nikon 100-500mm f4/5.6 vr III

[scottthehat]

hopefully this is on its way in 2010.
http://nikonrumors.com/2009/09/28/more-nikon-lenses-rumors.aspx

 

[grumpybadger]

Sounds good but it will be a bit of a beast. At least a 90mm diameter front element (so at least 95mm if not 100mm diameter lens hood)

 

[desantnik]

Well, its going to be a popular lens judging by the number of folk who use the Canon 100-400 but...

 

[Icee]

It looks good and I for one would be interested in it, but to be competitive it needs to be priced around the same as canons 100-400 and knowing Nikon I can't see that happening.

 

[grumpybadger]

It can't be. For a start, the front element is over 1.5x the area of the Canon and costs rocket at that point.

 

[desantnik]

I would suspect probably a price point of 1200-1400 quid.... which for a f4-f5.6 lens is kinda expensive, and even at that price point its not going to be good, average at best.

Nikon, unlike Canon, have made a very good long zoom - the 200-400. However, this product clearly illustrates what has to happen when you do make a quality ultra-zoom... the price is currently 4.5k.....

 

[StewartR]

First thing to note about lens rumours: they're VIRTUALLY ALWAYS WRONG.

Who predicted any of the following?
Dec 09 - Nikon AF-S 300mm f/2.8 G ED VR II
Dec 09 - Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E III
Dec 09 - Nikon AF-S DX 85mm f/3.5 G VR Micro
Sep 09 - Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Sep 09 - Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Sep 09 - Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM Macro
Jul 09 - NikonAF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 G ED VR II
Jul 09 - Nikon AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED VR II
Apr 09 - Nikon AF-S DX 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 G ED
Feb 09 - Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5 L II
Feb 09 - Canon TS-E 17mm f/4 L
Feb 09 - Nikon AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8 G

Pretty much nobody, that's who.

Plus, this lens would be huge and expensive. If Nikon were to build it, and assuming they include all their latest tech (nano coatings, VR II, etc) it's going to cost £2000+, maybe even closer to £3000.

 

[grumpybadger]

Have to agree on pricing Stewart. Was going to say I reckon it'll launch at £2k+ if true.

 

[StewartR]

Was going to say I reckon it'll launch at £2k+ if true.

Heck, the new 70-200 has been launched at £2000, and that's tiny compared to this (mythical) beast!

 

[grumpybadger]

Blimey - didn't realise the 70-200 was so much.

 

[desantnik]

Well, 1800+something.... but given that the old one can be seen retailing at 1600ish quid, its not that much of an increase... *gulp*

Bearing in mind that about 1 year ago the old one was around the 1100 quid mark, you can see how the battering of the pound has effected things

 

[Wail]

What I don't get from this rumour, besides what Stewart has already pointed out, is, how come Nikon will be releasing this lens with VR III when only a couple of weeks ago they've announced an upgrade to what must be one of their best ever lenses, the 300 AF-S, which now comes with VR II!

If Nikon had VR III in the works, surely they would have postponed the 300/ 2.8 until such time when they can incorporate VR III in that, instead of the mere VR II?

 

[Flash In The Pan]

Brought to you by the same people who bought London Bridge, thinking they were buying Tower Bridge

 

[Wail]

I would love to see a study, if ever, that would show how much sales is affected (+ve or -ve) when such rumours come about.

I'm inclined to believe, at times, that these rumours are some form of industrial espionage by aliens who need the nano crystals for their spaceships' warp drive!

 

[Flash In The Pan]

I would love to see a study, if ever, that would show how much sales is affected (+ve or -ve) when such rumours come about.

I'm inclined to believe, at times, that these rumours are some form of industrial espionage by aliens who need the nano crystals for their spaceships' warp drive!

"Nano,nano"

 

[Wail]

Now that's a flash from the past

 

[kevshore]

I liked Mindy myself.


Kev.

 

[wack61]

If Nikon had VR III in the works, surely they would have postponed the 300/ 2.8 until such time when they can incorporate VR III in that, instead of the mere VR II?

I think electronics are like The Terminators arm, they have the perfect item in a glass cabinet and every year they reverse engineer it slightly to improve their current product but not enough to make it perfect so we all buy a new one every 2 years

 

[Wail]

I liked Mindy myself.


Kev.

You had to remind me ... . The pleasures of being young and innocent!

I think electronics are like The Terminators arm, they have the perfect item in a glass cabinet and every year they reverse engineer it slightly to improve their current product but not enough to make it perfect so we all buy a new one every 2 years

True, and that would mean that an upgraded 300 /2.8 VR III is in the works for launch around end of 2011. Gives Nikon enough time to milk our sorry pockets with the "now new" VR II version :bonk:

Knowing the buying habits of photographers is a good way to plan the release of new technology. I am sure they conduct extensive studies on such habits; which, to them, is more important and decisive than any logic I can pull.