Ignore the blithering idiot who has managed to give this two zero-star reviews (which is why I, who don't normally post reviews, am posting this to try and rebalance - but I'd give it 5 stars anyway)If you need f/2.8 (sports, film or you need a lens that doubles as a blunt instrument), then buy the f/2.8 lens; in all other situations this is the lens for you! I sold my f/2.8 VR1 to buy this.Why?

Don't have your lens, but I did buy the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRII this week for my D800.  I manage to take a few hundred pictures, greenhouse environment, closeup, etc.  Used only handheld and VR on, to see how it does. Most pictures at 200mm and took varied aperture setting.Sharp pictures at all apertures.  Especially at 70mm and up. I didn't pay too much attention to holding it steady.  On pictures below 1/60 I did notice some motion blur on some pictures when pixel peeking, otherwise no noticeable motion blur.The bokeh is better than my Nikon 24-70mm f2.8. Picture sharpness appears to be the same, not counting motion blur on some. Having that little more reach is very nice for closeups.  I'm not into long tele zoom (rare use for me) but I could add a teleconverter if needed.As for focus breathing, don't think it would be an issue for me, but can be nice if it wasn't there, but if I'm too close, I can run into focus failure.  To be expected, I think.Looking good, planning on landscape shots in the mountains this weekend and see how it does in comparison to the gold standard Nikon 24-70mm f2.8.so far, happy camper.  I have 15 days to decide to keep it. Going to run it paces with Focal for the mac and Spyder Lens chart later next week.

I agree.  It also makes a decent semi macro lens - especially with an extender (you can get 0.5X), and gives enough working distance for small creatures.