The 70-200 mm 2.8 will give me an professional grade lens in a range that I use very often. With the TC, it will also give me the extended range that I sorely miss for the occasional birding / fleet week / wildlife shooting / super moon opportunity. I am very tempted to go with this option.
An extremely nice lens, one of the best ever made by Nikon IMO. My main reason for getting a 70-200 f4 would be for the lighter weight, and the VR would be an asset as well. . .but without sacrificing the image quality the 80-200 2.8d delivers. Of course, the 70-200 isn't a cheap lens by any means andthat's definitely a consideration.
http://www.artoftheimage.com - Nikon 70-200mm f4 BEATS the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 Nikon 70-200mm f/4G ED VR Nikkor Zoom Lens on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2hVjirm
In reply to whoosh1 • Mar 1, 2013. 1. If you like to focus close up the 70-200 f4 at 200 mm gives more magnifications than the 70-300 at 300 mm. Adding a 1.4x converter to the 70-200 gives more magnification - close to the legendary 70-180 macro at 180mm. -- hide signature --.F2.8 give an extra stop of light, shallower depth of field wide open, are generally larger, heavier and more expensive. Depends on the lens but a 2.8 stopped down to f4 is usually sharper than a f4 lens wide open. Sharpness, colour rendition, contrasts, distortion, aberrations etc. depends on the lens. 1. Dubdah. The device is protected with extra seals to prevent failures caused by dust, raindrops, and water splashes. Has a metal mount. Nikon Nikkor Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR. Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S. A metal mount is generally superior to a plastic mount as it is more durable. weight. KIBJtg.