Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="john*thomas" data-source="post: 502730" data-attributes="member: 16937">From what I've read, the newer 70-200 is a good bit quicker at AF.......The one complaint you will find with the older non VC like mine is a slower AF and on occasions a bit of hunting for the focus.   Based only upon my personal experience I would say that those complaints are probably legit. Mine will on occasion do a bit of hunting for focus. It's not always instant fast while the reports are the newer one is. The thing I like is the quick action in and out of AF. It has the in/out action of the focus ring which I like far better than the switch on the Nikon.   Once I got used to mine I've been able to adapt somewhat. I take a lot of pics of my daughter in the High School band. Probably the same sort of distance you are going to shoot. In day light under those conditions I don't have any problems. In low light I'll often times just shoot in manual. The band doesn't move as quick as soccer players though.  I've had zero compatibly issues so that wouldn't concern me that much but yet, you never know what Nikon may pull in the future. I'd say the odds are low though. If the extra money wasn't a problem, I would go the newer VC version. By everyone's account it is a better lens. If money is a concern the older one does a great job, you just have to get used to the limitations, which by limitations we are still talking much better than a slower lens.   Used versions of the older lens I have are still selling for 90% plus of what I paid for a refurbished unit with a warranty. I figured if it didn't cut it I could sell it, not be out much and get the newer version. Now that I've been using it for awhile, I've decided I'll just stick with it. It works 90% plus for what I wanted it for.</blockquote>

Verification