Nikon 70-200mm f/4 question: Hi all, I am headed on a backpacking trip and do not really want to carry my 70-200mm 2.8. Do any of you recommend the f/4 version? Is there a considerable...

Kalina54 Loc: Flagstaff, AZ

Hi all, I am headed on a backpacking trip and do not really want to carry my 70-200mm 2.8. Do any of you recommend the f/4 version? Is there a considerable amount of quality loss? Thanks I value you opinions. The salesmen just want to sell lenses..

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Many are more than satisfied with the f4, but is a half a pound difference worth consideration? We switched to a shoulder strap and are quite pleased with the ease of carry and readiness.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

How long of a backpacking trip? I went 800-miles on the AT this past spring / summer. Something pocket sized was the only weight I'd want to add. I went with a Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II, both because Canon, but also for 20MP and to capture in RAW. The zoom covering 28-84mm (35mm equivalent) was fine for both macro-ish and landscape. I missed my DSLR, but I couldn't have brought it along regardless of lens choice.

Kalina54 Loc: Flagstaff, AZ

Hi, thank you for the idea but this is a photography backpack trip and it will require my dslr gear.It is about 10 days of considerable hiking up to 10 mies with elevation gains each day.

CHG_CANON wrote:

How long of a backpacking trip? I went 800-miles on the AT this past spring / summer. Something pocket sized was the only weight I'd want to add. I went with a Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II, both because Canon, but also for 20MP and to capture in RAW. The zoom covering 28-84mm (35mm equivalent) was fine for both macro-ish and landscape. I missed my DSLR, but I couldn't have brought it along regardless of lens choice.

Kalina54 Loc: Flagstaff, AZ

Hi, the f/4 is 30 ounces and the f/2.8 is 54.3. That is almost half of the weight.

DaveO wrote:

Many are more than satisfied with the f4, but is a half a pound difference worth consideration? We switched to a shoulder strap and are quite pleased with the ease of carry and readiness.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Kalina54 wrote:

Hi, the f/4 is 30 ounces and the f/2.8 is 54.3. That is almost half of the weight.

My bad math! We just came off a trip and we both used shoulder straps. My wife didn't want to deal with weight so she picked up a Tamron 18-400 and was quite pleased. I carried a 200-500 and a 24-70, changing from my backpack as the terrain varied. All hiking was over 6,000 feet and we never did more than 7 miles in a day. I didn't buy my glass to not use it for my opportunities. Whatever you feel comfortable with is the important thing. I can assure you that the shoulder strap made a huge difference especially when changing elevations. Good luck!

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Kalina54 wrote:

Hi, thank you for the idea but this is a photography backpack trip and it will require my dslr gear.It is about 10 days of considerable hiking up to 10 mies with elevation gains each day.

Looking at your photography, I see this is not a question of backpacking but lens characteristics. I don't have experience with the f/4 Nikon zoom and only the Nikon f/2.8 VR lenses. In the Canon line, the various models are immaterial in the differences in image quality and really differ only in size, weight and cost and whether one needs f/2.8 and IS/VR or not. At this professional-grade in Nikon, I'd expect the same superior image performance from both Nikon lenses.

Kalina54 Loc: Flagstaff, AZ

I am not certain as to what shoulder strap you are referring to. Sounds interesting. Do you have a name that I can look up? Thank you

DaveO wrote:

img src="https://static.uglyhedgehog.com/images/s... (show quote)

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Kalina54 wrote:

I am not certain as to what shoulder strap you are referring to. Sounds interesting. Do you have a name that I can look up? Thank you

There are many available and you'll get tons of recommendations. I modified one with an RRS arca-swiss release that attaches to my L-Plate or lens foot, but we won't get into that.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1278400-REG/blackrapid_361001_cross_shot_single_strap.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/878356-REG/BosStrap_bosg315_Generation_3_Sliding_Sling.html

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Kalina54 wrote:

Hi all, I am headed on a backpacking trip and do not really want to carry my 70-200mm 2.8. Do any of you recommend the f/4 version? Is there a considerable amount of quality loss? Thanks I value you opinions. The salesmen just want to sell lenses..

They are very close...the f4 may be a little sharper, depending in part on your camera. Having both seems redundant to me.

(Download)

toxdoc42

Anyone know of a strap that stabilizes a camera to your body so you don't need to have a hand on it to stop it from bouncing around? Does anyone beside me believe this would be valuable?

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Kalina54 wrote:

Hi all, I am headed on a backpacking trip and do not really want to carry my 70-200mm 2.8. Do any of you recommend the f/4 version? Is there a considerable amount of quality loss? Thanks I value you opinions. The salesmen just want to sell lenses..

While I don't have that lens, I've been coveting it for a long time and have looked at the reviews and sample photos. In a nut shell you give up ~half the weight and 1 F stop. However from all I've seen you don't give up much IQ if any at all. It is a superb lens. Rent one for your trip, you might wind up buying in the end.

whitewolfowner

Kalina54 wrote:

Hi all, I am headed on a backpacking trip and do not really want to carry my 70-200mm 2.8. Do any of you recommend the f/4 version? Is there a considerable amount of quality loss? Thanks I value you opinions. The salesmen just want to sell lenses..

May I recommend a used nikon 70-210mm f4.0 AF lens. Bear in mind that this lens will not auto focus on any D3000 or D5000 series cameras. It is a sleeper but a goodie and KEH has one in EX condition for around $200; a steal for this lens.

fergmark Loc: norwalk connecticut

i think the f4 is fantastic

Robert Bailey Loc: Canada

"Joer" has already shared some information from Dxomark's tests.
There are actually three versions of the Nikon 70 to 200.
(I'm not sure which two you have of the three choices.)
This link shows the results for all three- which are all pretty good for a zoom lens.

https://www.dxomark.com/lenses/brand-nikon/launched-between-1987-and-2017/focal-from-70-to-200/aperture_max-from-1.8-to-36/launch_price-from-0-to-13000-usd/lens_zoom-zoom#hideAdvancedOptions=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=global