Nikon needs to make a constant f/4 tele

Started Oct 15, 2012 | Discussions thread
Joe Marques Veteran Member • Posts: 5,963
Re: 300mm f/4 doesn't count for you?

em_dee_aitch wrote:

BackInTheGame wrote:

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.

It's a huge seller for Canon. See them all the time.

-- hide signature --

David Hill
San Francisco & San Jose, CA | Austin, TX
Wedding Photographer and Apparent Gearhead

Exactly what I was going to post David, you beat me to it by 15 minutes.  I owned the Canon 70-200 f4 and LOVED it.  Incredible value.  Just as sharp as any 70-200 2.8, speedy AF, and 1/3 the price (without VR).


 Joe Marques's gear list:Joe Marques's gear list
Sony a6000
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow