Previous news story    Next news story

Nikon announces development of 800mm F5.6 VR super-telephoto lens

By dpreview staff on Jul 11, 2012 at 09:37 GMT

Nikon has announced it is developing an 800mm F5.6 image-stabilized super-telephoto lens for professional photographers. Details are sparse, beyond a couple of images and an intention that it will suit field sports, news and wildlife photographers. It will include an AF-S silent-wave focus motor and the company's Vibration Reduction stabilization system, as you might expect for a lens of this type. A prototype will be demonstrated at the Open Golf Championship in Lancashire, England between July 19th and 22nd, but no details of availability or price have been announced.


Nikon announces development of F-Mount 800mm super-telephoto lens

Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 12 July 2012 - Nikon today announced the development of a ground-breaking super-telephoto, fixed focal length lens to add to its line-up of full frame (FX) NIKKOR lenses. The 800mm, AF-S lens, with a bright aperture of f/5.6 and VR (Vibration Reduction) system, will be fully compatible with the auto focus system of all Nikon FX-format cameras.

The new lens has been developed to further strengthen the NIKKOR line-up of super-telephoto lenses. It will boast the longest focal length of any NIKKOR autofocus lens, and has been designed with field sports, news and wildlife photographers in mind. In addition to its superior optical performance, the lens will offer dust and water resistance.

“We are very excited to showcase a ground-breaking new milestone in NIKKOR development at this summer’s major sporting events” said Robert Cristina, Manager, Nikon Professional Services, Europe.

“It reflects our on-going philosophy to turn ‘feedback into fact’ for the world’s leading news, sports and wildlife photographers,” he added.

A prototype of the new lens will be premiered to professional photographers at the Open Golf Championship at Royal Lytham & St. Annes Golf Club in Lancashire, England, between July 19th and 22nd 2012. Nikon has been an official sponsor of The Open Championship since 1993. The lens will also be on show to the general public visiting Photokina 2012, the world’s largest photo and imaging exhibition, in Cologne, Germany, from September 18th to 23rd.

Earlier this month, Nikon announced that total production of NIKKOR lenses for interchangeable lens cameras had reached seventy million and that the total production of AF-S lenses equipped with the Silent Wave Motor (SWM), the autofocus motor developed by Nikon, had reached 30 million. This year, Nikon released three professional FX-format D-SLR cameras: the flagship Nikon D4, the Nikon D800 and Nikon D800E, which offer incredible resolution and image quality.

An on-sale date, suggested retail price and further specifications will be announced by Nikon Corporation at a later date.

Comments

Total comments: 108
kk123
By kk123 (Jul 20, 2012)

crypsis101

I think you will be amazed when you compare AF on 400+2x converter with a pure 800mm, especially on fast moving subjects like birds in flight. I have tested that for 300 f2,8 + 2x compared to 600 f4, and can assure you much better AF and higher quality. I asume the same will be the case for 400/800mm.

If you reallly believe you get the same sharpness with the converter, especially on long distances, I think you also should do some homework.

D800 cropped = D7000 in resolution. None of them an answer to the D300 as a folllow up DX camera.

0 upvotes
crypsis101
By crypsis101 (Jul 18, 2012)

kk123,

Don't know what "kind" of photographer you are but......"the converter ruins the quality and AF does not work nearly as well as it should with the converter" ??
Hmmm! I have been a wild life photographer for over 30 years and use my 400 2.8 AFS starting with my F5 "a hundred years ago" and switched to the D1 in 2000. I live in the NW and Eagles and Trumpeter Swans are a mainstay and AF works fantastically with both the 1.4 and the 2.0. Sharpness is key and they both work!! Proof is in the end photos! But, each to his own. As for the "follow-up" to the D300, it's the D800 and D800E. You should get one, preferably the 800E, it is pretty awesome with 36megs.

The light gathering capabilities of these latest generation of cameras allow using higher ISO's that negate camera shake to almost nothing and I very often handhold my 400. No other way to get the shots! Okay, it weighs 14 lbs without the camera but then I've built up my muscles over the 15 years I've owned it.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
kk123
By kk123 (Jul 17, 2012)

Finally Nikon replies Canon. Why is Nikon so slow? VR came too late, 800mm too late. I sell my 600 VR and by the 800 for sure. And I am still waiting for the D300 follow-up. The good thing with the 800 by the way, is the "light" weigth compared to the magnifying capacity. And a 400 mm with 2x converter is not an issue. The converter ruins the quality of the photo, and AF does not work nearly as well as it should with converter. Fast AF is a must for a bird photographer.

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
chrisncami
By chrisncami (Jul 17, 2012)

Many may feel this is too long a focal length and not needed in the Nikon lineup. But for bird photographers, an 800mm Nikkor is a very welcome focal length! Look through one of the most well known avian photographer's work, Arthur Morris (birdsasart.com), and you'll see a HUGE number of his images are shot with the Canon 800mm f5.6IS. The Sigma 800mm f5.6, as well as their 300-800 Zoom, are also popular among birders. Most of them shoot from blinds, their car, or a tripod. So weight is not a limiting factor. I think there's definitely a viable market for this lens. Different folks have different needs...to each their own! I say the more options Nikon gives us Nikon Shooters, the better. Personally, I have the 200-400 and am lusting after the 600 as my next big purchase!

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
CaseyComo
By CaseyComo (Jul 17, 2012)

I'm pretty macho, so I figure with VR I'll be handholding that baby at 1/125 of a second.

1 upvote
crypsis101
By crypsis101 (Jul 16, 2012)

Big Deal! Not really though. I have owned a 400 2.8 AFS for 13 years now. One of my main workhorses and use a 1.4 and 2.0 teleconverter. With the 2.0 converter I end up with an 800 5.6 on my D800E AND I have the flexibility of a 640 F4 and of course the 400 2.8. Why would anybody invest in another $8k lens with no flexibility since above 5.6 autofocus is marginal according to Nikon.

As for them adding VR........Come on folks....starting with the D300 on these cameras gather so much light that VR has become insignificant!! My other workhorse lens is my 1998 80-200 AFS 2.8. I would not trade it for a 70-200 VR I or II...ever!! Ever find an 80-200 AFS 2.8 for sale? Rarely and they go for as much as they did when new. Small wonder nobody wants to give them up.

So buy a 400 2.8 AFS with VR if you're going to spend eight or ten grand for a long lens and another thousand or so for the tele-converters.

Oh, and by the way, with my D800E my 17-35 2.8 AFS negates the need for a 14mm.

0 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 15, 2012)

To everybody, here is something to read when thinking about a big telephoto-lens : http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/500vs600.shtml

Informative, meaningful yet quite funny as always with the proud Michael Reichmann's analysis.

0 upvotes
kk123
By kk123 (Jul 17, 2012)

But Nikon 500mm and 600mm now both have stabilizers, so this must be some years old.

0 upvotes
Paul Guba
By Paul Guba (Jul 15, 2012)

Just in time for the Olympics.

0 upvotes
olreliable
By olreliable (Jul 14, 2012)

wow! i think im gonna sell my car for this thing.. LOLZ

3 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 15, 2012)

Don't ! Instead sell your wife, you might need your car to carry that heavy load !

2 upvotes
Meta Magico
By Meta Magico (Jul 14, 2012)

I'm going to hold out for something where I can shoot Paris from New York.

2 upvotes
King Penguin
By King Penguin (Jul 14, 2012)

I assume you are talking about the place not the celebrity....... :)

0 upvotes
chixwifdix
By chixwifdix (Jul 15, 2012)

Haha I would love tt too but I doubt the curvature of the earth would...

0 upvotes
Rick Knepper
By Rick Knepper (Jul 13, 2012)

Nikon can run off 20 copies and that should cover everyone on earth who could afford one of these things.

2 upvotes
ScarletVarlet
By ScarletVarlet (Jul 13, 2012)

and is strong enough to carry it any distance.. *GRUNT*

Maybe time to hire out a Lens Caddy.

"This looks like a long shot. Hmm. Boy, hand me my 800mm."

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Ilkka Nissilä
By Ilkka Nissilä (Jul 13, 2012)

The 800/5.6 should be about the same weight or a bit lighter than the 600/4, but the new lens is likely to be longer.

According to Roland Vink's Nikon lens serial number database, at least 2972 manual focus Ai-S 800/5.6's were sold from 1986 to 2005. Given that the old lens has no AF or VR, and the slow speed of high quality color film, the users of that lens had quite a challenge in getting good results. Today, Nikon sells somewhere between 5x and 10x as many DSLRs as they ever sold film SLRs (per year) and ISO 6400 is entirely realistic to use (maybe limit the ISO to max 1600 for cover of a high quality magazine?). The new lens combined with modern cameras will be much easier to use than the old lens was using cameras of that time. However, because people can crop images more with reasonable results today, the actual need for such a long lens may be less pressing. I would guess sales to be between 5000 and 10000 units in the lifetime of the product (20 years?).

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Nismo350Z
By Nismo350Z (Jul 13, 2012)

If you lose the lens end cap, you can always use a D3200 (which is probably much cheaper).

7 upvotes
John P.
By John P. (Jul 13, 2012)

Is B&H taking pre-orders?

3 upvotes
jmmgarza
By jmmgarza (Jul 13, 2012)

Head shots at 50 yards?

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Ilkka Nissilä
By Ilkka Nissilä (Jul 13, 2012)

At 50 yards you would get a full body vertical portrait of an adult with 800mm on a DX camera; on FX you would have a looser composition. For a head shot at that distance, a focal length of 3000mm would be good.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 15, 2012)

Hey Ilkka, it was just a joke ! But thanks for your comment though.

0 upvotes
Absolutic
By Absolutic (Jul 12, 2012)

it was about time, Canon has 800mm F/5.6L IS for a while. Nikon is slooooowly catching up

5 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 15, 2012)

But Nikon had a Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8D ED-IF II, which can reach the 800mm at f5.6 with a teleconverter. Having a look to the Nikon lenses (cf: http://www.dpreview.com/products/Nikon/lenses ) doesn't show the Yellow Brand is so far away from Canon when we talk of choice...

0 upvotes
Cariboou
By Cariboou (Jul 12, 2012)

Now the 5.6 between 3-4 years 4.5 and in 10 years 2.8, sure if they give as the 2.8 immediately we to buy the last and nothing else, then I like know the real cost to the production, how much for one gram of the lens... I know that is a mystery, like a car nobody know...... only thing we can do is buy and pay eh...

1 upvote
joejack951
By joejack951 (Jul 12, 2012)

800/2.8, eh? Seeing as how no one has ever produced even a 600/2.8 and the Sigma 200-500/2.8 zoom is close to a $30k, 25 lb. lens, an 800/2.8 would be even less of a desirable lens due to significant heft and a home mortgage-sized priced. Also, I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that Nikon is skimping on aperture-size with their lenses in order to upsell later. I can't think of even one example of that.

0 upvotes
MattBrisVegas
By MattBrisVegas (Jul 13, 2012)

According to my calculations, the front element of this 800mm f/2.8 lens you are holding out for would be 898mm in diameter.

Would you be planning to use it hand held?

3 upvotes
Filthy McNasty
By Filthy McNasty (Jul 13, 2012)

898 mm? So would that qualify it to be labeled as a Newtonian or Dobsonian lens?

0 upvotes
MattBrisVegas
By MattBrisVegas (Jul 13, 2012)

I think that would place it in the theoretical realm.

2 upvotes
Redteg94
By Redteg94 (Jul 13, 2012)

@MattBrisVegas:

Where exactly did you get your calculations from?

800/2.8 is 286mm. 898mm would give it f/0.9.

Nevertheless, it isn't going to happen anytime soon. The Canon 1200/5.6 is probably as big as can be made at 214mm.

1 upvote
MattBrisVegas
By MattBrisVegas (Jul 13, 2012)

I based that on the formula for aperture area:

A = pi(f/2N)^2, where f = focal length and N = f number

Then solved for the diameter.

So what I actually calculated is the size of the aperture.

But now we are quibbling. The point is, no one aside from maybe NASA is ever going to produce an 800mm f/2.8

0 upvotes
lajka
By lajka (Jul 13, 2012)

Just put 300/5.6 on Nikon 1 and you`ll have 810/5.6. You can of course do it with 300/2.8 to get 800/2.8. Boy if they just made Nokia 808 with F mount!

0 upvotes
p3142
By p3142 (Jul 13, 2012)

Zeiss did a 1700mmf4- so an 800mmf2.8 should not be a problem

0 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 15, 2012)

To MattBrisVegas: yet Sigma has produced a 200-500 at F2.8 (cf: http://www.tobiashjorth.com/sigma-200-500mm-f2-8-apo-ex-dg-review/ ) which means a 400-1000 at f5.6 with a converter. Not so bad ! But have a look to the monster... its weight and its price too !

0 upvotes
Cariboou
By Cariboou (Jul 12, 2012)

how much the cost of mortgage..... eh..

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jul 12, 2012)

So long as it takes 52mm filters.

0 upvotes
Redteg94
By Redteg94 (Jul 13, 2012)

It should; all the superteles do from both C and N. Only Sigma makes outsized screw-on filters, everyone else is 52mm drop-in.

0 upvotes
slappomatt
By slappomatt (Jul 14, 2012)

Most likely does. Alot of the big Nikkors have a filter holder that goes in around the base of the lens with an internal 52mm holder.

0 upvotes
LVPhoto1
By LVPhoto1 (Jul 12, 2012)

I have a Nikon D40.....with that honk” of a lens I’m bound to look professional ;)!!!

6 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 15, 2012)

For sure, you will attract nice girls attention. I've heard they love men with a very big lens.

0 upvotes
Robert Soderlund
By Robert Soderlund (Jul 12, 2012)

I shoot DX format Nikon and have not experienced what it is to shoot lenses with this great focal length, however, would not these lenses be the one where you shoot with a remote instead of hitting the camera shutter button?

Even still, the VR is probably handy especially as we are looking at 800mm here. But shooting with pressing the camera trigger is bound to produce at least some sort of shake. Does the VR really sort it out at these extremes?

0 upvotes
Ilkka Nissilä
By Ilkka Nissilä (Jul 12, 2012)

Airplanes, small birds, spacecraft, the moon, racing cars, large field sports etc. Anything that moves and you can't get close to, or things that are very small yet some distance away.

If you follow a moving subject with an 800mm lens on tripod, you will normally have to turn the lens to keep the composition acceptable and subject under the focus point while taking the shots. In this situation, VR does significantly reduce the shake visible in the viewfinder and I would assume also during the exposure. The actual pressing of the button shouldn't cause much additional shake which isn't present just by having your one hand on the lens and the other on the camera. If you shoot a static subject then you can do it with hands off the camera and use a remote release and LV but you can expect wind to cause problems unless precautions are taken to prevent or reduce the effect of the wind on the lens.

0 upvotes
rhaerdi
By rhaerdi (Jul 12, 2012)

But where ist the new 80-400 ?
But where ist the new 20/2.8 ?

1 upvote
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 15, 2012)

Aber wo ist... is the correct form for german. In english, it got to be "where is"...

0 upvotes
Apewithacamera
By Apewithacamera (Jul 12, 2012)

Finally Nikon is turning the lens foot the right way.

1 upvote
Essai
By Essai (Jul 12, 2012)

mft owners will have a heart attack when they will see the size of this lens.

1 upvote
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 15, 2012)

And it's not impossible some cops could come gun in hand to know what's going on. With all that paranoia about terrorism, a cop taking that long tube for a mini-bazooka might end tragically...

0 upvotes
Cheezr
By Cheezr (Jul 12, 2012)

Imagine this on the V1 2160mm equiv!

0 upvotes
thomas2279f
By thomas2279f (Jul 12, 2012)

Looks excellent and great for pros - probably be similar to pricing of Canon 600 F4 L IS Mk 2 - £11k+...

0 upvotes
hypercore360
By hypercore360 (Jul 12, 2012)

$10 to 12 Grand for this!

0 upvotes
Dimitri Khoz
By Dimitri Khoz (Jul 12, 2012)

Cheap big sensor compact paired with the spotting scope
may yield better results while staying on a very light side:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1009&message=41856850

1 upvote
semorg
By semorg (Jul 12, 2012)

Year and half ago when I was shooting this young bear with a few other "bear photographers" who knew what they were doing at Grand Teton I heard talking about how they are getting the canon 800/5.6 since they find it lighter than the 600/4, etc. One of them said he switched from nikon to canon for the 800/5.6. So you can imagine the need why nikon created this lens. As one other person said, the weight is the key. Can they get it light enough to be comparable to canon and will the VR do enough to reduce blur from clicking the camera.

I shoot a bit with my 500 and 1.4x and even with that I look at live view and see how much the lens vibrates after a tiniest amount of touch or slightest breeze. I like shooing moonset or sunset behind bridges, etc. and for that I've been using heavy sandbag on the lens to reduce the vibration along with a golf umbrella to block any cross breeze that could effect the image.

0 upvotes
John Koch
By John Koch (Jul 13, 2012)

"Bear photographers"? Are those the people who always work in twosomes? One lugs the big lenses and is often martyred for the sake of his gear. The other uses a light P&S and lives to tell the tale. No one, however, knows what the bears do with the heavy gear? All those ursine e-Bay offers perhaps?

1 upvote
3a
By 3a (Jul 12, 2012)

Unless its weight is lesser than Canon counterpart, Nikon will have to lower the price very much to get market. Canon have been doing exceptionally well to lower the weights of their super teles.

0 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 15, 2012)

For my part, I'm surprised big companies like Nikon and Canon still use "standard materials". Can't they use some kevlar, spider silk, nano-carbon or whatever to make much stronger but lighter lenses ?

1 upvote
Jogger
By Jogger (Jul 12, 2012)

wonder how big the lens hood is.. id imagine that its at least 1/3 the length of the lens.

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Telefoto
By Telefoto (Jul 12, 2012)

For a brief moment two years ago, I really wanted Nikon to come out with this lens. Now I think its moment has passed, certainly for me. It's hard enough getting good images at base ISO with a 600/4, it'll be impossible at f/5.6 with even more magnification. I imagine this lens is purely aimed at the D3s/D4 sports crowd that habitually shoots above ISO 6400. As a low ISO shooter, I appreciate what high ISO has opened up for some folks in recent years, but I regret that specialized gear is increasingly pushing people up the ISO scale regardless of artistic need.

0 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Jul 12, 2012)

On a proper gimbal mount, the mass of the lens helps with vibration. Should be similar in weight to a 600 f/4. I rather have a 600 f/4 because the 800mm lens can be too long in some cases. f/4 is faster and can be matched up with a quality 1.4x TC for 840mm/5.6

0 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (Jul 17, 2012)

"Too long"

I'm sorry to say, but any prime - 300, 400, 500, 600, 800, 1200 - is going to be too long for some things and too short for others. If it's either - you've got the wrong lens for what you're shooting. That's not a strong argument against an extremely long focal length lens.

0 upvotes
shootitnow
By shootitnow (Aug 21, 2012)

If I had my druthers I would like to see the 800mm made in a f/4 but I understand that would increase the weight about 5-7 pounds just in glass, LOL oh well I guess the f/5.6 will be just fine?

0 upvotes
John Fleming
By John Fleming (Jul 12, 2012)

You're going to have to take out a second or third mortgage to pay for this baby!

Interesting that nikon says - “It reflects our on-going philosophy to turn ‘feedback into fact’" Where oh where is the "new" upgraded 80~400 VR that people have been asking for for years just to name one??? A new 80~400 VR would fly off the shelves....

John

3 upvotes
EmmanuelStarchild
By EmmanuelStarchild (Jul 12, 2012)

I think Nikon may have scrapped their efforts, or just need more time. Canon doesn't even make a lens in that range. Probably very difficult.

0 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 12, 2012)

In fact, Canon makes a very good 28-300 mm (cf: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-300mm-f-3.5-5.6-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx ) which means a 45-480 mm for an Aps-C camera.

But for sure all that requires a lot of glass and technology.

0 upvotes
Essai
By Essai (Jul 12, 2012)

Canon has a 800 5.6 DO coming: http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/patents-ef-600-f5-6-do-800-f5-6-do/

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Jul 12, 2012)

Sony makes 70-400mm and it's regarded as a superb lens. (plus, as all Sony lenses, it is stabilized).

1 upvote
gladiatorsfan1
By gladiatorsfan1 (Jul 12, 2012)

They are listening to pros.

0 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 13, 2012)

Sorry Plastek, but it seems you are wrong. The (apparently excellent) Sony 70-400mm F4-5.6 G SSM is not stabilized, as Sony politics is to rely on IBIS...

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Jul 12, 2012)

Fine lens! Wish I could afford. The consoldation is that, even with the necessary "toy chest" of cash, I'd not know how to use the lens properly. How in blazes can one find or track a distant subject with an 800mm (1,200mm with cropped sensor) lens? By the time you found the bird, player, or whatzit, it would probably have moved. To "chase" anything with the lens would be a very jerky, hit and miss, affair, unless the trajectory were very predictable. Golf balls, even when hit in a predictable path, are hard to see anyway. The P&S mega zooms allow one to zoom from wide to long.

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Jul 12, 2012)

An interesting "elephant versus mouse" comparison would be the 800mm onm a FF, versus an 800mm equivalent on a camera with a 1/2.3 sensor. On a tripod, with a fixed subject, the FF would probably win; hand-held, or with a mobile or capricious subject, I wager the P&S would win by default, since the pea-shooter would find the subject, while the Big Bertha would trail and object or miss it altogether. Plus, the user of the 800mm might be jailed for voyeurism or fined for lacking an advanced weapons license.

1 upvote
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Jul 13, 2012)

About that sort of considerations, everybody take some time to look at that funny (but meaningful) test titled "Pro DSLR + Cheapo Lens vs "Cheapo" DSLR + Pro Lens" just here: http://youtu.be/hk5IMmEDWH4

0 upvotes
SeeRoy
By SeeRoy (Jul 13, 2012)

Well, at lesser focal lengths admittedly, a sizeable ENG/EFP camera needs quite a lot of support too - and panning and tilting are a given. It's perfectly feasible if you use a decent set of legs and a proper fluid head of adequate build - Sachtler, Vinten and others have a range of serviceable gear that I guess would translate well to stills use - assuming you were deploying a beast of this size. Not cheap though. I'd like to see one of these on a PortaPed (do they still make them?)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Vitruvius
By Vitruvius (Jul 12, 2012)

What great timing... for a lens that requires a corporate budget. So now the photogs can tell their boss that they didn't get that great shot because they didn't have this lens.

0 upvotes
cjcampbell
By cjcampbell (Jul 12, 2012)

There goes my budget right out the window. And the weight budget, too.

0 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (Jul 12, 2012)

How about something that 'normal' people might find useful like a 300 f/4 VR? I'd rather buy a 20" telescope than this for the money.

Anyone who thinks that something like this will 'shake' is a kidding themselves - I doubt a puny shutter could move a beast like this at any time frankly.

3 upvotes
Jman13
By Jman13 (Jul 12, 2012)

You have obviously never used a lens this long. At these lengths, even tripod mounted, the slightest vibration is magnified tremendously. Heck, even using a 600mm lens on a tripod, if the shutter speed isn't high or there's no IS, you pretty much need to use a remote release or 2 second self timer to avoid blur from just touching the camera.

3 upvotes
Pastynator
By Pastynator (Jul 12, 2012)

Sorry, but you couldn't me more wrong.
Whats the point in commenting on this when you obviously have zero experience with the really long tele lenses?

Even someone walking past the tripod can cause blur with them.

5 upvotes
Mr Fartleberry
By Mr Fartleberry (Jul 12, 2012)

bossa is right. No excuse for old wood like the 300 f4 or the 80-400.

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Jul 12, 2012)

Footsteps on a boardwalk will jar the long lens, however mounted. Light breeze will cause it to wobble. Every time a bystander approaches to ask, "What's that thar thayng? Mind if I takes a looook?," exhalations from the exasperated photographer will cause it to rock.

3 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (Jul 13, 2012)

OK, I was a bit over the top. I DO know that any vibration, no matter how minute, will cause a visible movement and I also know that this lens will cost as much as a small car. To assume I have no experience is incorrect though. I'm in the market for a 300 to 400mm lens and as I have a back injury I really would prefer something around the F/4 mark and with VR. I can't excuse Nikon for not having an 300mm F/4 weather sealed lens with VR when just about every one of their superzooms get that treatment.

0 upvotes
SeeRoy
By SeeRoy (Jul 13, 2012)

Way back when I was using 2/3 tube TV cameras with 120-140mm maximum zooms plus 2X range extenders (built in) at max FL on heavy support equipment I could see my heartbeat transmitted via the pan bar.

0 upvotes
Rockwallaby
By Rockwallaby (Jul 12, 2012)

Should be a piece of cake for Nikon. I get great shots from my 300mmf2.8VR coupled with the new 2xIII converter mounted on a D300s. Thats an equivalent of 900mm in FF language.

0 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jul 12, 2012)

Just in time for the Olympic Games....

1 upvote
gladiatorsfan1
By gladiatorsfan1 (Jul 12, 2012)

Nope. Not until later this year. :)

0 upvotes
brunobarolo
By brunobarolo (Jul 12, 2012)

I would much prefer if Nikon would care to make lenses that their users are actually demanding, and have been waiting for for years, like a modernised update of the outdated 80-400 zoom.

5 upvotes
Guidenet
By Guidenet (Jul 12, 2012)

Nikon and Canon have to maintain their presence in the pro-lockers and this is an Olympics year and the year for long glass. This long glass is what these important users are demanding. The must be catered to all the time to maintain that professional aura so they can sell D5100 models to all the people who follow.

This maintaining support for the pro market provides trickle down technology for the more basic level of gear.

1 upvote
MattBrisVegas
By MattBrisVegas (Jul 13, 2012)

Yes, you have hit the nail on the head. The gap in the Nikon lens line-up is clearly the paucity of zooms on offer, particularly consumer-grade zooms. With only 13 available for DX and 17 for FX, that should definitely be the priority for further development.

The complete lack of a wide prime for the DX format and neglect of classic prime lenses, like the 800mm or the 400mm f/5.6 (which amateur nature photogs really could use) should definitely be a lower priority.

Like the man says, much of the reason they make pro lenses like this one is the same reason that car companies like Mercedes compete in Formula 1. It would be a pity if the flow-on sales that generates were directed exclusively toward developing even more soooperzooms.

0 upvotes
RBudding
By RBudding (Jul 12, 2012)

VR? Who would want to hand hold that thing? It belongs on a gimbal head.

0 upvotes
Peter KT Lim
By Peter KT Lim (Jul 12, 2012)

No you are wrong, super tele with VR / IS will improve the image sharper, especially at critical situation, I am sorry to say you do not have experience handle super tele long lens.

0 upvotes
Ilkka Nissilä
By Ilkka Nissilä (Jul 12, 2012)

An 800mm lens, even on a strong tripod and head will shake quite a bit. VR takes care of a lot of this shake, leading to improved viewfinder stability and sharpness of the final picture. I would expect the VR of the 800mm lens to be optimized for tripod use since it would be difficult to hand-hold such a long and heavy lens.

2 upvotes
stq66
By stq66 (Jul 12, 2012)

I hope this holds also true for the tripod collar, something which Nikon is known to have fumbled on some occasions in the past.

A renovated 80-400 VR IS should definitely be on their todo list.

0 upvotes
rgolub
By rgolub (Jul 12, 2012)

Some occasions? /Every single/ Nikon telephoto I own (and I collect them as sort of a hobby) has a third party collar.

0 upvotes
shootitnow
By shootitnow (Aug 21, 2012)

I changed out my Nikkor 600mm lens mount with a Really Right Stuff replacement and use there Telephoto support and it has corrected a lot of vibration in high winds even with using the Carbon Fiber lens hood mounted in 35-45mph gusts shooting waves crashing onto light houses as low as 1/60th with no issues

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Jul 12, 2012)

At this focal length the VR better be really good...

and Nikon, don't forget the cup holders, the GPS antenna strut, the umbrella rack, the iPad hook slot, windshield wipers over the filters...

.

2 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (Jul 12, 2012)

no massage parlour?

0 upvotes
Epitaph_pmr
By Epitaph_pmr (Jul 12, 2012)

Any bets on what it will cost?
14k?

0 upvotes
Wubslin
By Wubslin (Jul 12, 2012)

Too much. Nikon are getting desperate now.

0 upvotes
Gediminas 8
By Gediminas 8 (Jul 12, 2012)

Certainly more than the Canon equivalent. Always has been so.

3 upvotes
Bjorn_L
By Bjorn_L (Jul 12, 2012)

If you have to ask, you likely can't afford it.
For comparison's sake.
Sigma's 300-800 is 8k and theit 800mm f5.6 is 7k. Both are slightly older designs without "VR" but with AF-S (called OS & HSM).
Nikon's 600mm f/4 vr (gives roughly the same FOV and aperture with a 1.4x) is around 10k. A nikon 400mm f2.8 vr (gives 800mm f5.6 with the tc20e III) is 9k.
So I'd guess the Nikon 800mm f5.6 will be priced somewhere near the 400mm and 600mm lenses.
Of course the Canon 800mm f5.6 IS sells for just over 13k, so maybe the Nikon will be up there.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jul 12, 2012)

@Gediminas 8

Really? Look up the prices of super telephotos from 300 2.8 to 600 4 and you'll see Canon's often many thousands more than the Nikon equivalent.

3 upvotes
Guidenet
By Guidenet (Jul 12, 2012)

For starters, it hasn't always been so that Nikon is always more expensive. Go look at any online store today at the exotic telephotos and see if that holds true for many of them.

Now, what is this about Nikon getting desperate? That's a bit of a surprise. It seems to be they're off to another banner year. Even the new D800/E is flying off the shelves at much higher than expected volumes. Moreover, they seem to have edged out their arch rival Canon with market penetration to professionals, something Nikon has been used to since the beginning of 35mm cameras except for the last few years of auto-focus.

I'm going to guess this new 800 f/5.6 will have a MSRP of $13500 USD and a street price of around $11000. Now Nikon is prime to prime parity with Canon but Canon doesn't have a 200-400 exotic zoom yet, even though they've been promising forever.

3 upvotes
MichaelEchos
By MichaelEchos (Jul 12, 2012)

Annd most of the time, I realise that Nikon isn't more expensive, or vice versa. It's normally how new the lens is that determines its price.

1 upvote
LSE
By LSE (Jul 12, 2012)

"Too much. Nikon are getting desperate now."

lol yes, so desperate after a string of smash hits :) this only strenghtens their position and will no doubt pull yet more people to their system which were holding back precisely because this lens was missing.

2 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Jul 12, 2012)

In NZ$ the 600mm is already $20,000!! That's almost half the average NZ household income...!

0 upvotes
Teila Day
By Teila Day (Jul 12, 2012)

marike6, the Canon superteles spiked in price over the recent years with the new "II" series lenses, but it was widely known that Canon's superteles were at one time *much* cheaper than the Nikon equiv., in fact that was one thing I looked forward to when purchasing Canon (I use Nikon & Canon)... unfortunately, the newer glass is pricey compared to the models being replaced. Only a few years ago, some of the Canon lenses were actually several thousand dollars cheaper than the Nikon equiv.

Guidenet mentioned Canon's 200-400 zoom (with built in TC)... that should be an interesting lens if it ever hits the market.

0 upvotes
Joe Porto
By Joe Porto (Jul 12, 2012)

This lens should be roughly the same price as the 600mm f/4. Perhaps 10% more. The 600mm f/2.8 w/ TC-14II actually gives you a 840mm f/5.6 lens. This lens should have slightly better IQ than the 600 w/ 1.4, but that combo is already superb.

I still believe the 400mm f/2.8 is the most flexible of the super teles, which is why I chose it over the 600mm f/4, but if you have unlimited funds, and are seeking the highest IQ at 800mm, then this lens will deliver, I'm sure.

And yes...a 300mm f/4 VR with Nano coating is desperately needed. In fact, Nikon has released 4 different 300mm consumer zooms since the 300mm f/4 came out. 300mm is obviously a desired focal length....not sure what the marketing strategy is here...

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Jul 12, 2012)

If you have to ask about price at all, it means you can't afford it. The cost to rent it for a week, plus insurance, would be plenty.

3 upvotes
Guidenet
By Guidenet (Jul 12, 2012)

MichaelEchos seems to have made the same observation I've made in that the more expensive lens is the more recent release. Canon had the cheaper 500 f/4. Then the Yen/Dollar changed and Nikon released the newer model and was a good bit higher than the Canon. Then the Yen/Dollar fluctuated again and Canon's new ISII went sky high. I'm not sure, but would imagine a newer Nikon to leapfrog once again. The R&Dthen startup costs are higher each time.

Some of it is a false sort of increase. Take the 300 f/2.8 VR for a moment. Other than a coupld of dodads what is the difference between version one and two? Everyone says the VR but if you read the small print, even that seems to be the same. They both use the same VRII technology, nano coating and much else, yet the price difference is huge and nobody seems to able to tell why other than Yen/Dollar fluctuation. Nikon wanted to raise the price to cover that increase cost in yen dollar. :)

1 upvote
Ilkka Nissilä
By Ilkka Nissilä (Jul 12, 2012)

The original VR 300/2.8 doesn't have VR II; they specify 3 stops of improvement for this lens in the press release. The Nikon USA web site for this lens has a mistake. The second version has VR II and some autofocus switch changes. They both have nano-coating.

Mk I press release:
http://www.nikon.com/news/2004/0916_06.htm

Mk II press release
http://www.nikon.com/news/2009/1210_nikkor_01.htm

The price hikes are of course normally related to inflation and currency changes. The cost of photographic equipment has gradually decreased over the years relative to the cost of living in the western countries. However, the fantastically increased pricing of the new Canon supertele primes is not fully explained by currency changes or inflation but something else. Perhaps the lower weight comes with much-increased manufacturing costs and/or lower yield. Or they simply think the reduced weight means it is that much more attractive to the customer and so they charge more because they can.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 108