🦄 Nikon 70 200 F2 8 E Fl Review

That extra 5% of potentially better image quality is not worth the weight, size, and cost of the 2.8 for my uses. For landscape use I'd absolutely get the 70-300 over the 70-200. At $550 the 70-300 doesn't break the bank either. You could just keep the 70-200 for now and just buy the 70-300 to try out for awhile. The new version’s official name is 70-200 f/2.8 E FL ED VR, in short FL from here on. The E denotes an electronically controlled aperture, the FL a fluorite glass element. Nikon has done a complete optical redesign and changed some of the exterior layout, like adding extra configurable buttons to the lens for either focus-lock or focus the 70-200 vrII is faster auto focusing than the 300 pf and is a better lens for sports. It gives you more flexibility with its zoom range. It also offers a little more DOF versatility with its 2.8 max ap. Even with the 1.4 tele the 300pf is lighter and shorter than the 70-200. I took all three lenses, the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED AF-S VR, and the Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS, and I shot our test chart with all of them on the Sony a7R II. For Canon, I used a Metabones T Smart Adapter IV, and for Nikon, I used a Novoflex Nikon to Sony E adapter. I manually focused all three lenses Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR AF-S ». FX coverage. Autofocus (in-lens focus motor), internal focus. 21 elements in 16 groups, 7 ED elements. 9-blade rounded aperture diaphragm. smallest aperture is f/22. 77mm filter ring. 4.6' (1.4m) minimum focus; 1:4 maximum reproduction ratio. 8.1 x 3.4" (205.5 x 87mm) long, diameter. RySy30A.

nikon 70 200 f2 8 e fl review