Just thinking it thru:

The new 70-200 for 'Zee' is delayed. No idea how long. If the speculation is right the delay is related to the Chinese Coronavirus problems which are giving everybody the shakes. Other possibilities for the delay exist....supplier issues, for one.

So the question might end up? Is the F-Mount lens a viable alternative? FTZ adapter addes maybe 4 to 5 ounces and some length. The latest f2.8 is on sale at a pretty hefty discount and ends up even less expensive than the delayed lens. Indeed, the available lens is about 450$ less than the unavailable new. I'm tempted.

I'm not going to do this TWICE. I'm just wondering if the performance of the 'new' will be THAT much an improvement of the VRII or should I just 'bite th bullet'?

Opinions, anyone?

leonski said:

The new 70-200 for 'Zee' is delayed. No idea how long. If the speculation is right the delay is related to the Chinese Coronavirus problems which are giving everybody the shakes. Other possibilities for the delay exist....supplier issues, for one.

So the question might end up? Is the F-Mount lens a viable alternative? FTZ adapter addes maybe 4 to 5 ounces and some length. The latest f2.8 is on sale at a pretty hefty discount and ends up even less expensive than the delayed lens. Indeed, the available lens is about 450$ less than the unavailable new. I'm tempted.

I'm not going to do this TWICE. I'm just wondering if the performance of the 'new' will be THAT much an improvement of the VRII or should I just 'bite th bullet'?

Opinions, anyone?

Click to expand...

Just wait for it. For something this expensive it’s better to buy once buy nice.

I don't think it'll be long until the lens is on the shelves. I don't see any incentive for Nikon to stall shipping the lens off, and right now much of the supply chain from China is under some degree of lockdown - so the delay should be outside of Nikons control.

If you only use the the Z cameras I think it makes sense to wait for the 70-200S and pay that brand-new lens premium. The 70-200E is excellent but I find the autofocus to be a few steps slower using the FTZ than on a native F-body (something I also found with an old 300mm 2.8 non-VR, but less severe) and while sharp seemingly across the entire zoom range and with nice-looking out of focus transitions it seems like the S model will kick optical performance up even further.

If you might end up getting a F-mount camera, the E gives plenty of flexibility. But the S seems to be an initially costy but safe bet.

One other Point....

And I agree 100% and will wait for new.....

But one thing for others thinking of using the F-Mount? According to some sources this lens EXCEEDS the weight limit for the FTZ Adapter.......The poster noted that pretty much ALL Nikon lenses that come with a tripod socket DO exceed that limit.

leonski said:

One other Point....

And I agree 100% and will wait for new.....

But one thing for others thinking of using the F-Mount? According to some sources this lens EXCEEDS the weight limit for the FTZ Adapter.......The poster noted that pretty much ALL Nikon lenses that come with a tripod socket DO exceed that limit.

Click to expand...

In those cases you simply use the lens socket instead of the one on the FTZ.

In my experience the new Nikon lenses for the Z system are better across the board than their F mount versions. Also, please do not say "Zee" when referring to the Z mount...only one user on dpreview calls them "Zee" and it is in a derogatory way because he dislikes the Z system.

HeavyDuty said:

leonski said:

One other Point....

And I agree 100% and will wait for new.....

But one thing for others thinking of using the F-Mount? According to some sources this lens EXCEEDS the weight limit for the FTZ Adapter.......The poster noted that pretty much ALL Nikon lenses that come with a tripod socket DO exceed that limit.

Click to expand...

In those cases you simply use the lens socket instead of the one on the FTZ.

Click to expand...

Yep, you don't put the lens on the camera, you put the camera on the lens.

Unless, of course, you are on a bouncing airboat and trying to shoot holding the camera with one hand while you complain about the camera.

Droster said:

Just wait for it. For something this expensive it’s better to buy once buy nice.

Click to expand...

Well, the current F-mount alternative is pretty nice, too. It's widely considered the best 70-200 on the market. I imagine the new will be even better, at least in most ways, but not necessarily in ways that are immediately noticeable for most shooters.

ETA: I can think of one advantage of the F-mount variant. If you're using the lens to shoot action as well as for portraiture, you can get a cheap d750 or d500 used to pair it with as a backup.

paulski66 said:

Droster said:

Just wait for it. For something this expensive it’s better to buy once buy nice.

Click to expand...

Well, the current F-mount alternative is pretty nice, too. It's widely considered the best 70-200 on the market. I imagine the new will be even better, at least in most ways, but not necessarily in ways that are immediately noticeable for most shooters.

ETA: I can think of one advantage of the F-mount variant. If you're using the lens to shoot action as well as for portraiture, you can get a cheap d750 or d500 used to pair it with as a backup.

Click to expand...

and being able to use the 1.4 teleconverter

paulski66 said:

Droster said:

Just wait for it. For something this expensive it’s better to buy once buy nice.

Click to expand...

Well, the current F-mount alternative is pretty nice, too. It's widely considered the best 70-200 on the market. I imagine the new will be even better, at least in most ways, but not necessarily in ways that are immediately noticeable for most shooters.

ETA: I can think of one advantage of the F-mount variant. If you're using the lens to shoot action as well as for portraiture, you can get a cheap d750 or d500 used to pair it with as a backup.

Click to expand...

Not a bad idea if buying used. This advantage is only temporary. Once a Z sports body comes out bye bye fast action AF argument. Lenses out live bodies.

leonski said:

The new 70-200 for 'Zee' is delayed. No idea how long. If the speculation is right the delay is related to the Chinese Coronavirus problems which are giving everybody the shakes. Other possibilities for the delay exist....supplier issues, for one.

Click to expand...

Nikon said manufacturing issues, but regardless of what is going on, you're talking about a lens that is already announced and has a release date. A delay at this stage shouldn't be a long one. To get jittery at this point and consider a step backwards to an f mount lens would just be surrendering to anxiety. Now, if the lens wasn't even on the road map or if it was but no dates announced whatsoever, sure...otherwise, just sit tight a few more weeks.

When I look at Nikkor glass, the nomenclature is bewildering and I'm not about to try to figure it all out....except for the 'G' lenses, which as a series, make sense.

What's the right name? 'S'?

Right you are. I'll just be quiet and WAIT.......

My BIRTHDAY is coming up and this lens is what I want.

I'll surpress my urge to have an Anxiety Attack!

Good advice, to buy ONCE and do it right......

paulski66 said:

Droster said:

Just wait for it. For something this expensive it’s better to buy once buy nice.

Click to expand...

Well, the current F-mount alternative is pretty nice, too. It's widely considered the best 70-200 on the market. I imagine the new will be even better, at least in most ways, but not necessarily in ways that are immediately noticeable for most shooters.

ETA: I can think of one advantage of the F-mount variant. If you're using the lens to shoot action as well as for portraiture, you can get a cheap d750 or d500 used to pair it with as a backup.

Click to expand...

I underlined a statement in your post I have a hard time understanding.

I find it confusing and not so subtly misleading. Also, having 4 qualifiers back to back like that is SO vague as to make it totally utterly mostly near-completely probably meaningless.

"Something is better but not in ways you can notice". Then how is it better to ME?

If that "better" is so cryptic nobody can notice why pay more for it?

That's perfect "marketing gobbledegook talk" where they try to make you think one way when the reality is different.

SHEER GUESS?

by better? You might have to be a very critical pixel peeper to appreciate the new V the old.

Also? Some of the new features, including that neat display MIGHT be offputting at first but later become part of your process.

I'm chomping at the bit, waiting for one of the NEW (I've been told NOT to use 'Zee') so is it S mount lenses to be available to mess with. Maybe even bring my camera to the store and take a half dozen trial shots. Than to home and Pixel Peep to my hearts content.

leonski said:

I'm chomping at the bit, waiting for one of the NEW (I've been told NOT to use 'Zee') so is it S mount lenses to be available to mess with.

Click to expand...

That's what Nikon calls it.

Nikon Z Series: Z Mount System

Currantos said:

paulski66 said:

Droster said:

Just wait for it. For something this expensive it’s better to buy once buy nice.

Click to expand...

Well, the current F-mount alternative is pretty nice, too. It's widely considered the best 70-200 on the market. I imagine the new will be even better, at least in most ways, but not necessarily in ways that are immediately noticeable for most shooters.

ETA: I can think of one advantage of the F-mount variant. If you're using the lens to shoot action as well as for portraiture, you can get a cheap d750 or d500 used to pair it with as a backup.

Click to expand...

I underlined a statement in your post I have a hard time understanding.

I find it confusing and not so subtly misleading. Also, having 4 qualifiers back to back like that is SO vague as to make it totally utterly mostly near-completely probably meaningless.

"Something is better but not in ways you can notice". Then how is it better to ME?

If that "better" is so cryptic nobody can notice why pay more for it?

That's perfect "marketing gobbledegook talk" where they try to make you think one way when the reality is different.

Click to expand...

Sure. Fair enough. I realized after I posted that that it was a bit confusing.

So, I have the new 70-200 FL (VR III for f-mount). It's an astounding lens. Not once in all the time that have been using it have I looked at a picture and said: Wow, that's a nice pic. Wish it were sharper.

The bokeh is fantastic. The VR is great. The acuity is outstanding.

Now, the new lens, I imagine that the sharpness measures higher, especially as you move out to the edges of the frame. But are those things you'll notice in day-to-day- shooting, especially for the way many people will use the lens? My guess is, no. I mean, if I have a picture of my son on the soccer field, it's doubtful I'm doing to be worried about acuity at the edges of the frame.

I imagine the AF might be a little snappier, but the AF of the current version is pretty killer. (ETA: Given the superior AF tracking on my D4 and d500, I imagine this works in favor of the current lens anyway).

The VR might work a little better in conjunction with the IBIS of the z-system, but I find that, at the shutter speeds I'm usually trying to capture with this class of lens, VR isn't all that critical.

That's all I meant.

LOLOL

I know, just being the syntax/grammar police here a bit too, I personally have a dislike for vagueness and intentionally or unintentionally 'misdirecting/misleading' sentences that kind of want to say one thing but imply another.

No big deal.

However, we might be reaching a technologic plateau where the end use is the 'limiting factor' so further and further real improvements in tech will go unnoticed by the 'human' while on bench-tests it will perform better and better.

So for example, if the current D5 AF accuracy is 90% and the D6 has a 20 percent improvement over that it will be EXCEEDINGLY difficult to demonstrate in real life. From my rough back of the envelope calculation it would take approximately 8014 trials/test.

So DPReview, in their upcoming review when they do the 'riding bicycle' test would have to shoot 4000 pictures with D5 and 4000 pictures with D6 to detect a VERY significant 20% improvement in the claimed AF system improvement.

If the improvement is lower percentage wise, which something tells me it is, it will take even MORE pictures. There is NO way they can scientifically statistically demonstrate it to anyone's satisfaction unless the premises have to change. When they say something vague about it I will have to be the first one to call them out on it, unless they are already reading my post and taking notice.

Which is LOL too.

The other thing to consider if you own a Nikon SLR, is that the 70-200 F lens will work on both the Nikon SLR and Nikon Z with FTZ. The Z lens variant will only fit a Nikon Z camera.