Part of it may be that I like using pinpoint AF, which forces a CDAF pass, and I don't think the 70-200 likes doing that much. Photographers choose expensive professional 70-200mm lenses for their excellent sharpness and consistency in sharpness throughout the focal range, at their maximum apertures. Your camera/lens combination will be better balanced on your tripod, and a steadier camera/lens combo means less vibration and thus higher image quality. I thought my test results were wrong when the corners at 200mm on a DX body seemed worse but were okay on an FX body.

If you don't shoot much action with the 70-200/4, I think it can produce excellent results with a very pleasing overall rendition. So when testing the Nikon 70-200mm f/4G VR, I wanted to see how well the TC-20E III would couple with the lens when it comes to sharpness, autofocus speed and accuracy. lens you’ll immediately be struck by how just trimming one stop from the aperture made this new lens clearly smaller and lighter (see below).Something that's easy to miss in the spec-sheet is that the new lens has a filter thread of 67mm, compared to the more common 77mm on other high-end Nikon zooms. This is why I compared all lenses at f/4 when showing bokeh performance below – all lenses had to have a similar field of view with exactly the same aperture for a fair bokeh comparison.

Actually, being an Ape With A Camera, the OP presumably does not have much linguistic skill and was actually saying that the lens looked as good as a banana, in other words very good indeed. L on my 5D Mark III just because I had it handy; the differences from one stop to the next are the same with any brand. This is an extreme example; I'm pointed directly into the unsheilded solar disc, and giving enough exposure to show details in the dark palm which I've deviously placed right where the ghosts would be.Different focal lengths and putting the sun in different places will give very different results; this sample just happens to be shot at 80mm at f/11. So peevee1 is correct, 1/250sec (or 1/200sec, rounding off) to 1/15sec is 4 stops down, not 5 stops. Stopping down, performance degrades slowly until, at f/11, diffraction definitely renders the image too soft for critical use.

APO-Lanthar, and the Zeiss 2/135 APO-Sonnar; however, neither of these would be flexible enough and frankly I prefer not to use manual focus telephotos on moving objects such as cars and people (both of which there’d be plenty of in Havana). To Denis of Whidbey Island : the way you introduce the discussion is interesting but I must say the logic is uncomplete. is about twice heavier than the f/4 version, so weight could have been the reason for better sharpness in my case.You'll see some difference at two stops difference, but from one stop to the next, it's negligible — and not worth hauling an f/2. As usual with Nikon’s designs these days, it’s almost impossible to get the collar locked tight enough to the lens to form an absolute secure connection, let alone one that will withstand any tripod slap. Coated optical glass elements certainly help with handling ghosting and flare on the 70-200mm f/4G VR. Perhaps on the big D4/D5 type body the difference isn’t going to seem meaningful, but on the smaller bodies it absolutely is.

need tack sharp corners or need the least possible amount of distortion and use a Nikon D800 or Nikon D800E, should get the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.I suspect the resale value of many F-mount lenses may go up on the second hand market once the improved focusing on the Z8/Z9 trickles down to Z6/7 series cameras and people will probably find many of those lenses to have a long life ahead whether on mirrorless or DSLR cameras. If you are looking for a good wildlife lens + TC combination, I would not recommend the 70-200mm f/4G VR with the TC-20E III.