Purpose is to identify the differences between the following three Nikon lenses with regard to their sharpness and contrast: Camera used was a Nikon D300, ISO 200.
Tests for each lens were conducted on a tripod at approximately 3 meters from the subject: Three combinations were tested:
1) Focal length 70mm at f4.5, f8 and f11
2) Focal length 135mm at f4.5, f8 and f11
3) Focal length 200mm* at f4.5, f8 and f11
Note: For the Nikon 70-300 at focal length of 135mm and 200mm for the f4.5 aperture test set, f-stop achievable was f4.8 and f5.3 respectively, for the Nikon 70-210 at 200mm, f-stop achievable was f5.6. * Focal length for the 70-210mm 200 test set was 210mm.
Shutter speeds varied depending on f-stop from 1/2000s for the 70-200mm (200mm @ f4.5) to 1/100 for the 70-210 (135mm @ f11).
Weather:
Weather was partly overcast with a slight breeze, moving the subject slightly on occasion, not sure if this could lead to interference but might impact contrast so my ranking for the lenses is limited to picture sharpness.
Conclusion:
The Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR outperformed on average more often then not, however I think there may be flaws in this test and I will perform another in the near future which limits external interferences. I was surprised with the performance of the old 70-210mm AF.
Strengths:
The Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR is worth the investment, though the 70-300mm at f8 and greater performs very well for the money and a good alternative if you don't want to but the 70-200mm f2.8. If you have older lenses like the 70-210mm you can keep them they still take a great shot.
Weaknesses:
Continued enlargement of 70-210mm lens shots at 210mm results in a light blue hue around the subject.
I bought this lens to replace my Sigma 70-200 F2.8 HSM lens. It was a good lens, but the AF speed wasn't cutting it for the sports I was shooting, so I was looking to upgrade.
After getting the Nikon, I put each lens on a D2h body & tested the AF, which the Nikon blew the Sigma away. The next soccer tournament I went to shoot (and other events after that) I had a hard time picking out which photo in a burst I wanted to keep, instead of trying to find the one in focus, they all came out beautiful.
The VR is real. I've done a couple low light wedding receptions and being able to hand hold that lens to get cross room candids and have them sharp is well worth the extra $$ over any of the other lens options.
Strengths:
VR
Body build
Constant 2.8
AF Speed
Weaknesses:
Weight, but after a few days using it it doesn't bother me anymore
Lens hood likes to fall off, so I resort to using a little gaffer's tape and taping it in place
Similar Products Used:
Nikon 80-200 F2.8 ED
Sigma 70-200 F2.8 HSM DG
Customer Service:
Haven't had to use it for the lens, but other camera bodies I've sent it have been returned quickly, and I've found Nikon's CS to be fantastic.
This lens is a masterpiece of quality engineering and optics
While making my decision to purchase, I had some deliberation over costs of cheaper alternatives like Sigma 70-200 F2.8 and the non VR Nikon at ½ the price. The build quality fast aperture and VR were the key reasons. The price .... Well I’ve never regretted quality!
The ability to take shots in relatively low light to keep shutter speeds high and ensure freezing of subject movement, reduces the need Image Stabilization. Using this lens at F2.8 gives sharp images; there is little point in having a fast tele lens if its not fully usable at all apertures.
Used with the TC 1.4 AFS Teleconverter the results are exceptional. A 280mm F4 lens is fairly useful for wildlife. I tried the 2x converter for more reach; but as it makes it a touch soft at wide apertures; so I decided on the 1.4
It is interesting to compare results to my other tele zoom Lenses: Nikon 70-300 G and 18-200VR The 18-200VR does the job, but I never had many images that have WOW factor! I had better results with my cheap 70-300 G lens; which wore out after several years hard use. I genuinely thought that replacing it with the 18-200 would be a good move; I just didn’t get such nice images.
As soon as I started using 70-200 F2.8, my photos came alive with breathtaking sharpness color and a romantic quality; which cannot be justified by numbers, Dollars, or pixels. This is a fabulous piece of kit; which on build and image quality alone; can justify its purchase.
Strengths:
• Wonderful image quality and sharpness
• Performance at F2.8
• Performance with 1.4x Teleconverter
• A constant aperture at all focal lengths
• Uncompromising build quality
• Fast, focusing speed
• Image stabilization VR
• Neat rotating tripod mount
Weaknesses:
• No compromises in construction means that this lens is heavy
• Similarly the build quality makes it expensive
I use this lens for everything from sports to nature to people to fine arts.
In every way it performs above and beyond.
I moved up from the 80-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S Nikkor.
This lens is extremely sharp and has beautiful bokeh. Focus is lightning fast, and doubly so with the focus limiter engaged. VR really works- I've gotten sharp results handheld at 200mm 1/8 sec and slower after VR has stabilized for around 5 seconds.
I shoot mainly at f/4.0-f/8.0, unless I want a shallower DOF, in which case I shoot all the way to 2.8. Sharpness there is really good, but not as good as the lens is stopped down even a stop. The shallow depth of field there is also tricky at times. CA is more apparent in my experience than with the 17-35 AFS, but I shoot this lens at a wider aperture most of the time than my 17-35. It is also somewhat prone to flare, but the hood greatly reduces this and it is not a problem for me. The feel of the lens and the general layout is much improved over the 80-200 AFS. It is heavier, but feels much lighter. Balance is better, as is the tripod collar with its innovative quick release foot.
Truly an amazing and legendary lens.
Strengths:
Focus speed, sharpness, bokeh, ergonomics and feel, build, tripod foot, and overall performance
Weaknesses:
CA more visible at wide apertures, big and heavy (not a problem for me), semi-prone to flare unless hood is used. Also would have liked it to be f/2.0 and for a pet siberian tiger to carry it for me, but that's just not in the cards.
Expensive beyond expensive...but worth it.
I bought this lens from another photography enthusiast recently. Having sold the previous version of the same lens several months ago. Not that I am not happy with the old one, but I found the focusing speed cannot keep up with the action sometime. To me the picture quality is the same between the two, maybe the colour of the older version is very slightly warmer ? Could be due to the photo. lab. process, but the older version is definately has a slight 'warm feel' to it. Skin tone on this current version is very accurate. The VR feature is a bonus on this lens, it really does help to eliminate blurry pictures. Then again the use of a good solid tripod, and a cable release or self-timer does the same thing too. But it is good to know, the VR feature is availiable for those spontaneous moment. Yes, I still use the regular film to do my photography.
Strengths:
VR feature. Instantaneous response. Much, much quicker than my previous two ring version of the same lens. Nicely constructed. Can switch to manuel focus immediately.
Weaknesses:
None. Marks may show up more easily, because I have bought a white version of this lens.
Similar Products Used:
AF Zoom-Nikkor ED 80-200mm f/2.8D two rings non-AFS version.
Sample Images
More Products from Nikon
Link to this page
4 of 5
View Comments (1)
5 of 5
