Anyone tried the Nikon AF 70-200MM F2.8 G ED VR II on the AF100?

[seanwin]

Had anyone tried this lens on the AF100? If so any problems or is this lens going to be a beautiful thing to have on the Af100?

I had recently got the Nikkor Micro 105mm, but with a little bit of extra money just come in, I can exchange it for the 70-200. I'm just wondering if it a good decision to change them over.

My current lenses for the AF100 are
Voigtlander 25mm
Zeiss 50mm Planar
Tokina 11-16

As I said I just got the 105mm, but am seriously considering exchanging it for the 70-200.

 

[TheReverend]

Nikon 70-200 2.8 is a great lens. We tried that, and wound up getting the 70-200 2.8 Tamron lens and the quality was just as good, despite being half the price. Both lens will do an AF100 shooter well.

 

[Fotojorno]

The previous generation Nikkor, the 80-200 2.8 is half the price and for all intents just as good as the 70-200 if the lens is not being used for still photos.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/124669-USA/Nikon_1986_AF_Zoom_Nikkor_80_200mm_f_2_8D.html

I've had one for over 12 years and it's as sharp at 2.8 as the day I bought it.

 

[TheReverend]

The previous generation Nikkor, the 80-200 2.8 is half the price and for all intents just as good as the 70-200 if the lens is not being used for still photos.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/124669-USA/Nikon_1986_AF_Zoom_Nikkor_80_200mm_f_2_8D.html

I've had one for over 12 years and it's as sharp at 2.8 as the day I bought it.

Do note that the 80-200mm here has an iris ring too. Bonus!

 

[woobiee]

A great lens with brilliant bokeh. Skew is magnified so fast pans might not be so good. Keep in mind you'll need support for these lenses.