Nikon needs to make a constant f/4 tele

Started Oct 15, 2012 | Discussions thread
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: 300mm f/4 doesn't count for you?
In reply to Glen78, Oct 15, 2012

Glen78 wrote:

Basically I was suggesting it would be nice if there was a full "Trinity" of enthusiast oriented f/4 zooms like there is for the Pro f/2.8 zooms (basiscally an enthusiast f/4 constant aperture version of the 70-300 VR). It would also need to be enthusiast in terms of cost like the 16-35 and 24-120, roughly 2/3 the price of the pro equivalent, give up a little IQ and a stop of aperture in exchange for a slightly larger range and lighter weight. The 200-400 f/4 is a $6,750 pro exotic lens and is a continuation of the pro lineup.

The 300 f/4 is a prime so it would not fit this category, although it is certainly a lense that I would be interested in purchasing, especially if they update it with VR.

Nikon has a 70-200 f2.8, as you know.  I don't know how many would line up for an f4 zoom in that range.  Perhaps Nikon has an idea how many, and perhaps they don't think it is enough to justify production.  That one stop that sounds so attractive because people will feel it's smaller and cheaper - that one stop is a lot, particularly if the lens has to be stopped down.  The Canon is supposed to be good wide open, and the Sigma 100-300, when they were making it, was good wide open.  Perhaps you could find one of those Sigmas on the used market.  According to photozone it was a very good lens.

If Nikon is counting in this thread, I don't want a 70-200 f4.  It will cost more than the 300mm f4, which is climbing up the price chart pretty good.  I like the 70-200 f2.8 VR1 on the used market better than an f4, and the price might be less.

-- hide signature --

Roy

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow