I know that many of our readers have been patiently waiting for me to publish my upcoming Nikon 70-200mm f/4G VR Review (Update: the review has been posted right here). While the review is under way, I have a lot of gear in my hands that I need to test and hence, it is a little delayed. Thanks to my friend David Bassett, I had a chance to play with the 70-200mm f/4 for the last couple of days until I receive my copy from B&H (should be arriving later this week, along with the Sigma 70-200mm and Tamron 70-200mm). One of the first things I did after I got the lens, was mount the lens on my D800E and test it in a lab environment for its resolution capabilities. As you can see from the below comparisons with my beloved Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II, the 70-200mm f/4G VR performed incredibly well. I am stunned and seriously in love – wife said that she doesn’t mind :) Once again, Nikon produced an absolute winner, a true gem that will quickly become a favorite lens by many. First, we had the 50mm f/1.8G, then the 85mm f/1.8G and now the 70-200mm f/4G. As I have said before, it is a good time to be a Nikonian! Superb camera bodies, excellent lenses – a great system overall.
So here is the Nikon 70-200mm f/4G VR @ 70mm:
And the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II @ 70mm:
The Nikon 70-200mm f/4G looks weaker in the center, but take a look at the corners – it clearly resolves more details in comparison.
Zoomed in to 105mm, we get the following results from the 70-200mm f/4G:
And the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II @ 105mm:
Once again, the 70-200mm f/4 shows excellent performance throughout the frame and its center sharpness at f/5.6 is quite remarkable.
Lastly, here is what 200mm looks like on the 70-200mm f/4G VR:
And the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II @ 200mm:
Again, the Nikon 70-200mm f/4G VR shows superb performance. It might be a bit weaker in the center, but its corners clearly look better, which is something I did not expect to see.
Please note that I have not fully completed performing other tests such as bokeh, vignetting, distortion, flare, etc – I am saving those for the final review, which will be posted within the next few weeks. Also, these are preliminary test results that I performed very quickly, so the final results in the review might look a little different. Is the new Nikon 70-200mm f/4G VR perfect? No, of course not. It has its share of problems with heavier vignetting, more distortion (especially at 200mm), etc. But considering its weight, price and sharpness performance, it sure looks like another winner.
Meanwhile, for those of you who are impatient to see my review, B&H has just received a new stock of the 70-200mm f/4G VR lens for you to enjoy during the holidays.
Some sound advice here on TC’s with this lens which I already own. Loss of focussing and resolution spoken about a lot…. but cameras mentioned here and elsewhere mention high res bodies (24-45MP). Some mention shooting without a TC and cropping… I shot on a Df, love it, sees in the dark, focusses at f/8 fine. We also travel a fair bit and love to travel light, but I can haul a heavy pack it the photo is worth it. Landscape mostly and a “dash” of wildlife. My question is: If I am content with shooting at f/8, higher ISO’s and 16MP which is great without cropping… TC-20iii over say a 200-500mm or an extra 300mm PF at the extra cost?
I want to buy full frame nikon camera
please guide which one is good to go
D750 or D810
presently I am using D7100
I have following lens
Nikon 70-200 f/4
Tokina 12-24 f/4
I have recently bought a D610 Nikon with 24-120 f/4 vr . I am looking for another lens that can shoot the sky stars in night . please suggest
Hi Nasim , I have Nikon 28mm F1.8g and 85mm F1.4g . Should I get this 70-200 F4g or an old AFs 80-200 F2.8 ? And I cant afford the 2.8 VR2 !
If I may answer to your question…
I had the old 80-200 f2.8 and now own the 70-200 f4 VR and no contest the latter beats the 80-200. The VR III is great for videos. Okay it’s a slower lens but it’s versatility, optic qualities and light weight make up for that. I tried a TC 1.4 on it with surprising results (w/D800 body) making it a stabilised 280 5.6 . If you really need 2.8 aperture the 70-200 2.8 VRII is the best solution (IMHO). But it’s heavy, but it’s big, but it’s expensive….
I intending to get a 70-200mm lense but not quite sure whether to get the f4 or f2.8. Well, I heard many of my the professional said that the f2.8 is a one of the popular portrait lense and f4 is for landscape, does the above mentioned are true? Does f4 can consider as a portrait lense as well?
Beside that, I am shooting more on landscape during my holiday trip with my 14-24mm and hence I going for 70-200mm lense is allow me to get the shots which its range is beyond that and also some candid/portrait shots. Any advise?
does this mean there will be soon a Nikkor AF-S 24-70 f/4 with Nano crystal coating?
Here is a short video shot with a Nikon D600 with the Nikkor 70-200 f/r VR….hand-held in available light. No processing of any kind done to the raw footage. I found this combination produced quite good video with the 70-200 f/4 able to focus at very close distances of just over 3 feet. Unfortunately this was a very fast test that I was doing with my D600 (my second copy of same) after just getting it back from Nikon Service where it had been for almost 7 weeks. After a few dozen shutter actuations the oil/dust has returned…so back to Nikon it goes.
Still hunting for a new telephoto for wedding work… the weight savings of the f4 really appeal to me considering the long days work, as does the (slightly?) better VR… but losing the speed and bokeh of the 2.8 really concerns me. Considering (roughly) the same price, what does everyone think about the Nikon F4 vs. say the Tamron 2.8 VC which just came out in the fall? Seems to be getting some pretty stellar reviews…
I’m just back home and the collar was in the mail. Unfortunatly I did not have it for the trip. It’s as good as it can get (for $26.00 or $200.00 lloll). It will be very useful on the monopod. I had the 70-200 F4 VR in the bag all the time and we shot a few pictures with it. As soon as I have done all my homework (shoveling the snow, sorting the clothes etc…), I will have a close look at the pictures. But one conclusion comes to mind right away. Even if it’s a lot lighter than the 2.8, it’s use is marginal compared to the 24-70’s (for us). A small 16-17 century city like Trinidad Cuba is much better seen at a wider angle. The combo 24-70G / D800 is like a magnifying glass on life and if given proper attention, will beat the h… of the 24-70L / 5D3 for details. I would compare it to a sniper rifle against an assault rifle. I had a few shots of a waterfall (w/D800) where my wife and some pretty chicas were bathing and they are jaw dropping (humm …). For every single composition on the D800, I have three ones on the 5D3 out of which at least one will fare pretty good (but wow the sensor on the D800). All in all, we’re getting to like our Nikon gear. But because of the AF, (IMHO) the D800 is terrible for videos while the 5D3 is just IT. Just point, AF-ON and shoot, perfect ALL the times. No tic a tic or anoying perpetual focussing.
Ok how much longer until the full review?