POLL - What are the next Nikon FX ƒ4 VR Zooms?

Started Jun 16, 2010 | Discussions
lifelibertyproperty
Junior MemberPosts: 26
Like?
POLL - What are the next Nikon FX ƒ4 VR Zooms?
Jun 16, 2010

Poll time! What will be the FX ƒ4 VR Trinity? (All options are ƒ4 VRII)

1. 28-135mm + 135-300mm
2. 24-105mm + 105-250mm
3. 35-135mm + 135-250mm
4. 35-150mm + 150-300mm
5. Something else.

-- hide signature --

D700 | 16-35mm ƒ4 VR | 50mm ƒ1.4D | 85mm ƒ1.8 | 70-300mm ƒ4-5.6G | Aperture 3 | Drobo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/barronkerry/

lifelibertyproperty
Junior MemberPosts: 26
Like?
Re: POLL - What are the next Nikon FX ƒ4 VR Zooms?
In reply to lifelibertyproperty, Jun 16, 2010

I predict option #3.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SNGX1327
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,186
Like?
Re: POLL - What are the next Nikon FX ƒ4 VR Zooms?
In reply to lifelibertyproperty, Jun 16, 2010

personally i wouldn't mind seen a 70-200 f/4 with comprable quality to canon's f/4L... with or without VR... at a modest price. i think that would be killer. i like my 70-300 VR, a lot, but i REALLY liked my old 70-200 f/4L... and the IS version of that is supposedly even better...

for $600 i think i'd rather have a 70-200 f/4 than a 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
emax
Senior MemberPosts: 1,891
Like?
I Think # 5.
In reply to lifelibertyproperty, Jun 16, 2010

24-100(or -120) 4 & 70-200/4 ($1,000+ each).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RBFresno
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,703Gear list
Like?
A Nikon 70-200 f/4 for $600? Not likely.
In reply to SNGX1327, Jun 16, 2010

for $600 i think i'd rather have a 70-200 f/4 than a 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR...

Sure.
But don't hold your breath waiting for one for $600.

The Canon 70-200 f/4 is $1200:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/457678-USA/Canon_1258B002AA_EF_70_200mm_f_4L_IS.html

Hard to imagine that a Nikon counterpart would be $600.

RB

http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile

 RBFresno's gear list:RBFresno's gear list
Nikon D2H Nikon D3 Nikon D200 Nikon D4 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +16 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Windancer
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,648Gear list
Like?
I agree!!
In reply to SNGX1327, Jun 16, 2010

SNGX1327 wrote:

personally i wouldn't mind seen a 70-200 f/4 with comprable quality to canon's f/4L... with or without VR... at a modest price.

I am so sorry I sold my 70-200/4.

Regards
Terry

-- hide signature --

Graham Fine Art Photography
http://grahter.sasktelwebsite.net
http://gallery.reginaphotoclub.com/TGraham

Disclaimer: This e-mail is intended to impart a sense of humor. Given e-mail's inability to carry inflections, tone and facial expressions it may fail miserably in its intent. The sender acknowledges the limitations of the technology and assigns to the software in which this message was composed any ill feelings that may arise.

 Windancer's gear list:Windancer's gear list
Nikon D100 Nikon D200 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon 1 V2 +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Colin Stuart
Contributing MemberPosts: 549Gear list
Like?
Re: POLL - What are the next Nikon FX ƒ4 VR Zooms?
In reply to lifelibertyproperty, Jun 16, 2010

None of those zoom ranges, those are all far too odd. What emax said would probably be the most correct, something to be competing with Canon (24-105/4, 70-200/4).

But then again, why does Nikon need to make these lenses? They are slower, cheaper, cover a little more range... ugh. Nikon already has a $1000 70-200... it's called the 80-200/2.8D, lol. Why get a slower lens with VR and pay more?

What nikon needs to concentrate on is their primes.

35/1.4 AF-S
50/1.2 or 1.4 AF-S (larger, heavier, better bokeh, sharper, better AF)
85/1.4 AF-S
105 and/or 135/2 AF-S
180/2.8 AF-S

All those lenses are currently AI-S or AF-D, lol. Designs that are 10+ years old. They need an overhaul.

 Colin Stuart's gear list:Colin Stuart's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brunobarolo
Contributing MemberPosts: 927
Like?
Re: POLL - What are the next Nikon FX ƒ4 VR Zooms?
In reply to lifelibertyproperty, Jun 16, 2010

lifelibertyproperty wrote:

Poll time! What will be the FX ƒ4 VR Trinity? (All options are ƒ4 VRII)

Seems pretty clear to me: simply Nikon versions of the two Canon zooms I used to own until I jumped ship: 24-105 L IS and 70-200 L IS.

These are so useful especially if you mount the standard zoom on an FX camera, and the tele zoom to a DX camera and have a 105-300 FOV with a light and compact unit.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
b33g33
Senior MemberPosts: 1,070Gear list
Like?
Re: POLL - What are the next Nikon FX ƒ4 VR Zooms?
In reply to lifelibertyproperty, Jun 16, 2010

24-105 ($999)
70-200 ($1399)

-- hide signature --

What you know imprisons you

 b33g33's gear list:b33g33's gear list
Nikon D50 Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mebyon K
Contributing MemberPosts: 596
Like?
Re: POLL - What are the next Nikon FX ƒ4 VR Zooms?
In reply to b33g33, Jun 16, 2010

I don't know what they will be, although I think something like a 24-105/120 will be next.

The two I would like to see are a 24-85 and a 80-200 to give compact size and the highest possible optical quality at f4. Unfortunately as with the Canon f4's, with the exception of the 70-200 which even so is nowhere near the stated focal range being actually 74-189 mm, and the recent Nikon 16-35; I think marketing will triumph over engineering and we will end up with lenses of a wide focal length range which have poor edge quality at one or both ends of their focal ranges.
--
Mebyon K

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nikons52
Senior MemberPosts: 1,077
Like?
Re: I agree!!
In reply to Windancer, Jun 16, 2010

Nice capture!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ron Scubadiver
Senior MemberPosts: 1,465Gear list
Like?
24-105
In reply to nikons52, Jun 16, 2010

Canon sells tons of 24-105 f/4 zooms. If Nikon makes one it will probably cost at least $1200. Three quarters of the folks I see carrying around 5DII's when I travel have this mounted. Funny thing is most of the folks carrying D700's have a small prime in the 24 to 50 range on their camera while traveling.
--
See my photos at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/29229060@N04/

 Ron Scubadiver's gear list:Ron Scubadiver's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Tamron AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Windancer
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,648Gear list
Like?
Re: I agree!!
In reply to nikons52, Jun 16, 2010

nikons52 wrote:

Nice capture!

Thank you very much, it is one of my two dogs. If yo are are interested, visit

; or
http://gallery.reginaphotoclub.com/TGraham/My-Dogs

Regards
Terry
--
Graham Fine Art Photography
http://grahter.sasktelwebsite.net
http://gallery.reginaphotoclub.com/TGraham

Disclaimer: This e-mail is intended to impart a sense of humor. Given e-mail's inability to carry inflections, tone and facial expressions it may fail miserably in its intent. The sender acknowledges the limitations of the technology and assigns to the software in which this message was composed any ill feelings that may arise.

 Windancer's gear list:Windancer's gear list
Nikon D100 Nikon D200 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon 1 V2 +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pictureted
Contributing MemberPosts: 511
Like?
24-105/4
In reply to Windancer, Jun 16, 2010

Nikon has the terrific 16-85 for DX and NOTHING comparable for FX. The 24-105 is the most logical addition.

I hear the clarion call for primes frequently and wonder what the sales numbers are for primes vs zooms. I used primes exclusively until I got the 16-85 (w/D90). Good primes too - 20/2.8, 28/2.8, 55/2.8 Micro, 105/2.5 and 200/4 (non-macro) and would never go back (all shot with F2A and F3HP). Unless a prime is a macro or long telephoto, zooms are much more convenient. Unless, that is, they are Nikon's pro f2.8 zooms, which are just too big. Why they'll make a 24-105/4.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
scrane
Contributing MemberPosts: 868
Like?
Re: A Nikon 70-200 f/4 for $600? Not likely.
In reply to RBFresno, Jun 16, 2010

RBFresno wrote:

for $600 i think i'd rather have a 70-200 f/4 than a 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR...

Sure.
But don't hold your breath waiting for one for $600.

The Canon 70-200 f/4 is $1200:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/457678-USA/Canon_1258B002AA_EF_70_200mm_f_4L_IS.html

Hard to imagine that a Nikon counterpart would be $600.

RB

http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile

The Canon 70-200 f4 is ~ $600.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/183198-USA/Canon_2578A002_EF_70_200mm_f_4L_USM.html

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Rivers Lakes and Woods
Junior MemberPosts: 43
Like?
Re: POLL - What are the next Nikon FX ƒ4 VR Zooms?
In reply to Mebyon K, Jun 17, 2010

I think the two that are wanted by many are the 24-105f4 and the 70-200f4. I think something near these focal lengths will be in the works eventually. Why? There is too much money to be made! There is a whole group of people that want less weight and high quality imaging at less than the price of the 2.8 zooms.
A 70-200 f4 VR2 of high imaging quality would immediately go on my wish list.

The Canon 70-200 f4 IS is apparently a very exceptional piece of glass (one of Canon's best zooms ever) for around $1200. It would be wonderful to have something like this for Nikon. I predict a price of $1200.00 to $1400.00 for a 70-200 f4 VR2.

Ron

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
coracii
Regular MemberPosts: 382
Like?
Re: A Nikon 70-200 f/4 for $600? Not likely.
In reply to scrane, Jun 17, 2010

scrane wrote:

The Canon 70-200 f4 is ~ $600.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/183198-USA/Canon_2578A002_EF_70_200mm_f_4L_USM.html

But that is the non-IS version, anyone want to guess how loud the screams here would be if Nikon released a 70-200 f4 without VR?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
scrane
Contributing MemberPosts: 868
Like?
Re: A Nikon 70-200 f/4 for $600? Not likely.
In reply to coracii, Jun 17, 2010

I don't think anyone would complain about a non VR 70-200 f4 with the astonishing optical quality of the Canon for less than $600.

It may be that Nikon will not be able to match the quality of Canon's IS version, no matter what the price.

Nikon could improve on the performance of a 24-105 f4 Canon IS, though, which is a good, but not great lens.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Canyongazer
Regular MemberPosts: 196Gear list
Like?
Re: POLL - What are the next Nikon FX ƒ4 VR Zooms?
In reply to lifelibertyproperty, Jun 17, 2010

Those who talk don't know.
Those who know don't talk.

 Canyongazer's gear list:Canyongazer's gear list
Fujifilm X100S +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
coracii
Regular MemberPosts: 382
Like?
Re: A Nikon 70-200 f/4 for $600? Not likely.
In reply to scrane, Jun 17, 2010

There was a loud chorus of people complaining loudly about the 14-24 and 24-70 not having VR. These are lenses that don't really have a great need for it (though they are quite a bit more expensive than the Canon 70-200f4 non-IS), but too many people think every lens must have this feature. Personally, if given the choice between a VR version for $1200 or a non-VR with the same image quality for $600, there'd be no hesitationfor me in saving $600.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads