Comments on: Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G AF-S ED VR II Lens Review: Field Test Report

By: Steven Carvotta

Steven Carvotta — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 17:55:42 +0000

This is a great piece of glass along with my Nikon D700. Had it for 2 years now amazing.

By: Peter K Burian

Peter K Burian — Sun, 31 Oct 2010 20:46:36 +0000

Well, I don’t know if I would want mroe resolution than the D700 provides.

When you cram 24 million pixels onto a 24x36mm sensor, each pixel will b much smaller.

And yet, apparently Nikon has solved the problem that small pixels can produce, with the D3x.

This is a comment about the 24 megapixel D3x vs. the 12 megapixel D3:

JPEGs: Apart from the D3X’s significantly higher resolution once again the most obvious difference here is the ‘per pixel’ sharpness, which is simply superb on the D3X. The D3X default sharpening is higher than the D3 but again part of the difference appears to be due to a weaker AA filter on the D3X. As expected the D3X resolves a significantly higher amount of detail than its sister model, but color and tone characteristics are very similar.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/page27.asp

RAW: We saw earlier in the JPEG comparison that the D3X applies stronger default sharpening than the D3, and therefore by equalizing the amount of software sharpening to the camera output the D3 gets more of a sharpness and detail boost than its higher resolution sister model. On a per pixel basis both cameras produce very clean and detailed output but, as you would expect, the D3X resolves visibly more detail. Whether you need this extra detail is another matter, and completely depends on the photographer’s individual needs and the photographic application.

This comparison clearly shows how good the D3 is when you shoot RAW; at normal print sizes you’re simply not going to see much difference.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/page30.asp

By: Sune Bertelsen

Sune Bertelsen — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 20:03:51 +0000

Bought mine about a year ago, had all my Canon equipment stolen, and decided it was time for a system change, I’m werry impressed with the 3 lenses that i so far bought, and the 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8′s both have a much higher resolution than the sensor of the D700, they are bouth capable of making crisp pictures wide open, the reason for system change is obvious, Nikon noise levels and AF performance is superior to Canon’s counterpart to the D700 (5D mkll).
The only thing is now, that i want a full frame with higher resolution and same iso performance as the D700, and i can’t afford the D3X

By: Peter K. Burian

Peter K. Burian — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:55:58 +0000

I see that dpreview.com has tested this lens. Anyone who wants a tecchie review may want to read that one too. They gave it a Gold Award.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_70-200_2p8_vrii_n15/page6.asp

………. the most accomplished lens of its type that we’ve tested so far, and a perfect companion to Nikon’s top-end bodies such as the D3S and D3X. DX shooters may not have so much reason to upgrade from the previous model, but for FX users the improvements are clear. How long it will retain this crown is open to question, with Canon and Sigma also recently releasing new image-stabilized 70-200mm F2.8 lenses, but just for now this is as good as it gets……..

By: Peter K. Burian

Peter K. Burian — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:12:33 +0000

Do you already have the new VR II version, Bill? If so, you are among the first. Frankly, I loved the old one too. But the new one is better in some aspects. Especially with the D700 this is a fabulous combination that provides supreme quality.

Cheers! Peter http://www.peterkburian.com

By: bill Henderson

bill Henderson — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 21:35:33 +0000

I love this lens, and you just told me why! I use it all the time, but don’t stop to take measure of what I like other than the quality of the images. Thanks