Hands-on with Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8E and PC Nikkor 19mm

so, any tests online yet ?

Is the lens made in Japan ?

Is it a compensator shift focus design like the VRII ?

Oct 29, 2016permalink

AbrasiveReducer

I want to see if the 19mm is needle sharp in the corners, when fully shifted and stopped down 2 or 3 stops. If it is, it's worth the price, and then some. If it isn't (and so far no PC lens is) then the comparison with the $2100 Canon, which started at $2500, seems obvious. The 2mm difference is only for fans, but an extra $1300 over the Canon seems like Nikon's pricing strategy that Thom Hogan talks about.

Oct 27, 2016permalink

jvhd

Hi folks, I am selling a lot of excellent quality B$W f-PRO / Heliopan filters ... check it out ... https://goo.gl/ZzTDX9

Oct 25, 2016permalink

spbStan

The complaints about pricing would get more sympathy from me if there were not excellent alternative with good performance and build quality for casual or hobby use. There are more great choices than ever at all price points.
The ne 70-200 is no more expensive than prior models relative to the buying power of the currency. I am still using my 70-200VR1 and still love it, and do not plan to upgrade because this old workhorse has paid for itself many times over and still does what I need it to. If I did not have one, I would weight the price performance performance ratio of the various offering and be glad there are so many options that are very good. Comparing to the relative costs of housing, health insurance and other items that go up a great deal more each year, the higher price of the E model becomes understandable. Lens last a long time and retain more of their resale value than bodies, and are more important to the results, yet people upgrade cameras every 18 months.

Oct 24, 2016permalink

ZJ24

Agreed. My 24-70 2.8G Nikkor has paid for itself several times over, my kit lenses haven't (although they probably could). I'm not saying Nikon or other brands should charge whatever they like, but like a D5 or D810 this is not an item you just need to take decent images - go to your average hardware store and look at power tools, some are 5 times more expensive than others for a reason.

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

CIASpook

Mrkunty,

Overnight? Did they increase the price of the current 70-200? Did I miss that part? Perhaps now is the time to find great deals on the VR2.

I wish it was less expensive. It is what it is. I hope to some day have it. But I'd probably rather buy a used or new 300mm f/2.8.

I doubt Nikon is trying to gouge us. Supply and demand largely sets the price. Make the price too low and you won't be able to keep up with demand. Make it too high and you won't move product.

if this price is truly too high for the market, Nikon will adjust.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

You are wrong, it is the same price. The launch price of the VRII was $2400 in 2009. Using the US inflation calculator that is $2700.30
The street price will of course be less soon after launch.
Why should the lens be the same price anyway ? All sorts of factors change over time including exchange rates and Japanese inflation levels etc.

Oct 27, 2016permalink

CIASpook

New Username, I do not work for Nikon. But I have a basic high school understanding of economics.

I not saying this price isn't too high. It is for me. If Nikon can't sell them, they'll adjust the price. But if they have no problem selling to match their target numbers, then the price is not too high.

Oct 28, 2016permalink

jvideographer

Can anyone tell me what the limitations are when coupling the 19mm PC lens with the D750? Nikon says the range is limited.

Oct 24, 2016permalink

Tony Bologna

My best guess is the D750's pop-up flash housing prevents the vertices tilt from moving in its full range of motion.

Oct 24, 2016permalink

zunivolo

You'd think Nikon would be busy making some DX lenses when in reality they're creating updates of existing lenses that are already considered awesome.

Oct 24, 2016permalink

Redirector

Agree, I have the D500 and love the new 16-80mm and want more purpose-built lenses to take advantage of this new body, esp on the wide end. But I think the 19mm PC is not an update, it's a new lens. New ultra-wide angle field of view (97 vs 84deg for the 24mm PC) and completely new tilt-shift functionality. I pre-ordered. Can't wait to mount to D810 and put it to work.

Nikon has lots to do -- defend their professional top-end market share being high on the priority list, but DX market expansion should not suffer -- they did the hard part with the great D500. Need to pounce on that, to your point.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

zunivolo

Yeah, you're right. I was only referring to the 70-200. The 19mm seems like a great addition to the lineup that many have been asking for. Still a very specialised one while a few simple DX primes (especially wide primes like 16 f2) would go a long way to make DX more attractive.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

GRUBERND

comment from a colleague who has both the dual-ring 80-200 and one of the newer 70-200:

"bold move. but finally."

after asking about his reasoning:

"with a monopod the tripod-mount is always in the way of zooming".

things you only learn through painful experience in daily usage.

Oct 23, 2016permalink

Richard Murdey

Seems like the order isn't as important as having the zoom ring well forward of the collar and foot. That condition met, it seems reasonable and convenient to have the focus ring back towards the distance indicator window.

I suppose the reason manufacturers flip it around is certain constructions lend themselves to front-mounted focus, others to back-mounted focus rings.

Oct 24, 2016permalink

sts2

I'd hazard a guess that the people using this lens _without_ a monopod outnumber those who use it _with_ by at least 20 to 1. The lens is certainly not heavy enough to require a monopod for normal use.

When handholding this new lens, it basically means it will rest on your palm where the focus ring is located... horrible design flaw if you ask me. I've tried holding my current VRII the way I would have to hold this version, and it feels really awkward and impractical... most of the weight of the lens/camera combination is towards the centre/back, so it's much more stable with your hand closer to the camera body instead of towards the front.

Maybe it needs some getting used to, but why fix something that isn't broken?
This is likely a reason for me not to "upgrade" and just get another VRII if mine ever breaks (and I think I'm not the only one)

Oct 24, 2016permalink

Sezano

Not exactly street photography material. I might get attacked. For everything else, an amazing lens.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

feraudy

It's fluorite, not flour, right?

Oct 26, 2016permalink

scokill

If your attempt to take a secret picture is noticed when you pull out a big lens?

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Sezano

That would be giving away secrets now, wouldn't it?

Oct 30, 2016permalink

Photomonkey

Congratulations to Nikon for two solid lenses.
The 70-200 is a solid update and the 19PC-E adds a much needed lens to the range.

The carping about price is expected but, IMO, short sighted.

Apart from the issues of exchange rates and competition, both these lenses are industrial strength lenses designed to give decades of reliable service in difficult conditions while enjoying parts and repair support for decades.

That is what one is paying for when purchasing a professional lens.

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

Nikon2011

seems a spot for a company rather than your own opinion from the consumers side (because you are a consumer, unless you tell me you work for nikon or associates)

Oct 23, 2016permalink

Photomonkey

As a working pro for 30+years it is my experience and opinion.

As the bulk of current users came into the field after it transitioned to a consumer electronic environment they are not generally concerned with the longevity of most of their purchases as they are encouraged (and used ) to upgrading regularly.
While many demand professional features, what many overlook is the prime professional feature of durability and support.

Oct 23, 2016permalink

Yet again, a comment that might sound better as part of an ad to make you pour even more money into an overpriced item...
When the price of an item is more than double of what the non-brand is asking (while they are still making a nice profit), it's quite clear you are paying too much.
You can either buy two of these (so the point of having „support” is kinda moot), or you are giving money to Nikon to have parts for another full lens, which (of course) you will need to pay for when you require servicing.
Stop the apology of jacked-up prices!

Oct 24, 2016permalink

Steve Sanacore

It's obvious to me that those that think the lens is overpriced are just inexperienced. Anyone in the business long enough already learned the lessons of buying inferior equipment. If you're an amateur, then it's probably ok to go for the cheap stuff as that's all you'll probably need in the long run. Many working pro's need gear that meets higher mechanical standards in adverse conditions.

Oct 24, 2016permalink

tektrader

That thing is HUGE, It looks almost as big as the 200-500 F5.6

Oct 22, 2016permalink

BaconNEggs

It's actually 3mm shorter than the VRII and same width. I was at the same show, at a glance they both look almost identical. I own the bigger VRI and the 200-500mm, the 200-500mm is still a fair bit bigger, especially around the barrel.

Oct 24, 2016permalink

rfsIII

Fascinated by the negative reactions....not so long ago it was every photographers dream—Canon and Nikon alike—to own three lenses as the core of their kit: 14-24 or 16-35, 24-70, and a 70-200.
What happened to that dream?

Oct 22, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

The dream is still there. But somehow people don't like it when camera company's of another brand brings out fantastic lenses like these. Others who do use the brand don't like he higher price that comes with the new and improved lens. I think it will be a fantastic lens, although I do wish Nikon would also make some more serious APS-C zoom lenses for a great camera like the D500.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Kharan

To me, the problem is 'good enough syndrome' - the value proposition goes out the window when you compare a lens like this to its predecessor, and becomes even worse when you think of the sure to come Tamron and Sigma updates, two companies that have resisted inflation admirably so far.
These lenses lose much of their appeal when you consider the relatively small improvements versus the huge price increase they offer. It's funny, because Fuji X or Sony E users don't suffer as much from this as do Nikon and Canon shooters, as they don't have older options at a lower price.

Oct 23, 2016permalink

Kona Mike

Ha, the dream today is to take every picture and video clip in portrait orientation with a phone and use digital zoom. It’s practically magic, ha ha.

Oct 23, 2016permalink

Jan Itor

The Nikon PC lenses, sports the marking PC-E
Where the E stands for electronically controlled aperture

Oct 22, 2016permalink

photo perzon

Lately Nikon is not trying to compete with $ 50 cell phones. Good for them,

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Hmmmm......
So them competing with GoPro is much better than them competing with a $50 cell phone?
:-)
Isn't a $50 cell phone a bit of an exaggeration to make your point?
Or maybe you meant $500.
:-)
It is nice that Nikon is making some great lenses.
For sure.
The electronic iris makes them a bit less useful.
But that's their decision.

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

faterikcartman

Yup. It looks like they're going to compete with medium format. I'll keep my Nikon kit as it does some things well. But Nikon's new price points have reached the threshold where I may as well spend a bit more for a larger format. P1, Hassy, Pentax, soon Fuji. A lot of systems at a lot of price points.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

faterikcartman

Oops. My apologies for forgetting to mention Leica.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Kharan

On slide 4, it should read "...but the *benefits* of electrical actuation (which is *slowly* being phased in to Nikon's high-end lenses) *are* better precision and stepless movement."

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Jan Itor

Yes and stepless movement ,is that 256 or 1024 steps?

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Since the final video is always 8bit, looks like 256 steps for the aperture is more than enough to qualify it as „stepless”. And a bit of overkill, even...

Oct 24, 2016permalink

Cycletourer

Come on Dpreview, where is the hands on for the AF-P 70 - 300mm VR lens and the Nikon info regarding firmware updates for those cameras currently unable to turn off VR? Surely there as many DX enthusiasts as FX pro's in your readership?
Why all the love for the latest 2.8s?

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Fujica

So for reversing the focus ring and zoom control, you have to pay a near 50% more to get the extra inconvenience... Well done Nikon.

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

left eye

...could now be political?

I'm having lots of trouble with my Japanese and German cars, the indicators and wipers are on opposite sides!!

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

Greg VdB

It really is odd that DPR's "hands-on" didn't mention at all the questionable reversal of the zoom and focus rings. Look here for a more thorough hands-on tackling the potential issues: https://photographylife.com/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-vr-handling-concerns

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Daniel Clune

wow after watching that video its pretty clear Nikon screwed up here with the focus ring placement.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Muqdad

This is because DPR staff are pretty positive Nikon will shortly show they are listening to their customers and issue a firmware fix that switches the places of the two rings back, thus making everybody happy again ;-)

Oct 23, 2016permalink

BaconNEggs

I was actually at the same show and tried it out. What I do is hold it by the foot and my thumb and index reaches the rear end of the zoom ring. The video is exaggerating the placement of his hands to the front. When he's neutral you can see his thumb is actually on the barrel between the zoom rings. You would have to shift back to use the focus ring and slightly forward to get the zoom. Its weird at first if you're used to the old ones but actual handling isn't much different. It's more internet overreacting than anything else. I own the 200-500mm and that one is much worse reach wise of the front zoom placement, plus it has heavier and longer rotation distance of the zoom ring. The new 70-200 has short throw and easy to rotate you can operate just one or two fingers

Oct 24, 2016*permalink

Wally Brooks

On reversing the focus ring and zoom control. I am seeing a lot of pro comments that don't like this decision and question Nikon for doing this.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Wally Brooks

70-200 specs look good, Criticism Nikon looks like Microsoft gets it right the 3rd time. I think i am sticking with my 80-200 $500 used! I don't go on safari, shoot weddings, and other than my grandchildren playing soccer, too much sports.

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

karlkk

silly lens for silly rich and bored people.who needs a lens with such huge dimensions and weight for practical use ? how many of this magazine's readers go on safari trips ?

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Linerider

Totally agree!
Outrageous price for a huge, impractical lens

Oct 22, 2016permalink

hikerdoc

Way too short for a safari!

Oct 22, 2016permalink

GVansteelant

The 70-200 isn't much use on a safari trip unless you go to a place like Kruger National Park where you can get close to the wildlife.
A 70-200 is a portret lens for events and weddings. I bet almost every professional photographer has one.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

String

I wish I was silly rich and bored so I could go on safari :-D

Oct 22, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

"who needs a lens with such huge dimensions and weight for practical use ? "
Well. concert photographers and others who shoot (indoor) events. Especially those where use of flash is undesirable.
In these cases it's very rare that you see a pro who *doesn't* use a 70-200/2.8.

It never ceases to amaze me how difficult it is for some people to look beyond their own needs.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Photomonkey

This lens, like its Canon counterpart, is an industrial strength lens designed to deliver superb results under difficult conditions for decades with support from the manufacturer for that period.

As such it is very fairly priced

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Broken record much? Do you have any reason to go everywhere and make up excuses for outrageously jacked up prices?

Oct 24, 2016*permalink

Miki Nemeth

As a Sony E-mount user/fan I'd prefer Canon TS-E lenses since they have decent adapters to control the aperture. Nikon should have added an aperture ring to a lens like the PC 19mm to make it appealing to the emerging community of high-resolution Sony A7 community looking for full-frame tilt-shift solutions. For Sony/Fuji APS-C cameras the Kipon tilt-shift adapters are quite excellent; far from perfect but quite great solutions. I used one on my Fujifilm X-A1 and I was surprised how great that Kipon tilt-shift (NIK-FX) adapter worked with my Nikon D and AI lenses. Of course for Sony full frame, the only options are these hell very expensive Canon TS-E lenses.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

crazyryoga

Why don't you write a letter to Nikon asking to make new lenses more compatible for your Sony. I'm sure they will listen to you.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

I really doubt if Canon mind at all if Sony users are buying Canon's expensive lenses to use with their cameras. They'd prefer it if they bought their cameras too, but I'm pretty sure they will be happy all the way to the bank...

Oct 22, 2016permalink

2careless

No, for Sony FE bodies, have a look at Cambo Actus mini view camera.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Miki Nemeth

At last a meaningful comment, thank you, 2Careless, thank you for the hint. I had a look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSVvDHPGbbA (Cambo ACTUS) it's really brilliant. Exactly this is what I am after. I have a couple of Minolta RZ67 lenses (37mm fish-eye, 50mm, 110mm and 180mm). The total cost would about $2500 (base, RZ mount, E mount) a tad bit less expensive than a PC19mm, but it wouldn't get 19mm FoV, not even close. The TSE17mm for $2200 would be the best option. But, I guess the ACTUS would give much more movements.

Oct 23, 2016permalink

2careless

I have yet to confirm but I was told the Nikon 14-24 apparently has a large enough image circle for shift with the cambo actus mini. Also if you're mostly tilting, nearly all full frame lenses work well with the cambo. Only issue is shifting.

Oct 23, 2016permalink

Miki Nemeth

When I wrote Minolta RZ67 above, of course I meant Mamiya RZ67. The 14-24 is a G lens, and not really ok for adapted work. I used to have a Kipon TS adapter and I preferred D/AI-S lenses vs G lenses. Do you think that the Samyang 14mm (NIK) or similar Voigtlander, if available with Nikon mount, would work with the Cambo covering the 35mm FF circle?

Oct 24, 2016permalink

2careless

The Nikon G adapter plate has aperture dial so you can control it mechanically...

Oct 25, 2016permalink

PPierre

And suddenly, Sony is becoming not so expensive (compared to competition, not in absolute). All these crazy high-priced lenses for crazy-high resolution make me think I hope 24MP will remain a standard for FF (up to 32MP is ok, though). It seems to be the best number of MP to have lenses that totally resolve the sensor, but don't cost a kidney.

Now that MF is becoming "affordable", keep the 50MP for MF :) 18MP (most lenses don't resolve higher than that on APS-C) for APS-C, 32MP for FF and 50MP for MF. That would be sweet.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Nice to see Nikon making a PC lens that you finally don't have to send back to the service center to change the 2nd axis.
Unlike you know who's that you don't have to send back to switch the 2nd axis.
Let's hope that $3400 is MSRP and that the actual cost is closer to the Canon with a street price of $2150. If not, wow! 50% more????!!!
:-)

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Scottelly

Damn that thing is a beast! And it's about time Nikon start making a PC lens wider than 24mm. Canon has had their 17mm for years now! The biggest problem I see here is that the Nikon isn't a 16mm.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Gomboc

I'm holding out for the $5,000 version!

Oct 22, 2016permalink

nebulla

but why is Nikon remaking most of their lenses? Is this a marketing hype by adding fluorine and then charging premium prices? and Nikon is not the only one. The whole photography industry has gone completely wild with high prices . My 70-200mm VR1 is still a very sharp, and completely useful lens so I really do not care, but I am very much put off by these steep prices , and if by chance this has to do with video, this makes even better for me as I do not do video.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Good lenses cost.

Nikon has finally started to catch up to what Leica and Zeiss have known for decades. Olympus was years ahead of both Canon and Nikon.

Sharpness is hardly the only quality by which one can evaluate a lens.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Scottelly

The D810 has revealed the lack of image quality available from the now old lenses. This was bound to happen eventually. In fact, it's been happening all along. The VR II lenses are the result of the step up from 6 MP to 10, 12 MP (The D200, D300, D3, and D700).

Oct 22, 2016permalink

mandm

I also had the 70-200 VR-1, very sharp, but it didn't cover full frame very well, big fall-off in the corners; that's the fix the VR-2 offered.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Teila Day

I suppose some see a lot of light fall off and others don't.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51276668

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Buzz Lightyear

I agree, Nebulla and Teila Day. I have specific lenses for landscape and telephoto work (Tamron 24-70mm and 150-600mm). My D810 has actually revealed what great image quality can be obtained from the old 70-200 VR1 lens - IF used properly as a portrait or street photography tool, stopped down a bit if desired, but software or cropping will also solve corner sharpness and vignetting issues easy enough - especially with 36 MP to work with on a D810.

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

nebula
There is more money in lenses.
Everybody and their brother is building new lenses.
The industry is imploding (slowly)
Prices are up because volume is dropping rapidly.
Nikon is moving down the spiral faster than Canon.
I'm curious to see what the photography landscape will look like in 5 years.
The good thing is the newer lenses have better designs and better performance.
The bad thing is they're costing a lot more.

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

Leonp

For what I experienced:
* Lenses from the analog days are really not very sharp. Among other examples, I have this 35-135/3.5-4.5 which was acceptable for me in 1990, but in digital was so unsharp that I didn't experience any moire even with my 6MP D70.
* Backfocus. I once bought a AF-D Nikkor 80-200/2.8 but backfocus was so bad (and incorrectable because it varied wit aperture, distance and zoom setting) that the pictures were on my D300 even unsharper dan the ones form my 35-135/3.5-4.5, tested alongside. I sent the 80-200 right back of course and got my money back, phew!

But you are right if you mean that along an expensive 36MP-lenses lineup, the is room for, let's say, 15MP-versions thad would, after the obvious and now quite simple corrections, convince 99% of viewers in the world as being just great.

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

They got a lot of grief for the focus breathing of the previous lens, which they have fixed in this version. At minimum focus distance the previous model, when set to 200mm, was actually only 134mm. This one is a much more respectable 158mm, so max magnification goes from 0.12x to 0.21x, which is a huge amount, and surely not co-incidentally now exactly the same as the current Canon one.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

At launch in 2009 the list price of the VRII was $2400 USD. Plug that figure into the Government inflation calculator and you get $2700.03. There is no price increase. The large and expensive fluorite crystal element means the lens is less expensive in real terms !

Oct 22, 2016permalink

As someone said here, the cheap fluorine with fairy dust is too cheap for most of us.
We are holding back for the 10.000$ version, with half the glass made from real diamonds. And no gluten ;)

Oct 24, 2016permalink

Barbu,

Well, Nikon has the 11 thousand dollar f2.8 400mm, if you're looking to spend the cash you have in your pocket.

Oct 24, 2016permalink

Pocket calculator stuff, used Canon 1200mm f5.6 lenses go for about $100k...

Oct 24, 2016permalink

Timbukto

Electronic diaphragm is not only relevant for video...it is relevant for an improved liveview experience and improved potential *mirrorless* experience. I think the only mirrorless camera I can think of that supported mechanical apertures would be the Pentax K-01...which kinda again supports the general idea that electronic diaphragms are sort of a necessity for modern functioning mirrorless (as opposed to camera museum pieces). IMO Nikon liveview experience is some of the worst, and I've tried just about all of them (i.e. Pentax, Canon, etc).

Oct 21, 2016permalink

Timbukto

Nikon 1 liveview experience I remember as being actually pretty good (it's been a long time). Perhaps just a completely different code base that they haven't figured out how to merge...

Oct 21, 2016permalink

John C Tharp

Nikon Live View was the worst because Nikon didn't bother to actually properly develop it- Canon had them beat here by a decade.

They have taken steps to improve this on their latest cameras, as they've also improved video functionality significantly- electronic diaphragms and stepper motors are part of that effort too.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Les Kamens

I'm ready for a new 70-200.... Not so ready for $2800.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

alcaher

Im ready for an aps-c version of this lens. why not a 50-150 (or a wider FL range) at F1.8? Many Dx users would be happy with a lens like that instead of investing on a 2700dol lens or on a old used 70-200.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

brendon1000

Because Nikon and Canon and now Sony have long known that they can squeeze more profits from 35mm lenses as both crop sensor users and FF users can use them.

Sigma had a modern 50-150mm f2.8 OS and now a 50-100mm f1.8 which isn't setting any sales charts on fire.

So basically a high end crop sensor only Tele zoom lens which costs a bit doesn't seem have much traction in the market.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

Actually the high end Fuji 50-140 f/2.8, Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 and Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 are very popular.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

brendon1000

The systems you mentioned don't have anything other than crop sensors. There is simply no option of using a lens designed for a bigger sensor.

Over here Nikon crop users have access to both crop lenses and 35mm lenses too.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

Albert Silver

The biggest issue I have seen mentioned in practical terms is the switch of the focus and zoom rings.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

jesus_freak

I'm surprised DPR hasn't highlighted this more prominently, as it is a BIG change for people to adjust to

Oct 22, 2016permalink

scott_mcleod

I'm sure I'll get reamed for this, but I'm also pretty sure I'm not the only one who wants to know: where are they made? I looked at the images of the lens mounts but I couldn't see any engravings (I guess they were out of the shot)

Oct 21, 2016permalink

Albert Silver

Zimbabwe

Oct 21, 2016permalink

Elliot H

was told by Nikon at PhotExpo-J made in Japan

Oct 21, 2016permalink

scott_mcleod

Thanks for that. I was surprised that the 105/1.4 is made in China and wondered which, if any, other pro lenses were going to be off-shored.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

John C Tharp

Worry more about quality controls rather than where something is made.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Elliot H

most prefer Japan quality controls including the Chinese

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Nikon2011

might it be that xx% is made in China, the final assembly in Japan

Oct 24, 2016permalink

Regarding the NY Show and new gear not from Nikon:

Is the Leica F1.4 50mm SL lens being shown? And if yes, how about some samples shot out of doors?

What about cameras like the Panasonic FZ2500?

I assume the Hasselblad XD is there, got any samples?

Oct 21, 2016permalink

PKDanny

Plastic Fanastic!!!!!

Oct 21, 2016permalink

faterikcartman

I think I would rather spend more (and Nikon's pricing is making that less and less more) and shift, no pun intended, into a Hasselblad and their HTS.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

raw should ditch that Leica stuff and get an HTS.
IQ light years away.
:-)

Oct 21, 2016permalink

http://www.nikon.com/news/2016/1019_lens_01.htm

FLrucka,

I don't own any Leica stuff, any longer.

I'd consider the SL if that new 50mm AF lens is all it can be. Though the SL is a little weak for higher ISOs, and that's important to me. So a D5 with Zeiss could work.

The Hasselblad looks very promising. The AF is slow, the lenses as yet haven't been thoroughly tested in public. They look very good. But they are slowish. Just by way of example there aren't too many lenses that compete with the Leica APO M50mm f2.0 for colour/light, the new Noctilux would be one. Perhaps so to the 50mm f/1.4 AF for the SL mount.

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

evilmagicnut

As a measure to stem the tide of ever increasing prices can I lobby dpreview to stop coverage on lenses that exceed $2000 msrp?

Oct 21, 2016permalink

dennishancock

Censorship!

Oct 21, 2016permalink

Barney Britton

You can if you like, but it won't work, because that's a silly idea.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

Albert Silver

While I complained myself, it is more about my not being able to afford it than anything. The truth is that in adjusted dollars it isn't really much more than the VR II when it came out, which in 2016 dollars was about $2700.

There is a clear upside to the arrival of this baby: the already superb VR II is seeing price drops and increased sales offers (they go hand in hand obviously) on second-hand markets such as eBay and FM.

Oct 21, 2016*permalink

ewelch

Right. And while you're at it, ban Leica from coverage. And Sony. And Nikon. Canon. Even Panasonic and Olympus. Nobody needs anything by manual focus Samyang cheap junk. Right?

Oct 21, 2016permalink

Weia

Those expensive lens are optically the most interesting ones, and although I cannot buy them I would hear much about them!

Oct 21, 2016permalink

evilmagicnut

You guys are far too serious

Oct 21, 2016permalink

DongaMogudu

I am actually surprised DPReview doesn't do detailed reviews and comparisons between top selling phones for phone cameras (iphone, samsung and google ones at least). There is lot of interest from people for comparison reviews. I myself google for comparison camera reviews for phones whenever I am thinking about upgrading phone. I think, that is where the main internet traffic.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

Ran Plett

Right now I'm getting by with a 5D mkII, 16-35 4 L IS, 35 2 IS, and a 135 2 L. I've also got a 70-200 2.8 L IS and the two TC's, but I don't really need them. That's $2500 for some incredibly capable optics, and a used 5D mkII or III is not really out of reach for a lot of people.

On the other hand I'm saving up my pennies for a 5D mkIV, 35 1.4 L II, and a 400 4 DO IS. That might be about $12k right there. I've sold a lot of lenses over the years at 75% of the purchase price, so they really hold their value.

It's good to have options. Third party lenses are usually a fraction of the price and you get what you pay for. Canon has a lot of budget friendly options that are quite capable as well.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

nebulla

As Barney said, it won't work, but you can always ignore the reviews on anything above your price point. I do no care about video, and my version 1 of the 70-200mm 2.8 is very sharp. Don't need any other one.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

Timbukto

Barney you should at least compromise and just not review $2000 smartphone lenses

Oct 21, 2016permalink

NaBalam

I have to wonder how does the focus switch works?
M/A - Manual/Automatic
A/M - Automatic/Manual
M - Manual

It's kind of weird and I bet there is a good/simple explanation.

Oct 21, 2016*permalink

Darren Langdon

M/A: Autofocus can be overridden by manually focusing with
the focus ring.
A/M: Autofocus can be overridden by manually focusing with
the focus ring, but focus ring detection sensitivity is lower
than in M/A mode. Use this mode to avoid canceling the
AF setting by unintentionally moving the focus ring.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

NaBalam

Gracias amigo

Oct 21, 2016permalink

steelhead3

Can this physically be used with all Nikon dlsr's without bumping into the body?

Oct 21, 2016permalink

MSullivan

If you're referring to the 19mm then no, it cannot be used on all the bodies, at least not to its fullest extent:

"When used with cameras other than the D5, D4 series, D3 series, D810 series, D500, or Df, some combinations of shift and rotation may not be possible due to the fact that the lens comes into contact with the camera body."

Oct 21, 2016*permalink

That should probably be highlighted more. Especially if the D750 has issues.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

pwilly

Tilt shift has always had issues with overhanging flash bumps like the D3xxx and D5xxx, less so the D7xxx or the D750. The workaround is shooting upside down. No big deal, unless you aren't prepared.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Scoobaru

Any comment on focus breathing for the 70-200mm ?

Oct 21, 2016permalink

Why do you care about focus breathing?
Isn't this a Nikon lens?
Just kidding.
And it's not a cine lens.
It' likely to have some, for sure.
Curious to see how much my self.

Oct 21, 2016*permalink

DualSystemGuy

You should read up on focus breathing (it can happen in either direction and foal length change is necessary to get rid of breathing), but the max reproduction ratio is 0.21x, so it's the same as Canon's 70-200 II in that regard.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

I shoot RAW video....
So I know what focus breathing is.....
And I buy lenses to keep it to a minimum.
But I'm too poor to afford any cine lenses.....
I was asking why Scoo cared....
:-(
;-)

Oct 21, 2016*permalink

fluppeteer

I assume Scoobaru is worried about the significant focus breathing on the previous 70-200 (VR II).

That was frustrating. I was trying to answer this with maths, and spotted that Nikon's US web site claims a max 0.25x reproduction ratio for the old 70-200. I spotted that's a lie (after I got nonsensical numbers), and it's 0.12x according to imaging.nikon.com. Thanks, NikonUSA.

Right. With the old lens, we've got close focus of 1.4m (from, I believe, the sensor plane) and max reproduction of 0.12x. That means the nodal point of the lens is 1400/(1+1/.12) = 150mm from the sensor at close focus, and the thin lens equation says that's the behaviour of a 1/(1/150 + 1/(1400-150)) = 134mm lens.

The new lens has close focus of 1.1m and .21x magnification. The nodal point is 1100/(1+1/.21) = 191mm from the sensor, which means it's like a 1/(1/191+1/(1100-191))=158mm lens. Not perfect, but certainly not as bad.

Does that help?

Oct 21, 2016permalink

DualSystemGuy

I think the part that confuses many people is that in order to eliminate focus breathing, there has to be changing of the focal length (which is the part most people think they are referring to when they use the term focus breathing).

Oct 21, 2016permalink

Yes it helps.
I'm just not used to stills people caring about focus breathing.
It's normally video guys.
Now that I shoot video a ton more now, it matters to me too.
But lenses that truly have no focus breathing are very very expensive.

Oct 21, 2016permalink

158mm at 200mm and MFD vs 134mm on the previous version. (The current Canon is 166mm.)

Oct 22, 2016permalink

Scoobaru

@Dr_Jon
Thanks, exactly what I was looking for.

@FLruckas
I guess I should have said focus LENGTH breathing instead of focus DISTANCE breathing. I assumed it wasn't going to be parfocal.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

John C Tharp

Think Zeiss has a 70-200 cine lens that lacks focus breathing for $20,000, Lensrentals did a test with it, and optically, it smoked the current Canon 70-200, which this new Nikon 70-200 will be measured by...

Oct 22, 2016permalink

The Zeiss was a little better than the Canon at 70mm (average mtf 775 vs 755), but much worse at 200 (575 vs. 720). Not smoked, but ultimate sharpness isn't what you're paying for with a cinema lens (well, until 8k is a thing anyway).

P.S. I'm sure both the Canon and Nikon will do everything their respective users want of them, any differences really not mattering, the only issue being their weight and how often you'll take them with you...

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

Joed700

+ Dr_Ion - "...Canon is 166mm" where did you get that info? According to Tony Northrup, the current Canon is at exactly 200mm if not longer at MFD.

Matt Granger (Instagram) compared the Nikon new 70-200 to the VR II at MFD...it's much tighter, but no exact numbers given.

Oct 22, 2016permalink

I used the maths helpfully provided by Steve Balcombe elsewhere on this site:
--------------
1/a + 1/b = 1/f (the "thin lens formula")
- where a is the distance from the subject to the thin lens, b is the distance from there to the sensor, and f is the focal length.

b/a gives the magnification of the lens (just from 'similar triangles').

The published "focusing distance" is the total distance from the sensor to the subject - which is simply a + b.
----------------------
So using the 1.2m MFD for the Canon and the MM of 0.21x you get:
a=4.762b
b=1200/5.762=208.1
a=991.73
1/f=0.0060274
f=166mm

BTW I'd previously thought the Canon was closer to 185mm. However the previous Nikon was measured at 134mm and the equation gives exactly that, so it works for me...
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1:2.8G ED VR II
MFD = 1.4m
MM = 0.12x at 200mm
a=8.333b
b=1400/(8.333+1) = 150
a=1250
f=133.9

Oct 22, 2016*permalink

Joed700

+ DR_Ion - Thanks!

Oct 22, 2016permalink