NIKON 70 - 200mm f4

foo

Senior Member
I'am seriously considering buying this lens for my d 5200 , I want to know if anyone has also purchased this lens and if the results are as expected or better .The Nikon 2.8 is too heavy and expensive have considered the Sigma 2.8 70- 200mm is a good value lens, but just think the nikon for the extra couple of hundred going to outperform it . again there is the Tamron 2.8mm 70 - 200mm 2.8 but again weight is the issue hardly a walk about lens .
So that leaves me with the f/4 which is what I have settled on . Any help be great and any pics if possible . Thanks.
 

Krs_2007

Senior Member
Great lens, you can check out my gallery as it's been my primary lens for a year. I needed the extra stop so I just upgraded to the 2.8. You won't regret it, the image quality is awesome, it's light weight and fast as far as focus speed.
 

Chito

Senior Member
I'am seriously considering buying this lens for my d 5200 , I want to know if anyone has also purchased this lens and if the results are as expected or better .The Nikon 2.8 is too heavy and expensive have considered the Sigma 2.8 70- 200mm is a good value lens, but just think the nikon for the extra couple of hundred going to outperform it . again there is the Tamron 2.8mm 70 - 200mm 2.8 but again weight is the issue hardly a walk about lens .
So that leaves me with the f/4 which is what I have settled on . Any help be great and any pics if possible . Thanks.


I'm also looking at the same lens for almost the same reasons you have. I might rent one to check it out before our trip.
 

foo

Senior Member
I will be ordering one in about 2 weeks , then soon as it arrives , I will get out and about and test it . Wanted to get a top qaulity lens for my trip back home in October .
 

foo

Senior Member
hey Krs -2007 noticed in your gallery your f/4 has a tripod collar , although not shipped with one and so many available on ebay what did you choose for that beauty of a lens , some nice shots there too.:)
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I chose it over the f/2.8 for wallet and back reasons. Not a regret in the world. @hark has had some IQ issues with the Sigma and upgraded to the f/2.8. Grab the f/4 and don't look back. Great lens.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
I chose it over the f/2.8 for wallet and back reasons. Not a regret in the world. @hark has had some IQ issues with the Sigma and upgraded to the f/2.8. Grab the f/4 and don't look back. Great lens.

Might have been my copy of the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, but for the price, I do think the Nikon f/4 will give you superb results. :)
 

sonicbuffalo_RIP

Senior Member
Even though the f4 gives superb results optically, I don't like the 'recycle after 10' year stamped on the side of the lens....+ I'll get better low light capability with the 2.8.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
Even though the f4 gives superb results optically, I don't like the 'recycle after 10' year stamped on the side of the lens....+ I'll get better low light capability with the 2.8.

What I meant is my Sigma's overall focusing and sharpness were less than stellar. Even my Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR yields sharper photos than the Sigma, but like I said, it might have been my copy. The lens front focused, and everything immediately in front and behind that focus point was soft leaving my intended subject slightly soft.

Not sure about the recycle info stamped on the Nikon f/4 lens though. :confused:
 

foo

Senior Member
Here's the collar that I use. It's solid and dependable and much cheaper than the overpriced Nikon version.
Amazon.com : DSLRKIT Full Metal Tripod Mount Ring for Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR lens : Camera & Photo
I have seen that particular one on Amazon uk and its saved in my wish list already, a bit dearer than those chinese equivalents on Ebay and look better built , trouble with the chinese copies is take so long to get to the UK , and not sure of there build qaulity either.
Thanks.
 

foo

Senior Member
What I meant is my Sigma's overall focusing and sharpness were less than stellar. Even my Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR yields sharper photos than the Sigma, but like I said, it might have been my copy. The lens front focused, and everything immediately in front and behind that focus point was soft leaving my intended subject slightly soft.

Initially that was my problem in choosing the Sigma a fine lens I'm sure but there QC leaves so much to be desired , and when your spending Hard earned on a lens your choice is more critical and you want the best IQ and QC for your money thats why the nikon wins hands down .And its future proof with all Nikon dslrs , whereas third party lenses may not operate correctly with some of Nikons newer dslrs
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
Guys - regarding the f/4 vs f/2.8 comments. I understand buying the f/4 because of the price difference, but can't understand not buying the f/2.8 because of its weight. The 2.8 weighs 23 ounces more than the f/4. 1 pound, 7 ounces. I'm an old guy and I don't find the 2.8 heavy. And I don't use a fancy strap. The light weight of the f/4 might be an added benefit, but not a reason to buy it. There are plenty of exotic straps and harnesses available that allow you to carry heavy gear with minimal stress to your body. Pardon my rant.
 

foo

Senior Member
my 50mm 1.8g is made in china and a damn good lens .
Everything is outsourced these days even the clothes we wear .
 

sonicbuffalo_RIP

Senior Member
The f4 is primarily made of plastic and has little to no weatherproofing....Japanese made lenses are usually better quality than those made in T'land or China.
 

Phillydog1958

Senior Member
There is a $1,000 difference between the 70-200 f4 and the 2.8 version. That extra grand warrants that the 2.8 be as good as it is. The 2.8 is the ultimate, but the f4 is a fine lens, which I'm intending on keeping until it dies on me. It's only the 2nd best, pro-level, mid-ranged zoom that Nikon manufactures. I think that says much for the f4 version's credibility.
 

sonicbuffalo_RIP

Senior Member
There is a $1,000 difference between the 70-200 f4 and the 2.8 version. That extra grand warrants that the 2.8 be as good as it is. The 2.8 is the ultimate, but the f4 is a fine lens, which I'm intending on keeping until it dies on me. It's only the 2nd best, pro-level, mid-ranged zoom that Nikon manufactures. I think that says much for the f4 version's credibility.

All I can say is to ask yourself which lens will hold it's value longer?
 
Top