Holy Trinity 70-200 2.8 VR Ii (Page 2): I know many good photographers who never use filters. They say " why put a cheap piece of glass in front of a great piece of glass". Have...

Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City

I know many good photographers who never use filters. They say " why put a cheap piece of glass in front of a great piece of glass". Have always been confused by this thought process

Db7423 Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Mickey Mantle wrote:

I know many good photographers who never use filters. They say " why put a cheap piece of glass in front of a great piece of glass". Have always been confused by this thought process

I wasn't referring to a cheap piece of glass. I was referring to a polarizer or neutral density filter. Both are filters used to great effect in photography. ;)

Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City

I understand. Sorry for the misunderstanding

UncleBuck Loc: Malvern, Arkansas

I have the Nikon 70-200 f/4 on a D600. It's an amazing lens. There are times when I thought hard about the 2.8 but haven't pulled the trigger on it yet as the f/4 is so good. In hindsight I'd get the 2.8 simply because then I wouldn't be wanting it.

Mickey Mantle wrote:

This is the last piece of the holy trinity for me. Is it worth $2400? My favorite lens is the 24-70 2.8, but I have been blown away by the 14-24 2.8. What a beautiful lens. What should I do? Give into the GAS? How great is the 70-200? Will be using it on a d610

amehta Loc: Boston

Mickey Mantle wrote:

This is the last piece of the holy trinity for me. Is it worth $2400? My favorite lens is the 24-70 2.8, but I have been blown away by the 14-24 2.8. What a beautiful lens. What should I do? Give into the GAS? How great is the 70-200? Will be using it on a d610

Of the three, I would say the 24-70mm is the least interesting.

You have established a level of image/build quality expectation and financial comfort with the other two, so there is no reason to look at the alternatives to the "trinity tele". And the idea of a photographer with the username "Mickey Mantle" having the 24-70mm but not the 70-200mm is kind of ridiculous. ;-)

DaveHam Loc: Reading UK

If you need a 70-200 for the D610 this is the best you can get. It is heavy. Sharp, fast AF, good VR; it has everything going for it.

Bobbee

Mickey Mantle wrote:

This is the last piece of the holy trinity for me. Is it worth $2400? My favorite lens is the 24-70 2.8, but I have been blown away by the 14-24 2.8. What a beautiful lens. What should I do? Give into the GAS? How great is the 70-200? Will be using it on a d610

Hummm, I am 2 of 3 on the Trinity. This will be corrected sometime around Dec. Have had the 70-200 for some time. Perfect lens. I never question the purchase.

Davet Loc: Fort Myers, Florida

I can tell you that I am very happy with my 17-55 Nikor. It is a fantastic lens. I like it more then my 24-70. I guess to each his own, however I do not have the 70-200 and I think that will be my next lens.

Bozsik Loc: Orangevale, California

Mickey Mantle wrote:

This is the last piece of the holy trinity for me. Is it worth $2400? My favorite lens is the 24-70 2.8, but I have been blown away by the 14-24 2.8. What a beautiful lens. What should I do? Give into the GAS? How great is the 70-200? Will be using it on a d610

Since you are new here, and haven't posted any photos, it is difficult to say whether you just have money to burn, or have skills that would warrant spending the money on this kind of equipment.

The 70-200 is an excellent lens. The 70-200 can be had for much less if you look at refurbished or used lenses.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

I have the trinity plus a 105G f/2.8. The 70-200 f/2.8 does many things extremely well. I use it more often than the others. It is especially good for portraits and sports. Good luck.

Mickey Mantle wrote:

This is the last piece of the holy trinity for me. Is it worth $2400? My favorite lens is the 24-70 2.8, but I have been blown away by the 14-24 2.8. What a beautiful lens. What should I do? Give into the GAS? How great is the 70-200? Will be using it on a d610

juicesqueezer Loc: Okeechobee, Florida

Instead of spending the $2400 on the VRII, why not find a good used one with VRI for about $1100. A great lens and works for sports or portraits or anything else!

josie horne Loc: new orleans LA

I have a tamron 24-70 2/8 And it is fast and sharp ,and alot cheaper,also the nikon 80-200 af 2.8 D,is a great lens,no VR ,at a good price,Just my thoughts,I know one thing if you buy one it is hard to get back what you pay for it or even close,unless you buy it used,I have seen them for as low as 1300.00,take a look at the Tamron.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

I own the Holy Trinity. All three lenses are great-- the 70-200 is probably my favorite of the three. it is a must have portrait lens. Buy it- you will never regret the purchase.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Mickey Mantle wrote:

This is the last piece of the holy trinity for me. Is it worth $2400? My favorite lens is the 24-70 2.8, but I have been blown away by the 14-24 2.8. What a beautiful lens. What should I do? Give into the GAS? How great is the 70-200? Will be using it on a d610

I decided I didn't need the Trinity. I actually had two and sold them. Here's a good comparison of 70-200mm lenses.

http://www.mattgranger.com/gear-talk/item/446-70-200-showdown-pt1-tamron-vs-canon-vs-nikon

346pak Loc: Texas

Mickey Mantle wrote:

This is the last piece of the holy trinity for me. Is it worth $2400? My favorite lens is the 24-70 2.8, but I have been blown away by the 14-24 2.8. What a beautiful lens. What should I do? Give into the GAS? How great is the 70-200? Will be using it on a d610

Mickey Mantle, I needed the holy trinity too and decided to look around for refurbished and couldn't find one. I then was told to compare the Tamron to the nikon, which I did and ended up buying the Tamron. I have been shockingly surprised at how tick tack sharp this lens is with marvelous bokeh. All for significantly less that the similar nikon version. I have pasted the DXO Mark tested results for the both below as tested on a D610

Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Nikon

DxOMark Score
Best at f=100mm & f/2.8[?] 29
Lens Metric Scores
Sharpness[?] 19P-Mpix
Transmission [?] 3.2TStop
Distortion[?] 0.2%
Vignetting[?] -1.2EV
Chr. aberration[?] 7µm

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

DxOMark Score
Best at f=105mm & f/4[?] 28
Lens Metric Scores
Sharpness[?] 18P-Mpix
Transmission [?] 3.2TStop
Distortion[?] 0.3%
Vignetting[?] -0.9EV
Chr. aberration[?] 6µm