70-200mm vr or vr2?

[snapsnap2008]

Hi,

I have read up quite a bit on both model and it seems like many are suggesting that vr2 is more likely to perform better than vr on FX. Vr is sufficient if used on DX format. I am using D7100 and I am torn between this 2 lens.

 

[jnet6]

Depends on your budget, both VR1 & VR2 are good lenses.
If you got enough dough, go for VR2 so that next time when you upgrade to FX, you don't need to think of upgrading lens again.
If you are on budget, prices for 2nd hand VR1 looks good and value for $$ as VR will helps in your long range shooting.

VR2 corner sharpness will win VR1, however if you never compare side by side like comparing current 50" LED TVs, then no need to worry about the quality so much.

 

[lenslust]

Depends on your budget, both VR1 & VR2 are good lenses.
If you got enough dough, go for VR2 so that next time when you upgrade to FX, you don't need to think of upgrading lens again.
If you are on budget, prices for 2nd hand VR1 looks good and value for $$ as VR will helps in your long range shooting.

VR2 corner sharpness will win VR1, however if you never compare side by side like comparing current 50" LED TVs, then no need to worry about the quality so much.

Just for record, VR1 or 2 are both FX lenses.

 

[luckyorange]

Why not take a look at tamron 70-200? Grey set is selling cheaper than 70-200 vr I in bns. ?

Just a suggestion

 

[snowver]

VR is good enough for anyone. VR2 is better though. Tamron is really really good and good price.
Btw Tamron has minimum focus breathing according to reviews, while VR2 really suffer from focus breathing.

 

[jnet6]

Just for record, VR1 or 2 are both FX lenses.

Yes, of course. Did not mention they are DX lenses. Just going along with TS situation on current body is DX, future then FX.

 

[Luminare]

If you would like to add a TC-14E II to extend our range, get the VR II

The VR II version of the lens works better with TC.

Apart from that, the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II is the best in its range. If you can afford it and 70-200mm is your staple, then you would likely avoid "The poor man pays twice" because a good lens can last you many good years when well maintained hence you wont have to "upgrade" when your mind tells you that the time has arrived to get what you really wanted

If you don't need the f/2.8, get the 70-200mm f/4 VR III

Hi,

I have read up quite a bit on both model and it seems like many are suggesting that vr2 is more likely to perform better than vr on FX. Vr is sufficient if used on DX format. I am using D7100 and I am torn between this 2 lens.

 

[snapsnap2008]

Why not take a look at tamron 70-200? Grey set is selling cheaper than 70-200 vr I in bns. ?

Just a suggestion

where to buy grey set? Any local warranty for grey set?

 

[snapsnap2008]

...If you don't need the f/2.8, get the 70-200mm f/4 VR III

It is one of my choice as well considering the weight is so much lighter.

 

[snapsnap2008]

VR is good enough for anyone. VR2 is better though. Tamron is really really good and good price.
Btw Tamron has minimum focus breathing according to reviews, while VR2 really suffer from focus breathing.

Tamron is about $1950 new now and a used VR2 is around $2300-$2400. Considering the price gap is slight, that's is what holding me back.

 

[snowver]

Tamron is about $1950 new now and a used VR2 is around $2300-$2400. Considering the price gap is slight, that's is what holding me back.

Seriously if 3~400 is a small sum to you then just go for vr2 really! Dun buy something that u feel is 2nd choice if u can afford the 1st choice.

 

[saberlancer]

Go try both, weight is actually a factor u nd to consider as well..