Nikon Nikkor 70-200 VR II f/2.8 vs. VR I – design flaws?

There has been a lot of controversy lately about the brand new Nikon Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR II lens. Some folks claimed the lens is utterly unusable for wedding photography because of the changes to EFL (effective focal length) compared to the older VR I lens. As usual with expensive gadgets, the noise to fact ratio skyrocked in the ensuing (sometimes emotional) discussion in several photography related forums. Interestingly, the EFL issue went unnoticed in all the raving pre-release reviews of the new VR II lens.

I just want to point to a thread on which IMHO is the most accurate comparison between the VR I and VR II lens to date:

The first three posts from user em_dee_aitch sum it up very nicely.

5 replies on “Nikon Nikkor 70-200 VR II f/2.8 vs. VR I – design flaws?”

  1. What I don’t understand is: why they broke it! They simply did that!
    How’s Canon’s new 70-200 perfect? Nikon couldn’t do it?
    Now we have to live with the new -bad- one for ten or so years… Well maybe we don’t wont to wait so long, maybe we just buy Canon stuff if we depend on tele zoom…
    Wont we?

  2. Emailed Nikon Service and here is what they said. Don’t know if they’re trying to avoid it or what??

    Thanks for contacting Nikon Canada about your AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II lens.

    In any lens sometimes tiny air holes remain in metal parts during the component production and

    may appear as rough surface areas on the metal. These marks appear greatly magnified when viewed through the lens under direct illumination but are in fact tiny and completely normal. These marks in no way affect image quality, lens function, performance or any other aspect of the lens. Further, these areas do not create any dust inside the lens.

  3. Being on a budget, I expect to be able to make a good deal on a used 70-200/2.8 VRI from all the silly people feeling the need to upgrade to VRII. :)

  4. I mainly use my old 70-200 VR1 for portraits & on a few orations for sports, it is beautifully built, gives me great results and has a good range, I can use it in low light, the three focus lock buttons are a must when using auto focus and the new 70-200 does not have them and also when using close up your quite a bit short of 200mm, more like 160mm, so I will keep with the good old trusty 70-200 VR1.

    As they say, “If it ain’t broken don’t fix it” Pleased I did not sell my 70-200 VR2 for the new one with all these problems people keep finding with the new 70-200 VR2.

Comments are closed.