Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2018/07/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I just got the new cutting edge for Nikon AF-G 70-200 F4. This lens is so
gorgeous I almost don?t care that the pictures it makes are also as gorgeous.
With F4 meaning it's not less professional than an f 2.8 in this case. A
Canon does have a full line of top run f4's not just 2.8's.
Well I hoped it would be a lot lighter. I got a Kirk Tripod collar ring with
Arca swiss spec quick release bracket built into it and it balances and
revolves coolly beating out L brackets by a mile.
And my first lens with VR vibration reduction which is like being weightless
in outer space. I ain't in Kansas anymore.
f 15th of a second at 200mm and be there! All bets are off!
In real life we could never do this with a long lens.
I?m getting a monopod for it. I'm too much of an old guy for this much
weight having not kept up with my pull ups. I'm going to start doing
exercises, really!
A real professional feel and build.
My other Nikon zooms zoom like toys compared to this. I've been too much of
a cheapskate with this stuff in the past using consumer gear for pro use.
Looking forward for your comparative results, Frank!
I also have a cheap compact slow 70-200 which was probably made by someone
other than Nikon. I wonder if I'll ever use it again and for what.
Oddly enough the Internal Focusing and zooming blows me away almost as
much as the VR which stands for vibration reduction.
There is absolutely now swelling of any kind ever!
AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR $1,399.95
Approx. Weight 30.0 oz. (850 g)
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-s-nikkor-70-200mm-f%252f4g-ed-vr.html#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-Overview
--
Mark William Rabiner
Photographer
?On 7/1/18, 9:42 AM, "LUG on behalf of Frank Filippone"
<lug-bounces+mark=rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of red735i
at verizon.net> wrote:
Yes , more testing of legacy lenses against the current whiz bang
wunderkinds
.. I am trying to get a great optically, light weight kit of
lenses for my A7ii, without spending a fortune.
The lenses are
Leica 70-210 F4 Vario Elmar Introduced in 1984
. !
Nikon AF-D 75-240 F4.5-5.6 Introduced in 1999. Only 1 year of
production.
Nikon AF 70-210 F4 1986-1987 production
Nikon AF-G 70-200 F4 Current lens
Komura 85-205 F3.8 Not worth looking up
.. Pre AIS.
( Sony lenses, 70-210 F4, are $1K used. The most expensive lens in the
test
set was $600. If I were to spend $1k on a lens in this range, it would
be
the Leica 80-200 F4. Supposed to be great!)
Tests were done by photographing my notorious 45 year old natural grey
cedar
fence in the front yard, about 25 feet distance, in bright sun.
Test settings were
70mm ( or shortest), 135mm, 200mm and Longest focal
length, if over 200mm.
Test shots were taken at Wide open ( F4 or about F4), F8, and F16. All
combinations of focal length and f stop.
Focusing was done by the modern equivalent of ground glass, at selected
FL
and aperture. Some lenses had a noticeable amount of focus shift from
change of aperture. With an EVF, this is a pretty trivial concern.
The same adapter was used on all, the Fotodiox Pro Smart AF adapter ( the
one purported to blow up your A7 camera, which has never happened except
once
. To someone else. It should be noted that ALL the Nikon lenses had
full camera operable apertures through this adapter. However, AF does
not
work on any AF lens with Nikon body AF screw, and the G lens did not
work in
AF with this adapter.) The adapter is going off on Monday to be
replaced
by a new Fotodiox AF adapter that has a better track record for not
blowing
up cameras.
Lenses were checked for IQ in the center of the frame
.
No IBIS, the camera was tripod mounted.
Let?s get the worst one out of the way
The Komura was just not in the same
class as the others. Even for the $9.00 I paid for it, it was terrible.
Now the surprise winner
. The Leica 70-210 just was great
. Better than
anything else by a pretty good margin.
#2 was the Nikon 75-240, considered to be a lowly consumer lens ( lower
quality than the Pro lenses..????).. and the lightest lens by ?
.
#3 was the Nikon AF-G Wunderkind be all and end all
. It did not hold up at
any aperture of focal length to the Leica
. At the longer FL, beat out the
75-240 by a bit
. But its cost is greater by factor of 5, so it loses out
on at least price / performance ratio
..
The Nikon AF 80-200 F4, while considered a cult lens of superior quality,
just did not cut it.. the faster lens performed quite a bit worse than
its
newer, lighter, and cheaper sibling
.
Ergonomically, all the Nikon lenses worked great with the adapter, for
iris
control. The Leica requires full manual operation
.
I do not need AF. I am lazy and like to have it, but do not need it.
The non-G Nikon lenses require manual focusing
no big deal for accuracy, BUT
the focus ring in on the outermost part of the lens and is hard to grab
to
focus. The G lens has a nice big wide focus ring.
The best Nikon lens weighed in at 410g
The Leica weighs 720g
The Nikon G lens weighs 850g
Plus the appropriate adpter.
One last comment.. the Leica lens showed a bit of a color shift towards
the
blue. Certainly correctable, if it bothers.
So there it is
. The Leica lens was the best optically ( but you knew
that)
..
Which will I bring to my next big trip?????? It gets down to more
automatic
features or better IQ.
Frank Filippone
Red735i at verizon.net
_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information