Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR Lens

Product Information

While none of these highlights look as smooth as from portrait primes like Nikon 85mm f/1.4G, it can be clearly seen that some look better than others. In this case, I was rather surprised to see Sigma render highlights so well when compared to Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II – similar edges, but slightly smoother inside the highlight shapes. It certainly does not suffer from the “onion” bokeh many Tamron and Sigma lenses typically have, which is great. If you look at the specifications comparison from the earlier part of the review, you will see that Sigma has the most complex optical formula, with more lens elements and groups than other lenses (including the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II). Distance information is relayed to the camera, so the Nikon body can do all the advanced exposure-related stuff with this lens. But this is true for all alternatives too. [+]

Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/4G ED VR review - Digital Camera World

Asked this question in "Beginners Questions" but did not get any response. Thought would try here as well. AF: AF-S with SWM (silent wave motor), so it does work on D60/3×00/5×00-bodies, manual-focus override by turning the focus ring [+] Autofocus performance is snappy, nearly on par with the f/2.8 lens, which is about as good as it gets. The optical construction is still pretty complex: 20 elements in 14 groups, with three ED elements in the mix. Nano coating, 9-blade aperture diaphragm, and a VR system rated at 4 stops CIPA combine with internal focusing and zooming to make this somewhat compact lens stay compact at all times while still providing high performance. The 70-200mm f/4 does not extend or rotate during focus or zooming. This difference means the f2.8 version may enjoy a shallower depth of field and a one stop light gathering advantage, but allows the f4 version to come in at a lower price, a considerably lighter weight and even have the potential to deliver better quality. The big question of course is how the 70-200mm f4 performs in practice compared to the premium f2.8 model, so in this review I’ve compared them both using a D800 to find out.My experience with the TC-17E III was fairly short, because I am not particularly fond of this teleconverter in general. I mounted the TC-17E II on the 70-200mm f/4G VR (equivalent to 119-340mm f/6.7) and tested it out both indoors and outdoors. When shooting outdoors in bright light, the TC-17E II did quite well. AF speed and accuracy were both good and sharpness was fairly close to what I was getting with the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II with the same teleconverter. I expected the lens to suffer like my Nikon 200-400mm f/4G VR does when using it with the TC-17E II, but it certainly did better. In less than ideal lighting conditions though (especially indoors), AF speed and accuracy did suffer visibly more, with some loss of contrast. Will it live through occasional bumps every once in a while? Most likely. But I do not think it will survive a drop. As I was reviewing this lens, I happened to drop my Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II from about two feet on the bare floor. The lens barrel bent and I can no longer mount filters on it, but the lens still works well. I tested it with Imatest and compared the results to previous measurements and I saw no notable differences. I doubt the Nikon 70-200mm f/4G VR would work the same if it suffered from the same type of abuse. So if you are a working pro and you know that you will be abusing your gear, the 70-200mm f/2.8 will probably be a better option. What about weather sealing? Again, the f/2.8 version will certainly do better in extreme weather conditions – I have used mine in dust, rain and snow and never had any issues. I was only able to test the 70-200mm f/4G VR in light snow and temperatures below zero Celsius and it worked without any problems. However, I do not think I would be comfortable using it in heavy rain. One of our readers reported that his copy started fogging up on a rainy day, so keep this in mind.

Nikon 70-200mm f/4G VR Review - Photography Life

The Nikon 70-200mm f/4G VR has more noticeable distortion when compared to the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II. It suffers from both barrel and pincushion distortion at short and long focal lengths and pincushion distortion is most pronounced at 200mm. Here are the measured distortion results from Imatest: Again, vignetting is relatively easy to fix in Lightroom via the Lens Correction module. Ghosting and Flare Apochromatic lenses have special lens elements (aspheric, extra-low dispersion etc) to minimize the problem, hence they usually cost more. Matthew Richards is a photographer and journalist who has spent years using and reviewing all manner of photo gear. He is Digital Camera World's principal lens reviewer – and has tested more primes and zooms than most people have had hot dinners! When looking at bokeh performance, it is not very useful to only look at a single lens – I personally find side by side comparisons with comparable lenses much more useful. Therefore, I tested all four 70-200mm lenses in similar conditions. The first bokeh comparison shows how the lenses compare in rendering highlights (all shot at f/4 with comparable field of view):

Summary

On DX cameras, I can’t really find fault with the sharpness from 70-135mm. It’s excellent edge to edge even wide open, though f/8 might be the best aperture by a slight margin. At 200mm, you really need to stop down to f/5.6 to get excellent results; wide open I’d just call it very, very good. The corners at 200mm were down from the center, I’d call them good. I’m setting up a shoulder rig with a manual Zoom gear and using autofocus with the 24-120 S f/4 for now . The lens isn't designed for macro work, with a minimum close-focusing distance of 1 meter (just over three feet) and a maximum magnification of 0.27x.

Nikon Z Lens Roadmap (Updated October 2023) - Photography Life Nikon Z Lens Roadmap (Updated October 2023) - Photography Life

I have to say that the test results above done by SLR Gear do confuse me a bit. The pixel pitch of the D800 and the D7000 are almost the same but the data in the area where both sensors are being used seems to suggest otherwise. I can understand the corners in the FX area would be different but why the difference in the middle areas? The earlier tests of the 70-200 F2.8 were done on a D700 so there is no way to compare those test results here directly. (it would be good if SLR Gear did test the F2.8 on a D800E) The official specifications of the unannounced lens remains unknown, but it’s pretty easy to predict that the 35mm will be an f/1.2 lens to match the 50mm f/1.2 and 85mm f/1.2 lenses. There has even been an accidental mention of a “35mm f/1.2 S” on some of Nikon’s social media. When Are These Lenses Coming Out?Let’s take a look at how the lens compares to the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II, Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 and Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Macro that I used in this comparison: Feature

Nikon 80-400 vs 70-200/f4 - Digital Photography Review Nikon 80-400 vs 70-200/f4 - Digital Photography Review

At 70mm, sharpness in the centre portion of the frame is outstanding from maximum aperture. Although the clarity towards the edges isn't up to the same level, it is still very good at this aperture and focal length. Stopping down the aperture gradually improves performance across the frame, with peak edge to edge sharpness being achieved at f/11 where sharpness is outstanding across the frame. In total, every Nikon Z lens we know about is as follows. Lenses that have not yet been formally announced are marked in bold: Very satisfied. Now if Nikon could just make a cheaper, lighter solid mid range i could put my primes away.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR Specifications

The large zoom ring is about 1 1/2 inches wide and has great tactile feel. It's smooth to turn, and offers only slight resistance, taking gentle pressure from two fingers. There are about ninety degrees of turning action. As an internally focusing lens, there is no increase in length in the lens as the lens is zoomed in or out. Zoomed in to 105mm, we again see excellent results from the 70-200mm f/4G VR. Corners also increase in resolution at f/8, as can be seen from the above graph. Nikon’s own marketing gets it right with this lens: “strikes an ideal balance…” Yes, indeed. Far more so than most Nikon lenses, the 70-200mm f/4G is a very well-rounded, well-behaved, well-performing lens. Lastly at 200mm, we see superb center performance wide open, but at the cost of corner performance. Stopped down however, the lens reaches superb performance across the frame. mirrorless: sansmirror.com | general: bythom.com| Z System: zsystemuser.com | film SLR: filmbodies.com