Nikon needs to make a constant f/4 tele

Started Oct 15, 2012 | Discussions
Joe Marques
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,963
Like?
Re: Nikon needs to make a constant f/4 tele
In reply to hikerdoc, Oct 16, 2012

hikerdoc wrote:

if it does not need to be Nikon both Sigma (1250 USD) and Tamron (new model) have 70-200 f/2.8 with stabilization

I've tested the Sigma and owned the older Tamron (better IQ than the Sigma but no "VR"). The Canon 70-200 f4 is a better performing lens than either at 1/2 the price (and sells very well as a result).  So I think the market would be similarly strong with a Nikon version.

Joe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zardoz
Senior MemberPosts: 1,249Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon needs to make a constant f/4 tele
In reply to dennis tennis, Oct 16, 2012

Hey bro,

As excited as I am about that lens, I think the cost is going to be prohibitive considering my requirement to purchase 10 copies from different locations around the world in order to obtain a copy of the finest optical quality.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Leonard Shepherd
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,752Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon needs to make a constant f/4 tele
In reply to Glen78, Oct 16, 2012

Those of us using Nikon for more than a decade have been asking for a 70-200 f4 VR for around 10 years.

I sold my 300 f4 AF-s and 80-400 VR 3.5 years ago having convinced myself upgrades should be due. I am still waiting!

Digressing the Thailand flood may have delayed some lens launches. The availability of better and more affordable FX bodies probably means Nikon are now very busy increasing existing FX lens production.

My guess is, but for the Thailand flood, a 70-200 f4 VR (or similar) would have followed the 16-35 and 24-120 f4 optics.

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd
Many problems turn out to be a lack of intimate knowledge of complex modern camera equipment.

 Leonard Shepherd's gear list:Leonard Shepherd's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
photoad
Contributing MemberPosts: 570Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon needs to make a constant f/4 tele
In reply to Leonard Shepherd, Oct 16, 2012

Leonard Shepherd wrote:

Those of us using Nikon for more than a decade have been asking for a 70-200 f4 VR for around 10 years.

I sold my 300 f4 AF-s and 80-400 VR 3.5 years ago having convinced myself upgrades should be due. I am still waiting!

Digressing the Thailand flood may have delayed some lens launches. The availability of better and more affordable FX bodies probably means Nikon are now very busy increasing existing FX lens production.

My guess is, but for the Thailand flood, a 70-200 f4 VR (or similar) would have followed the 16-35 and 24-120 f4 optics.

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd
Many problems turn out to be a lack of intimate knowledge of complex modern camera equipment.

NO NO NO

Fast glass.

There is no substitute for fast glass.  All these threads give Nikon the idea that F4 and worse is a good idea.  Why take 10,000 dull photographs at F4 when you can take a great one at F1.4?  Head for the stars, wallowing in mediocrity is a waste of life.   Let start asking for a fixed F2.0 zoom and F1.0 primes.

 photoad's gear list:photoad's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D200 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cna
cna
Forum MemberPosts: 68Gear list
Like?
waiting for a 70-200vr4 for more than 5 years
In reply to Joe Marques, Oct 16, 2012

I've been waiting for a high quality 70-200vr4 zoom for more than 5 years (similar to the Canon 70-200L4IS)

I already have the very nice 180 afd 2.8 lens. But there are many occasions when I miss the flexibility of a lightweight zoom (I do not want to carry the 70-200vr2.8)

Cheers,

Philippe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
olynik969
Senior MemberPosts: 1,416
Like?
Yup.... Canon has had 'em.... But...
In reply to Glen78, Oct 17, 2012

No Nikon reply. The lack of a 70-200 f/4 option has been discussed for a long time on the Nikon forums.

The Canon 70-200 F/4 is simply excellent, I have one... (I shoot both systems), and they are now offering an "L-Class" 70-300 variable aperture lens. Very nice options; definitely missing from Nikon's lens offerings.

Bob

-- hide signature --

Bob (formerly bobmax)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PatrickP
Contributing MemberPosts: 713Gear list
Like?
NikonRumors suggesting it would be announced next week!
In reply to olynik969, Oct 17, 2012

Here we are!!!

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/10/17/breaking-nikon-70-200mm-f4-lens-with-next-generation-vr-to-be-announced-next-week.aspx/

I am guessing US$1500 MSRP.

olynik969 wrote:

No Nikon reply. The lack of a 70-200 f/4 option has been discussed for a long time on the Nikon forums.

The Canon 70-200 F/4 is simply excellent, I have one... (I shoot both systems), and they are now offering an "L-Class" 70-300 variable aperture lens. Very nice options; definitely missing from Nikon's lens offerings.

Bob

-- hide signature --

Bob (formerly bobmax)

-- hide signature --

D800E
Nikon Zooms: 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8, 70-200 VR2, TC-20E3, 28-300VR.
Nikon Primes: 24/1.4, 50/1.8, 85/1.8.

 PatrickP's gear list:PatrickP's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Glen78
Contributing MemberPosts: 649Gear list
Like?
Re: NikonRumors suggesting it would be announced next week!
In reply to PatrickP, Oct 17, 2012

Wow, I should suggest a new lens I want to Nikon more often! This lens may be my Christmas gift to myself! Now all I need from Nikon is a 35 f/2G that has as good of performance as my 50 f/1.8G and a VR version of the 300 f/4 and I think I will be set for lenses.

 Glen78's gear list:Glen78's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR Nikon PC-E Nikkor 24mm f/3.5D ED +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
emax
Senior MemberPosts: 1,905
Like?
Yahooooo
In reply to PatrickP, Oct 17, 2012

Thanks for the good news, Patrick.

I don't suspect the price will be good news, though.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
showmetheprime
Regular MemberPosts: 193
Like?
Re: NikonRumors suggesting it would be announced next week!
In reply to Glen78, Oct 17, 2012

Glen78 wrote:

Wow, I should suggest a new lens I want to Nikon more often! This lens may be my Christmas gift to myself! Now all I need from Nikon is a 35 f/2G that has as good of performance as my 50 f/1.8G and a VR version of the 300 f/4 and I think I will be set for lenses.

With respect, a patent was filed a LONG time ago, it's been in the planning longer than the last 2 days

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SethG
Contributing MemberPosts: 890
Like?
Re: Yahooooo
In reply to emax, Oct 17, 2012

I don't know what the hubbub is all about. I've had a Nikon 70-210 f/4 for years!

(it was one of their first AF lenses in the mid-80s)

-- hide signature --

- Seth -

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Motts
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,019
Like?
Re: Nikon needs to make a constant f/4 tele
In reply to photoad, Oct 17, 2012

photoad wrote:

NO NO NO

Fast glass.

There is no substitute for fast glass.  All these threads give Nikon the idea that F4 and worse is a good idea.  Why take 10,000 dull photographs at F4 when you can take a great one at F1.4?  Head for the stars, wallowing in mediocrity is a waste of life.   Let start asking for a fixed F2.0 zoom and F1.0 primes.

Sorry if I'm being a bit slow here, but this is a joke, right?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
michaeladawson
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,958Gear list
Like?
Re: NikonRumors suggesting it would be announced next week!
In reply to PatrickP, Oct 17, 2012

Certainly interested in this lens.  But I have to ask...

Wouldn't the Sigma or Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 be serious options to the Nikon f/4 offering?  The Nikon f/4 lenses that have been released to-date are not as good as their f/2.8 siblings.  I have the 24-120 f/4 and I love it.  But it is not the optical quality of the 24-70.  It simply has a a better zoom range that I like.

If  Nikon releases this new lens at upwards of $1500 in price I think I would rather take that money and buy an f/2.8 Tamron or Sigma.   The IQ will likely be as good and it is a stop better.

-- hide signature --

Mike Dawson

 michaeladawson's gear list:michaeladawson's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Nikon D200 Nikon D4 Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PatrickP
Contributing MemberPosts: 713Gear list
Like?
Re: NikonRumors suggesting it would be announced next week!
In reply to michaeladawson, Oct 17, 2012

The main attraction is weight savings. Nikon lenses tend to be a tad heavier than their Canon equiv, but this one should weight no more than 2 pounds. If this lens does not have the focus breathing issue on the latest 70-200 f/2.8 VR2 which weights 3.4 pounds, then all the better. While none of the third party options are light weight....

Nano-coating is also another major attraction.

As for the f/4 series the 16-35 is good but the 24-120 is so-so. (I own both) I am also skeptical of this new one given the track record of the f/4 series. I would rather wait until the photozone review before committing to one myself.

michaeladawson wrote:

Certainly interested in this lens.  But I have to ask...

Wouldn't the Sigma or Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 be serious options to the Nikon f/4 offering?  The Nikon f/4 lenses that have been released to-date are not as good as their f/2.8 siblings.  I have the 24-120 f/4 and I love it.  But it is not the optical quality of the 24-70.  It simply has a a better zoom range that I like.

If  Nikon releases this new lens at upwards of $1500 in price I think I would rather take that money and buy an f/2.8 Tamron or Sigma.   The IQ will likely be as good and it is a stop better.

-- hide signature --

Mike Dawson

-- hide signature --

D800E
Nikon Zooms: 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8, 70-200 VR2, TC-20E3, 28-300VR.
Nikon Primes: 24/1.4, 50/1.8, 85/1.8.

 PatrickP's gear list:PatrickP's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PatrickP
Contributing MemberPosts: 713Gear list
Like?
Re: Yahooooo
In reply to emax, Oct 17, 2012

Let's do some math:

14-24/2.8 : US$1999.    16-35/4 : US$1259 .  Cost 63% as much as the f/2.8 version.

24-70/2.8 : US$1899     24-120/4 : US$1299.  68%.

70-200/2.8 : US$2399.  If 70-200/4 cost 65% as much it would be $1559. The "next generation VR" would likely push the price higher :(.

emax wrote:

Thanks for the good news, Patrick.

I don't suspect the price will be good news, though.

-- hide signature --

D800E
Nikon Zooms: 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8, 70-200 VR2, TC-20E3, 28-300VR.
Nikon Primes: 24/1.4, 50/1.8, 85/1.8.

 PatrickP's gear list:PatrickP's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads