This hobby Sucks $$$$$$$$!

[sk66]

Yeah, those are dollar signs and not code for some swearing.
Gave into gear lust and ordered a Nikon 70-200mm F/2.8 VR II.....
Guess I'll be selling off some unused/ duplicate gear in the near future (just so I don't feel as guilty about buying more gear I don't NEED).
Before I do though I'm going to test my current lens against the nikkor. (Current lens is a second version Tokina ATX-Pro 80-200mm f/2.8, probably the best version they made).

I'm curious what would be a good comparison subject? I'm figuring using 200mm f/2.8 as the test settings....I'm just curious as to whether I just paid an extra $1300+ just for VR and built in motor because I've never been unhappy with the images taken with the Tokina (other than some cases of CA)

Architecture? Scenic?

[candidrachel]

Your right is is expensive! I'm holding off buying new lenses until I can afford the creme de la creme! Even if that is just 1 lens for now.

Are you having second thoughts buying your new lens? Why would you want to compare what you have already?

[sk66]

No second thoughts. I bought it because I wanted it and could afford it.....
But I'm curious as to what difference there really is between the two in basic image quality.
The new Nikkor will make it easier to get good images, but will they be *better*?....Just *what* does all the money really get you? IME it doesn't get you that much really.

I spent a lot of money going to FF, and while I don't *regret it* I don't see it as *money well spent* for a hobbyist. I suspect this lens will be similar.

[Jim Bryant]

The Nikon 70-200mm F/2.8 VR II has better quality optics in terms of sharpness and color casts than that of the Tokina. You'll like it.

[Photologyst]

Photography is much less expensive now than during the good old film processing days.

If one can resist gear lust, that is.

I like lenses (and many things) that can do double duty.

[sk66]

Originally Posted by Jim Bryant

The Nikon 70-200mm F/2.8 VR II has better quality optics in terms of sharpness and color casts than that of the Tokina. You'll like it.

So what's a good test to demonstrate it?

[sk66]

Originally Posted by Photologyst

Photography is much less expensive now than during the good old film processing days.

If one can resist gear lust, that is.

I like lenses (and many things) that can do double duty.

Yeah, lenses aren't my *big problem*...that would be camera bags!

[daft_biker]

Originally Posted by sk66

So what's a good test to demonstrate it?

Whatever you got it to photograph?

Except when it's a lens you got just because you felt like a new lens and end up taking nothing but test shots with it. Stick it on the camera, go for a walk and see what happens

I hear graph paper makes a good test subject....or brick walls.....always best to check a new lens on a tripod with mirror lockup and stuff to check it's not a bad one. Not just sharp on one side of the frame.....focus accuracy....stuff like that....

[Photologyst]

Originally Posted by sk66

Yeah, lenses aren't my *big problem*...that would be camera bags!

I never use a camera bag these days. Just a vest with a couple dozen pockets.

[Niresangwa]

set the body up on a tripod, lock up the mirror etc as already suggested, control as much as possible and put a bunch of things on a table...different textures, colours, sizes, different sizes of text on labels book covers etc... then shoot a couple of controls with each lens...

pretty sure i used a couple of bottles, some silverware, couple of glasses, wine bottle, box of cereal, candle, one leather shoe, one tennis shoe, a print, a propped open book etc etc...

you sure you want to test at only 2.8? when i did it i shot at about 4 different f-stops and also a couple of ISOs.

Then I got bored of pixel-peeping.

...however yes, as I'm winding down in the off season, the gear lust is starting to pick up again, even though deep down I know there's nothing I need. The things I do need however, I'm procrastinating badly on buying.