Nikon Camera Lens - 200-400mm?

Nikon Camera Lens - 200-400mm?

Hi - looking for som advice, looking to purchase myself a new camera lens. Debated between the Nikon 200-400mm f4 G VR AF-S IF ED Lens and Nikon 200-400mm f4 G VR II AF-S ED Lens.

Can anyone tell me the difference between the two, is this literally the vibration reduction technology? Also there's around £200 difference between the two lenses (Nikon 200-400mm f4 G VR II AF-S ED Lens is more expensive).Is it worth paying the difference?

I don't know much about lenses but i do know that it is all about the glass quality. Nikon has a high end glass quality, medium, and a low. The cheaper you go on the lenses the less quality in the glass. In my opinion i would buy an adapter to use leica lenses with your nikon. Leica makes some of the best glass around. Panasonic uses the same glass that leica uses so there both very good.

Basically the VR II is an update of the former with a slightly improved VR system. The other difference is that it has Nano coating, which may be more market hype than not.

Nano coating is supposed to be a re-formulation of the lens coating to cut down on glare. But I think using the lens hood would even be better.

If you want the latest and greatest, go with the VR2, but if you want to save a few dollars, I doubt the original will let you down.

But this is a lot of money for a lens. You could probably rent one or both and try out the differences to be sure. But by the time you did that, you probably lost any savings you would have had by buying the less expensive one to begin with.

Technologically, VR II gives you a bit more stability. Whether this makes a difference will in part depend on how you use the lens. For a lot of photographers a lens like the 200-400 requires additional support (either from mono or tripod), in this case the newer VR may not make that much difference. For those who handhold a 400mm lens, then having VR II may be a major difference between making a shot or not.

Are you a millionaire or something? That lens costs a fortune.

The extra VR stop on the mark ii is probably the best improvement. A new focus mode and a couple more nano crystals probably make it worth the extra, if it's about £200.

It's versatile with the zoom, but I would prefer the 300mm af-s 2.8 vr.

To be honest, unless you're doing a lot of work at long range and it's paying for your equipment, I'd make an entirely different suggestion;

A 300mm f5.6 or 500mm f8 mirror lens. Either would cost a lot less than what you're suggesting and would fit in a large pocket.

True, you're limited to Aperture Priority or Manual exposure, you lose autofocus, and neither can be stopped down, but you'll have all the power you need in a cheap, lightweight package.

Most use T-mounts, which will fit any camera ever made, and a good dealer may well throw one in if you ask him nicely.