Nikon 70-200mm f/4 question (Page 2): I use the f4 on days out to photograph mountain bikers. So while not on a 7 day trip but a full day in the hills and trails and find it not too...

picsman Loc: Scotland

I use the f4 on days out to photograph mountain bikers. So while not on a 7 day trip but a full day in the hills and trails and find it not too heavy on a peak design slide strap. The IQ is good but I can't compare to the f2.8.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

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..

Load you pack and try it, then but 1.5 lbs. less in your back pack and try it out, does it make a difference. Then, how much would you use two 70-200 lenses. And finally, is the trip worth the extra $1400.00?

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

You can never go wrong with any 70-200mm in f2.8. Especially in low light conditions. Give me that over an f4 any day. I could handle the extra weight for normal outing. But, I will admit, I have heard praise for the f4 as well.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

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..

Look at some comparisons.
https://photographylife.com/nikon-70-200mm-f4-vs-f2-8
http://news.coreyrich.com/2014/06/ask-corey-nikon-70-200mm-f4-vs-f2-8/
http://www.cameradebate.com/2012/nikon-70-200mm-f4-vs-f28-comparison/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFI4WFFg1K8

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Just to give you an idea, the late Galen Rowell, who was an avid hiker used to take with him a small 80-200 f4.5-5.6 AF lens. That lens, no longer in production, did the job for him while hiking, especially in the mountains.
Consider that Mr. Rowell was a professional so he knew what he was doing with his photo gear.
I have never used the 70-200 f4 VR Nikon lens but the pictures I have seen looked of excellent quality and yes, according to specs it is lighter than the 70-200 f2.8.
My 80-200 version is the f4.5 AI of the mid 70's a very sharp lens that I do not use that often any more. Maybe I should!

pego99

I have the Nikon 70-200 F4 version. It's a wonderful lens very sharp and has better VR than the 2.8 version.

fergmark Loc: norwalk connecticut

as picsman mentioned the peaks design strap, I want to say, it has made carrying the camera a very improved experience. No more bobbling. Hated that

fourlocks Loc: Londonderry, NH

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..

I'll add another vote to those who recommended the Nikon 18 - 200 mm lens. I have an 18 - 55 mm and a 55 - 300 lens but the 18 - 200 stays on my camera 95% of the time. It's one of the Nikon workhorses that offers sharp images across all the focal lengths and offers a nice range between wide angle and telephoto.

RKL349 Loc: Connecticut

The 70-200mm f/4 is very sharp and has excellent VR. David Busch, Thom Hogan and Ken Rockwell all recommend it for these reasons. I own one and use it on both my D610 and D7200 and am very satisfied with the results.

Leon S Loc: Minnesota

camerapapi wrote:

Just to give you an idea, the late Galen Rowell, w... (show quote)

Since you have brought up the 80-200 f4.5 - 5.6, let me recommend the 70-210 f4. If you can find a good copy, it is light and quite sharp. The nice thing is that it costs no more than $150 used in good shape. The newer model (? f4.5 - 6) is about as sharp and focuses faster, but losses light as you go toward 210mm. I've used both on my d700 and d810 and was happy with the results. However if I'm doing a wedding, I'd use my 80-200 2.8. VR is not that important to me.

Eberhard Brunner Loc: Alaska

I switched from the f/2.8 to the much lighter and YES sharper f/4
The 70-200 f/4 is my bread and butter lens. There is a slight loss of sharpness with the 1.4 Nikon extender.
You might consider a polarize filter. Try to find a metal screw on sun shade that fits your polarize filter.
Enjoy your hike.

dgsmax

I have owned my Nikkor 70-22mm F4.0 for 1 year now and I love this lens. I very rarely shoot in low light so an F2.8 was not important to me. Also the F2.8 is heavier which I did not want. The reviews I looked at all said the same thing plus the image quality is exactly the same. So I opted for the F4.0 and the cheaper price!! I hope this helps....Dave

Tronjo Loc: Canada, BC

70-200 F4 is one of the sharpest zooms out there and is focus breathing free. The last version, F2.8 E, is also focus breathing free, while F2.8 VRII breaths heavily at working distances shorter than 10m: http://www.bythom.com/nikkor-70-200-VR-II-lens.htm

Ira

The Nikon 70-200 f4 is a terrific lens. It is ultra sharp, very light, and priced right. I've commented may times about this lens on this site. See the images below

Shot with the D7200 and the Nikon 70-200 f4

(Download)

Shot with the D7200 and the Nikon 70-200 f4

(Download)

Shot with the D750 and the Nikon 70-200 f4

(Download)

Shot with the D750 and the Nikon 70-200 f4- at 200mm, F 5.6, 1/500 ISO 3200

(Download)

Japakomom Loc: Originally from the Last Frontier

toxdoc42 wrote:

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?

Cotton Carrier
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&O=&Q=&ap=y&c3api=1876%2C%7Bcreative%7D%2C%7Bkeyword%7D&gclid=Cj0KCQiAlpDQBRDmARIsAAW6-DPhVxaMUf1cM6JPKPxcCj6Rn7ag5MGXj7cpEPzbVF2UNemMMwydeWAaAnE7EALw_wcB&is=REG&m=Y&sku=836943