Previous news story    Next news story

Nikon launches 70-200mm f/4 VR telezoom with claimed 5-stop stabilization

By dpreview staff on Oct 24, 2012 at 04:01 GMT
Buy on GearShop$1,396.95

Nikon has launched the much-rumored AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR, a lighter and more affordable tele-zoom with a claimed 5 stops of image stabilization. This is delivered by what the company terms 'third-generation VR,' which we're told is not a successor to VRII. The lens joins Nikon's range of constant f/4 lenses, alongside the 16-35mm f/4 and 24-120mm f/4, and includes both nano crystal coating and a ring-type AF-S motor to give full-time manual focus override. At $1400 the lens is priced relatively closely to the Canon equivalent's list price - as is the $224 optional tripod ring.

Jump to:


Press Release:

NIKON CONTINUES POPULAR SERIES OF F/4 LENSES WITH THE ADDITION OF THE NEW FX-FORMAT AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR TELEPHOTO ZOOM LENS

The AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR Telephoto Zoom Lens is Nikon's First Lens with up to Five Stops of Image Stabilization; Offers Outstanding Performance and Superior Image Quality

MELVILLE, N.Y. (October 24, 2012) – Today, Nikon Inc. announced the newest addition to its legendary NIKKOR line of lenses, the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR telephoto zoom lens that provides a popular and versatile focal length and a constant f/4 aperture for full frame FX-format photographers. The 70-200mm f/4 is the first NIKKOR lens to feature the third generation of Nikon's Vibration Reduction (VR) technology to meet the still image and video demands of advanced photographers and videographers.

"With the new AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4, Nikon offers enthusiasts an essential telephoto zoom lens capable of amazing clarity and control, at a price point that's easily attainable," said Bo Kajiwara, Vice President of Marketing, Planning and Customer Experience, Nikon Inc., "With the introduction of Nikon's third generation of VR technology, the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4 lens offers superior performance and stunning image quality whether shooting beautiful stills or HD video in challenging lighting conditions."

Legendary Image Quality and Performance

In an expansion of Nikon's f/4 series of NIKKOR lenses, the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4 is an uncompromising telephoto zoom lens ready for real-world creative applications by professionals and enthusiasts including sports, portraiture and wildlife shooting. Smaller and lighter than Nikon's AF-S NIKKOR 70-200 f/2.8 lens, this 70-200mm f/4 lens offers a valuable alternative that maintains the superior image quality and lightning quick performance photographers have come to expect from Nikon.

Additionally, Nikon's newest lens is the first to feature VR image stabilization technology that is able to vastly reduce camera shake and blur by offering the equivalent shutter speed of approximately five stops slower than otherwise possible. Now users are able to shoot confidently in lower light or while handheld to deliver razor sharp images and smooth HD video.

When used alongside the Nikon D4, D800 series and D600 D-SLR cameras, 70-200mm f/4 lens users can take advantage of Nikon professional grade teleconverters to increase the focal length without sacrificing AF and VR abilities. By utilizing the camera's cross-type focus points at f/8 and below, users can effectively double the focal length of this f/4 lens to 400mm and still retain the AF ability to capture clear subjects at an even greater distance.

Constructed from 20 optical elements in 14 groups, the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4 maintains several core Nikon technologies including the exclusive Nano Crystal Coat to significantly reduce instances of ghosting and flaring. In addition, Nikon's Silent Wave Motor (SWM) provides quiet and responsive autofocus (AF) operation. The lens also features two versatile focus modes, M/A (autofocus with manual override) and M (manual focus) to adapt to a users shooting preferences. The AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4 achieves the top class feel, superior operability and solid handling that only NIKKOR glass can offer.

Price and Availability

The AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR will be available in late November 2012 for a suggested retail price (SRP) of $1,399.95*. Nikon also offers an optional Tripod Collar, available in the near future for a suggested retail price (SRP) of $223.95*. For more information on this and other NIKKOR lenses, as well as other Nikon products, please visit www.nikonusa.com.

*SRP (Suggested Retail Price) listed only as a suggestion. Actual prices are set by dealers and are subject to change at any time. Specifications, equipment and release dates are subject to change without any notice or obligation on the part of the manufacturer.

AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR specifications

Principal specifications
Lens typeZoom lens
Max Format size35mm FF
Focal length70–200 mm
Image stabilisationYes (VR, 5 stops)
Lens mountNikon F (FX)
Aperture
Maximum apertureF4.0
Minimum apertureF32.0
Aperture ringNo
Number of diaphragm blades9
Aperture notesRounded diaphragm
Optics
Elements20
Groups14
Special elements / coatings3 ED lens elements, 1 HRI lens element
Focus
Minimum focus1.00 m (39.37)
Maximum magnification0.27×
AutofocusYes
Motor typeRing-type ultrasonic
Full time manualYes
Focus methodInternal
Distance scaleYes
DoF scaleNo
Physical
Weight850 g (1.87 lb)
Diameter78 mm (3.07)
Length179 mm (7.05)
SealingNo
ColourBlack
Zoom methodRotary (internal)
Filter thread67 mm
Hood suppliedYes
Optional accessoriesOptional RT-1 tripod collar
213
I own it
58
I want it
7
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR

Comments

Total comments: 241
12
Artistico
By Artistico (Oct 24, 2012)

It's about time Nikon got an equivalent to Canon's excellent lens. If I ever go full frame again, I might consider Nikon an alternative now as having the Canon 70-200 f4IS would have been essential.

1 upvote
Ohm
By Ohm (Oct 24, 2012)

any idea of the focus breathing?

0 upvotes
Greg Gebhardt
By Greg Gebhardt (Oct 24, 2012)

$240 for a tripod collar!?!?!?

3rd party people will be selling for $50 and cleaning up!

I do want the lens, five stop VR mean the 70-200 2.8 will be staying at home!

This lens is not to replace the 70-200 f2.8 it is just a lighter tool to add to the collection and a long awaited one!

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
tt321
By tt321 (Oct 24, 2012)

Given what's happening with Canon tripod collars, third parties could be selling clones not for 50 but closer to 15.

0 upvotes
bocajrs
By bocajrs (Oct 24, 2012)

+1 they dont even include the collar..thats BS..I own the Siggy 70-200 2.8 OS DG HSM on D600 and couldnt be happier...Nkon wont get my money on this lens

0 upvotes
jkonrad49
By jkonrad49 (Oct 24, 2012)

I have 70-200/2,8 VRI four years. I never used tripod collar :-).

0 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (Oct 24, 2012)

Collar? Weighs less than a 24-70.

0 upvotes
AndrewG NY
By AndrewG NY (Oct 24, 2012)

For those who don't think tripod collar is necessary -- you may be right in the sense that the lens is probably light enough that decent heads will be able to handle the weight. But tripod collars also allow for decent balance for vertical composition without the use of an expensive L-plate on the body, and are especially handy with a monopod.

0 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (Oct 24, 2012)

Andrew, thats quite true, but the majority of users will not need it. It's weight is low enough that in general use it will not need extra support. I'd rather Nikon gave the option instead of passing on the cost.

0 upvotes
Mr Fartleberry
By Mr Fartleberry (Oct 24, 2012)

Looks like a great opportunity for Really Right Stuff to sell lots of tripod rings. Unless Nikon's has GPS or Wifi or something built into it we don't know about.

1 upvote
Denis of Whidbey Island
By Denis of Whidbey Island (Oct 24, 2012)

Agreed. In a way, this saves us from buying a Nikon collar that we'll replace with a footed RRS or Kirk. OTOH, they are testing the limits of pricing with this lens at this point without a collar.

0 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Oct 24, 2012)

"N" as in "Nice"... :)

0 upvotes
kewlguy
By kewlguy (Oct 24, 2012)

finally, better than never Nikon!

1 upvote
bimmerman
By bimmerman (Oct 24, 2012)

Wait a minute, did they say zoom type is extending??? Meaning the length of the lens changes when zoomed??? Oh no!!! say it ain't so Nikon. Why can't they make one like Canon? This is going to be a dust pump!!!

0 upvotes
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (Oct 24, 2012)

You mean like the Canon 100-400mm?

1 upvote
Thecameramole
By Thecameramole (Oct 24, 2012)

Yes but the point is that this is a 70-200mm, not a 100-400mm.

The Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 zooms internally. As do all of the Canon equivalents.

Also the Canon 100-400 is extremely old in contrast to this new design from Nikon.

1 upvote
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Oct 24, 2012)

Zoom method: Rotary (internal)

1 upvote
kevin_r
By kevin_r (Oct 24, 2012)

I think you're the only one who sees "extending" anywhere. Doesn't show up in the "find" function of IE. except in your post.

2 upvotes
Greg Gebhardt
By Greg Gebhardt (Oct 24, 2012)

NOT extending!

INTERNAL focusing!

2 upvotes
Claudio NC
By Claudio NC (Oct 24, 2012)

just look at the picture of this lens to understand immediately that it has rotary controls for zoom and focus and therefore is not a pump.
Less exclamation-question points, bimmerman, please use more your eyes and thought control!

0 upvotes
bimmerman
By bimmerman (Oct 24, 2012)

Dang! I could have sworn I saw extending a while ago. The folks at dpreview must have edited it. But I'm relieved. And if I was wrong about it then this is one occasion which I am really glad I was wrong.

Anyway, you said look at the picture of the lens and understand immediately that it's rotary and not a pump. Well, if you looked at the Nikon 17-55/2.8 for the first time would you say it was non extending? Well, the 17-55 is extending, rotary zoom but sucks in dust too.

I'm just glad this one is not. Been waiting forever for it.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Oct 24, 2012)

Internal focus has noting to do with the lens barrel extending during zooming or not.

0 upvotes
jkonrad49
By jkonrad49 (Oct 24, 2012)

Are You able to read?
Focus method Internal

0 upvotes
Gothmoth
By Gothmoth (Oct 24, 2012)

lol... the tripod rings ar such ripoffs.....

i get the same quality from third partys for around 30 $

3 upvotes
intruder61
By intruder61 (Oct 24, 2012)

finally

0 upvotes
aardvark7
By aardvark7 (Oct 24, 2012)

I have two observations:

First that image stabilisation is very useful, up to a point, but the main problem is whether the subject moves! In such a case the aperture is far more important (although that has its major limitations too!). I think the manfacturers over-emphasise the importance of this feature and now it's joined the megapixel race! Also, what is the power consumption of this compared to one of lesser ability?

Second, I would put money on, within a few months, many retailers offering a 'free' collar as part of a deal, rather than knocking the price down.

All that said, if it performs well, the pain of the price would be soon forgotten for Nikon users. I can see it now in the forums..."The best $1400 I've ever spent!"...

0 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Oct 24, 2012)

1. Image stabilisation is highly useful and is highly emphasised by users
2. Not many would buy the tripod collar because there is image stabilisation, and no....retailers won't include them, never happened to Canon at least.

2 upvotes
Antonio G
By Antonio G (Oct 24, 2012)

Weighting "just" 810 grs the collar may be not that important as for the 2.8.
The 70-300 never had a collar option and Nikon never referred you could have a problem using it on a tripod. Will the 60 grs difference be a problem for the mount's "health"?

2 upvotes
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (Oct 24, 2012)

I think it's no problem on a good sturdy tripod indeed.

0 upvotes
delete
By delete (Oct 24, 2012)

If this lens would have been available 6 months ago, it would be in my photo bag. Now I already have the f/2,8 VRII. Which is an excellent lens, but per physics also a very heavy and large one.

Not sure if to trade it in for the new f/4 would make sense for me. This would cost me probably nada. On the plus side would be the ~700g less, smaller size and better VR, on the negative side the one stop aperture.

Need to check my photos made with the big one, see how many of them were actually shot with f/2,8.

1 upvote
RaptorUK
By RaptorUK (Oct 24, 2012)

It's not just about what aperture the shot is taken at . . .

Focusing is done with the aperture wide open . . . f2.8 is better for focusing in low light compared to f4.

3 upvotes
PatrickP
By PatrickP (Oct 24, 2012)

you paid $2399 for 7 pieces of ED glass on the f/2.8 version, now you are down to 3 for $1399.

0 upvotes
delete
By delete (Oct 24, 2012)

No, I paid 1799€. I am not sure what the number of ED glasses means in RL. So let's wait and see what the performance of the f/4 is.

During my Canon years, I loved the 70-200 4 L...

0 upvotes
delete
By delete (Oct 24, 2012)

No, I paid 1799€. I am not sure what the number of ED glasses means in RL. So let's wait and see what the performance of the f/4 is.

During my Canon years, I loved the 70-200 4 L...

0 upvotes
delete
By delete (Oct 24, 2012)

No, I paid 1799€. I am not sure what the number of ED glasses means in RL. So let's wait and see what the performance of the f/4 is.

During my Canon years, I loved the 70-200 4 L...

0 upvotes
delete
By delete (Oct 24, 2012)

No, I paid 1799€. I am not sure what the number of ED glasses means in RL. So let's wait and see what the performance of the f/4 is.

During my Canon years, I loved the 70-200 4 L...

0 upvotes
Michael S.
By Michael S. (Oct 24, 2012)

Long awaited by many customers - so hopefully the output will be satisfying - then it will be a winner.

0 upvotes
thomas2279f
By thomas2279f (Oct 24, 2012)

Excellent looking lens and with great specs - $1300 / £1200 seem to be the price that i expected - if you want 6 months or more price should fall to be around £1000 in line with Canon's excellent model.

1 upvote
Vicariousgeorge
By Vicariousgeorge (Oct 24, 2012)

For that price, I'd just as soon grab the Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS for $150 LESS. I've actually used the Sigma before, and the particular copy was ridiculously sharp.

Considering the collar is ANOTHER $200+, you really aren't getting all that much for your money for an f/4 lens.

This should be around $1000 - collar included.

Comment edited 13 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Zafar Kazmi
By Zafar Kazmi (Oct 24, 2012)

What you are also not getting for your money is "Weight". The primary reason people asked for this lens.

2 upvotes
Rickard Hansson
By Rickard Hansson (Oct 24, 2012)

I have the 70-200 2.8 OS from sigma and compared to the nikon products it sucks.

Also, you loose compatibility with nikon 1 series using any sigma OS lens as of today, that is not the case with nikon branded lenses.

0 upvotes
Gothmoth
By Gothmoth (Oct 24, 2012)

landscape photographer don´t need f2.8 in this lens.

i use my EF 70-200mm f4 for landscapes and 95% of my images are shoot around f8-f11.

f2.8 would only add more weight and be wasted for my needs.

1 upvote
Photog74
By Photog74 (Oct 24, 2012)

I agree that it's a bit expensive - Canon's 70-200mm f/4L IS USM cost only $1,250 at launch and they even have have a non-IS version that retails for barely more than half the price. Comparison with the Sigma isn't entirely relevant though - being an f/2.8 lens, the Sigma weighs quite a bit more and if you don't need the extra stop you WILL mind the extra weight I guess.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Oct 24, 2012)

Yes, but to my surprise the Canon 70-200/4 without the IS (VR) is a different design and optically inferior to Canon's 70-200/4 IS (which is sensational and worth the money, BTW). Sigma is, well, Sigma.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Benna78
By Benna78 (Oct 24, 2012)

The lens I was waiting years ago, when I decided to switch to Canon

1 upvote
abi170845
By abi170845 (Oct 24, 2012)

Nice lens!It's time for Canon to improve the IS on the same lens. Don't get me wrong, I do have and love my canon 70-200/4 I.S, but 4 stops I.S would be awesome.

0 upvotes
Gothmoth
By Gothmoth (Oct 24, 2012)

if you have such tremors.. what about using a tripod? lol

2 upvotes
sprials
By sprials (Oct 24, 2012)

That lens does have 4 stop IS...so enjoy your "awesome"

2 upvotes
abi170845
By abi170845 (Oct 24, 2012)

I just read the spec again, my bad, it does have 4 stop I.S, I thought the I.S was the same as the 300mm f4 I.S

0 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (Oct 24, 2012)

It certainly seems like a more portable alternative to the f/2.8 version. smaller, considerably lighter, closer minimum focusing distance, and much bigger reproduction ratio. That said, I wasn't completely blown away by the smallish saple images on Nikon's site (the bird is particularly "meh"). And of course you're losing the weather sealing of the f/2.8.

0 upvotes
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Oct 24, 2012)

One of the lasting arguments for Canon or Nikon was that Canon had a 70-200/4 in their line up, now it's "Canon has the cheaper and lighter weight 70-200/4"

Paint this one white and it looks just like the other too... now it's put to performance, but how much better can one expect this to be, the Canon variant is already top notch for speed and sharpness with good bokeh, well this just equals things out a bit

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Nismo350Z
By Nismo350Z (Oct 24, 2012)

It sounds like you're saying the Canon 70-200/4 is a much better lens for the Nikon DSLR.

6 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (Oct 24, 2012)

Yeah, who cares how the Canon lens compares? Until I can use it on my Nikon bodies, it doesn't matter.

2 upvotes
Peter Hayward
By Peter Hayward (Oct 24, 2012)

$224 for the collar??? That'll be something only just shy of $400 here in Oz. Tell 'em they're dream'in!

2 upvotes
h2k
By h2k (Oct 24, 2012)

Why not say right in the news text
- weight
- filter thread diameter
- usable on full frame or not?

0 upvotes
VivaLasVegas
By VivaLasVegas (Oct 24, 2012)

This glass is longer, heavier compared to EF counterpart, with so much more glass elements only to have a so-so mtf chart, this is not good. What.....the collar cost $$$, I knew it, that five step VR designation was a way to price gouge the consumers.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Stepanfo
By Stepanfo (Oct 24, 2012)

My dear Viva, it has much better MTF chart that Canon. You probably forgot that Nikon publishes only wide opened lines, while canon publishes wide opened and f8 lines in the same graph, what can become confusing for sipler minds... :D

5 upvotes
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (Oct 24, 2012)

You're really grasping at straws now-a-days, aren't you?
The Nikon is 3% longer, 10% heavier and the Canon Tripod Mount Ring A II W has a list-price of 210$.

3 upvotes
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Oct 24, 2012)

yep troll Viva, mine is longer and heavier than yours.jealousy is for suckers..:-))
why whine about nikon price when you so much hate it and anyway cant afford it.
sucker!!

2 upvotes
russbarnes
By russbarnes (Oct 25, 2012)

The MTF charts make the Canon equivalent look positively soft by comparison - this new Nikon will be killer corner to corner, especially at 200mm. You need to actually learn how to read those charts if you're going to troll properly fool :)

1 upvote
Niklas Ramstedt
By Niklas Ramstedt (Oct 24, 2012)

Heh, I paid 1500€ for a used mint condition 2.8 VR in 2010. Tripod collar included. ;)
Now you can get them for 1000-1300€ used, and there's a lot of them out there.

1 upvote
gl2k
By gl2k (Oct 24, 2012)

About half the weight. WOW. love it.
If AF performance matches that of its f2.8 sister I'll buy it.
Focus breathing ... ?

0 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (Oct 24, 2012)

"Focus Breathing" is that all internal focus lenses change focal length significantly when you focus close vs further away. The rating of 70-200 mm is for infinity focus. For example a 70-200 mm lens might be something like 70 or 80-140 mm at say 10 feet focus distance.

0 upvotes
Mebyon K
By Mebyon K (Oct 24, 2012)

On the subject of focal lengths, I hope the Nikon f4 zoom is closer to the claimed focal length of 70-200 than the Canon f4, which is only 74-188 and should more correctly described as 75-190 at best.

1 upvote
Debankur Mukherjee
By Debankur Mukherjee (Oct 24, 2012)

.......at last.......

1 upvote
IgorAdam
By IgorAdam (Oct 24, 2012)

I m Nikon user and I love Nikon but sometimes his steps are incredible.

0 upvotes
ThuiQuaDayNe
By ThuiQuaDayNe (Oct 24, 2012)

Hum... I will wait for the Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC release then. $1400 is steep compares to Canon $1099. For $1400, I want it in bright yellow damn it!!!! Just to make sure you get attention like the guys with white lens.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
1 upvote
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Oct 24, 2012)

Comparing third party plastic crap and a 6 year old lens to something that hasn't even hit the shelves yet? Trolololo...

3 upvotes
ThuiQuaDayNe
By ThuiQuaDayNe (Oct 24, 2012)

The 70-200 IS L II is better than the 70-200 VR 2 so I am hoping this new one will be better than the canon's version F4 IS.

0 upvotes
RXVGS
By RXVGS (Oct 24, 2012)

The Canon 70-200 f4 IS was $1250 when it was announced in 2006, so the Nikon version isn't that much more when you factor in inflation and current exchange rates.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2006/8/24/canon70-200f4lens

4 upvotes
nunatak
By nunatak (Oct 24, 2012)

I commend nikon on the lens, but damn them for gouging their customers to the tune of $225 for a tripod collar. And if it's sub-standard like Nikon's other recent collars — double damn them.

Whomever decided the price point, along with the MB-D12 battery pack, UT-1 communication unit, WT-5A wireless transmitter, and GP-1A GPS unit needs to be shamed and dishonorably terminated.

How long is it before Kirk and RRS mill a superior collar, and probably for less? How long before an asian knock-off of the superior Kirk and RRS collars for under $50? Nikon — what are you thinking? If Japanese engineers can't design cost-effective tripod collars — let the superior engineers from China, Viet-nam, India, or America design them for you.

0 upvotes
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Oct 24, 2012)

And Nikon doesn't employ china to make their stuff to begin with?

1 upvote
Kartika Sari
By Kartika Sari (Oct 24, 2012)

tripod collar for $200,

the chinese will see business opportunity

LOL

14 upvotes
io_bg
By io_bg (Oct 29, 2012)

I wonder how they still haven't seen an opportunity for third-party lenses :P

0 upvotes
tedbare
By tedbare (Oct 24, 2012)

about frickin time

1 upvote
Chaitanya S
By Chaitanya S (Oct 24, 2012)

Finally after so many years, Nikon has added 70-200 f/4 to the list of lenses should be good for landscape shooters.

1 upvote
WellyNZ
By WellyNZ (Oct 24, 2012)

They had a 70-210mm f/4 a number of years ago. Not entirely sure why it was dropped. I used to have one and it was great.

0 upvotes
Kokeen4231
By Kokeen4231 (Oct 24, 2012)

It looks very big for a small body. I thought they were meant to be small and portable. Nonetheless it looks decent and finally a telephoto for this system.

0 upvotes
LKJ
By LKJ (Oct 24, 2012)

This is not for the 1 system.

However, even if it were, it would not be significantly smaller.

0 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (Oct 24, 2012)

Well, it's intended for full frame cameras, so they aren't going to be small anyway. Just hope the quality is excellent and there's no big breathing issues. Been thinking about getting the 70-200 f/2.8, but the price is just steep (not saying not worth it, but steep). I didn't like being limited to f/4 with the 24-120, but at this telephoto length I think I could live with f/4, as long as the bokeh is quality. That should be enough to get nice defocused backgrounds.

0 upvotes
Kokeen4231
By Kokeen4231 (Oct 24, 2012)

oh my mistake.

0 upvotes
NowHearThis
By NowHearThis (Oct 24, 2012)

Bigger, heavier, and more expensive than the Canon 70-200 f4. More expensive than the new Sigma 70-200 OS too. For $623.95 less you could get the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 OS with the supplied tripod collar. You could put the money you save towards a 1.4x converter and still save hundreds.

I'm sure it'll be a nice lens, but I was hoping for a bit less (size, weight, price).

2 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Oct 24, 2012)

You're comparing different focal lengths and the Nikon isn't even out yet. And as much as I like TCs, they inevitably come with a drop in resolution.

2 upvotes
NowHearThis
By NowHearThis (Oct 24, 2012)

I made multiple comparisons, 2 of the 3 were 70-200mm lenses (Canon/Sigma). I brought up the 50-150/2.8 because you only lose 50mm and save over $600 and have a faster lens. It's a valid comparison - yes I agree that TC's can lower the resolution at bit - but I didn't say you had to use it.

My point is this new Nikon is rather pricey for what you get - especially considering there are other options which could work for some.

0 upvotes
Steve9
By Steve9 (Oct 24, 2012)

Very tempting Nikon, but shame on you for making the tripod collar such an expensive 'option'. Perhaps the overall dimensions and weight will be closer to the 70-300, so a tripod collar might not be necessary. I'm still waiting to see what the new Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC will be priced at. Will also want to see how IQ stacks up. That will be the deciding factor for me. Weight/size is not an issue for me. Still, a very tempting alternative from Nikon and with sexy "N" coating.

2 upvotes
Ken Aisin
By Ken Aisin (Oct 24, 2012)

$224 for a tripod ring?? By the way, when will the manufacturers make a collar that is arca compatible without having to add a plate to it? How hard could that be???

3 upvotes
imbimmer
By imbimmer (Oct 24, 2012)

That will create a lot opportunities for the 3rd party vendors as in the case of the battery grips. They may actually be available before the OEM. :-)

0 upvotes
mholdef
By mholdef (Oct 24, 2012)

I can understand having the tripod ring as optional, but $225 is kind of steep

1 upvote
Absolutic
By Absolutic (Oct 24, 2012)

once you add the price of the tripod collar, how much cheaper is it than the 2.8 version that already comes with a collar??? You can also get 70-200 F/2.8 VR I used for $1300-1400.

3 upvotes
cameramen
By cameramen (Oct 24, 2012)

Where are the specifications?

1 upvote
NowHearThis
By NowHearThis (Oct 24, 2012)

here...

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/2202/AF-S-NIKKOR-70-200mm-f%252F4G-ED-VR.html#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-TechSpecs

2 upvotes
cameramen
By cameramen (Oct 24, 2012)

thanks

0 upvotes
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (Oct 24, 2012)

Took them a while.....I wonder if it will be better then the legendary canon 70-200 F4 IS L

0 upvotes
cameramen
By cameramen (Oct 24, 2012)

Yep it took six years more. And the Canon is the first with four stops for Canon, while the Nikon is the first with five stops for Nikon! It seems they were serious at the time introducing the lenses.

0 upvotes
kelpdiver
By kelpdiver (Oct 24, 2012)

first one claiming 5 steps. Until verified, this is marketing.

2 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (Oct 24, 2012)

Pathetic value IMO, given the f/2.8 version gets the tripod collar as standard. I paid only $300 more for the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS mk II.

Wonder if this lens shares the woeful maximum magnification of the Nikon f/2.8 II version?

3 upvotes
russbarnes
By russbarnes (Oct 25, 2012)

Its price will fall quickly after release. I never understand why so much attention is put on the release price.

As for the 70-200 2.8 VRII, it's a spectacular lens - I doubt you've actually used it at all given the amount of Canon gear you own.

2 upvotes
Mike Cialowicz
By Mike Cialowicz (Oct 24, 2012)

$1400 and they make you spend an extra $225 for a tripod collar... ridiculous. I was really looking forward to this lens, especially since it's lighter and smaller than the 2.8 version, which makes it great for hiking. However, at $1625, looks like it's a big skip.

Can't wait to see what the Tokina 70-200 f/4 is like.

2 upvotes
cameramen
By cameramen (Oct 24, 2012)

Yep it is lighter for hiking; would you carry a tripod when hiking? which weight it has?

1 upvote
alabaster
By alabaster (Oct 24, 2012)

Would leave my water bottle behind before leaving the tripod!

1 upvote
Dragos C
By Dragos C (Oct 24, 2012)

There are cheap e-bay collars fitiing the Canon equivalent nicely, I can immagine it will take very little time for the same to be available for this Nikkor. After all, this is not part of the electronics and you don't risk damaging anything by using a knock-off collar.

1 upvote
hiro_pro
By hiro_pro (Oct 24, 2012)

for hiking i think i would go with a 70-300.

0 upvotes
JustSomeDude
By JustSomeDude (Oct 26, 2012)

@cameramen: I never go hiking without my Gitzo 1541T.

0 upvotes
Alberto Tanikawa
By Alberto Tanikawa (Oct 24, 2012)

Optional tripod collar... it should be standard. The lens should then really be $1623.90. That's almost the same I paid on my 70-200 f/2.8 back in 2004, and it had a collar standard.

2 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Oct 24, 2012)

I paid $1600 for mine in 2006. Although the collard doesn't completely detach like this one. And the VR1 is more expensive new these days. Blame exchange rates, inflation, and a crap economy.

1 upvote
Leonard Shepherd
By Leonard Shepherd (Oct 24, 2012)

No price from Nikon UK yet but the Nikon MTF looks good
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/zoom/telephotozoom/af-s_70-200mmf_4g_ed_vr/index.htm
AF at f8 with a 2x on the new bodies is confirmed.

1 upvote
sbc
By sbc (Oct 24, 2012)

I think an 810gm lens should be quite usable without the collar. Also I find the MRP reasonable (street price should be lower). Pentax users has to pay US$1900 for the 60-250 f4. That extra 50mm is insignificance. Crop the photo slightly at 200mm and I would get the same end result.

2 upvotes
jonny1976
By jonny1976 (Oct 24, 2012)

the pentax price u say is just not true. you can find the same lens at 1200 1400 dollar everywhere. and 50 mm more and 10 mm more on the short side are superbly good. leaving aside you can get a free collar. even the sony has a 70-400 4-5,6 that looks cheaper considering this lens has ashort zoom range.
What is surprising is all those canikon who buy a big camera and then omplaint about big lenses. a sigma 50-150 2,8 cover the same zoom range, haas the same dof capabilities and more useful 2,8 in low light, and cost much less. Same the pentax 50-135 2,8, that is lighter but much useful. Ah i forgot the mantra FF..FUFUFUFU..

0 upvotes
Leonard Shepherd
By Leonard Shepherd (Oct 24, 2012)

On "breathing" on a technicality the f2.8 MkII does not breathe in the sense it holds image size when focusing close.
The Mk 1 breathes heavily in the direction of increasing image magnification.
The Mk II maximum reproduction ratio is 0.12x. This f4 is more than twice the magnification at it closer minimum focus at 0.274x.
Tripod mode VR is not mentioned so you will need a good tripod to better the up to 5 stops VR effect with a static subject.
Digressing at close focus distances most wide angles breathe heavily in the direction of reduced magnification.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 241
12