Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR coming soon? & More

[snerkler]

Nikon getting it wrong again.Make a 24-105 f2.8 or a 24-70 f2. VR is a waste of time on a lens like that.

Not for me, I've been waiting for a VR version. The other two lenses would be nice, although would imagine heavy and expensive.

 

[StewartR]

I think we wont know if the price is low or not until we know what level of IQ the lens can give. I suspect they will not want to make their more expensive long telephotos redundant. If IQ is as good or better than the 200-400 then it will be a very good deal indeed, I'm betting it wont be but I would be delighted if I'm wrong

It might be. The major manufacturers have made HUGE improvements in zoom lens design in recent years, and the 200-400 design isn't that new.

 

[StewartR]

WOOHOO!

I just received confirmation that I am at the very top of the pre-order list!! No idea on the likely arrival dates yet, though....

 

[Swanseajack]

WOOHOO!

I just received confirmation that I am at the very top of the pre-order list!! No idea on the likely arrival dates yet, though....

On the link I posted on previous page for Clifton Cameras release email, the 24-70mm is due 27th August 2015..............the 200-500mm is due September 17th.............and the 24mm its stating September only, no day date. Don't you buy through Wex? if so, will you get them a little earlier?

 

[skiking]

I wonder whether the price of the 200-500mm zoom will trigger a drop in the Sigma 150-600mm Sport

 

[rob-nikon]

It might be. The major manufacturers have made HUGE improvements in zoom lens design in recent years, and the 200-400 design isn't that new.

It's an interesting lens (200-500), I'm guessing to compete with the sigma and tamron 150-500. The price is lower than I thought it would be and lower than the nikon 80-400 that it competes with.

Nikon rumours has the mtf charts (not sure how much that tells us).

http://nikonrumors.com/2015/08/04/n...m-f2-8e-ed-vr-and-200-500mm-f5-6e-ed-vr.aspx/

 

[snerkler]

Just had an email from Clifton Cameras with their UK prices are:

24-70mm £1849.00 ouch..................... > http://www.cliftoncameras.co.uk/Nikon_24-70mm_f2.8E_ED_VR_Nikkor_Lens
200-500mm £ 1179.00 seems fair..................... > http://www.cliftoncameras.co.uk/Nikon_200-500mm_f5.6E_ED_VR_Nikkor_Lens
24mm £629.00 okay ??........................... > http://www.cliftoncameras.co.uk/Nikon_24mm_f1.8G_ED_AF-S_Nikkor_Lens

£1800 for a 24-70mm f2.8 is madness imo, would anyone really pay that much for this lens?

The 200-500mm looks interesting, maybe I should have withheld my recent Tamron 150-600mm purchase Mind you, it's £480 more than my Tammy so I'm not too upset.

 

[gramps]

£480 more for 100mm less, it will need to be good even with its f5.6 throughout.

 

[snerkler]

£480 more for 100mm less, it will need to be good even with its f5.6 throughout.

Agreed. I'm really impressed with the Tammy too.

 

[StewartR]

£1800 for a 24-70mm f2.8 is madness imo, would anyone really pay that much for this lens?

Yes they would. The Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 Mk II was that price when it came out, and for about a year afterwards. It really is an astonishingly good lens, much better than the Mk I. I'd expect the new Nikon to exhibit a similar level of improvement over the current version.

 

[snerkler]

Yes they would. The Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 Mk II was that price when it came out, and for about a year afterwards. It really is an astonishingly good lens, much better than the Mk I. I'd expect the new Nikon to exhibit a similar level of improvement over the current version.

It would have to be pretty special.

 

[BillN_33]

200-500 5.6 is a fantastic idea imo. I've always thought some long f5.6 telephotos (zoom or prime) would fill a huge gap in the market between consumer zooms and the pro telephotos that cost as much as a nearly new car.

The 200 500mm

as long as it is not weak at the long end and even weaker with a TC fitted .......... but at that price I suspect that this will be the case

I agree that it is needed in the Nikon range a 100 400mm or a 200 500mm, but if the quality is poor at the long end ........... when compared with the Sigma and Tamron it may fail

we will just have to wait and see ?

 

[StewartR]

It would have to be pretty special.

The Canon one is, believe me.

 

[snerkler]

The Canon one is, believe me.

I'll have to take your word for it. It surprises me that these lenses do so well tbh, for 'pro' use I'd always expect two primes would be a better option, but then I'm not a pro so what do I know

 

[SFTPhotography]

200-500 I may buy

 

[minnnt]

So how are people thinking the new 24-70 will be better than the older version?

 

[petert]

The 200 500mm

as long as it is not weak at the long end and even weaker with a TC fitted .......... but at that price I suspect that this will be the case

I agree that it is needed in the Nikon range a 100 400mm or a 200 500mm, but if the quality is poor at the long end ........... when compared with the Sigma and Tamron it may fail

we will just have to wait and see ?

The IQ,AF and VC would have to be substantially better for people to give up their Tamron or Sigmas, it's 3lb heavier less reach and 5.6 no great advantage, it will definitely fail otherwise, will be interesting

 

[BillN_33]

The IQ,AF and VC would have to be substantially better for people to give up their Tamron or Sigmas, it's 3lb heavier less reach and 5.6 no great advantage, it will definitely fail otherwise, will be interesting

I crop 90% of my nature shot so I would be always at 500mm or 700mm, (with the x 14) ....... so I would always prefer a prime

 

[Swanseajack]

A benefit I can see with Nikon, is the 200-500mm will take a 1.4 TC which gives you 700mm with the TC and AF for bodies capable of AF at f8. The Tamrons and Sigmas are excellent value and the Nikon needs to perform better if they want people to buy instead of the Sigma & Tamron.

 

[petert]

I crop 90% of my nature shot so I would be always at 500mm or 700mm, (with the x 14) ....... so I would always prefer a prime

Most of us would prefer a prime but don't have that kind of readies

 

[petert]

A benefit I can see with Nikon, is the 200-500mm will take a 1.4 TC which gives you 700mm with the TC and AF for bodies capable of AF at f8. The Tamrons and Sigmas are excellent value and the Nikon needs to perform better if they want people to buy instead of the Sigma & Tamron.

I think it's got be better without tcs, I'd probably sacrifice 100mm if everything else is substantially better, I suspect it won't be but will have to see, this could.a big loser for nikon :-o

 

[SFTPhotography]

So how are people thinking the new 24-70 will be better than the older version?

VR for hand hold use. Hopefully its sharper (its ok but nothing special sharpness wise IMHO) and more contrasty, towards the long end they lose their contrasty look in my experience.

Particularly around these high pixel density sensors, sharper glass really helps. The mk1 24-70 was designed around D700 and D3 use, 12mp, not 36mp plus cameras.

 

[BillN_33]

Most of us would prefer a prime but don't have that kind of readies

It is a little surprising that Nikon have moved that way as I though that with long lens developments they were trying to move away from physical size and weight to a smarter technical design that was light weight

If they have produced this to compete with Sigma, isn't the Sigma more expensive ........ but I feel they have produced this for the general consumer market, maybe for users who aren't really aware of the Sigma or Tamron offering.

I would have thought that a good 400mm f5.6 and a quality 100 400mm f5.6 VR zoom would sell well

We can only see what the reviews are like ...... the 100 300mm f4.5/f5.6 VR zoom has always been good value for money

 

[petert]

It is a little surprising that Nikon have moved that way as I though that with long lens developments they were trying to move away from physical size and weight to a smarter technical design that was light weight

If they have produced this to compete with Sigma, isn't the Sigma more expensive ........ but I feel they have produced this for the general consumer market, maybe for user who aren't aware of the Sigma or Tamron offering.

I would have thought that a good 400mm f5.6 and a quality 100 400mm f5.6 VR zoom would sell well

We can only see what the reviews are like ...... the 100 300mm f4.5/f5.6 VR zoom has always been good value for money

I would rather have seen a 400 5.6 like canons than this, that I would change to.

 

[BillN_33]

I would rather have seen a 400 5.6 like canons than this, that I would change to.

That's what I wanted for travel and BIF

I have just bought the 300mm f4 PF VR ..... so I'll see how that fares hand held ..... it is supposed to be good

Amazon Germany has them at Euros 1,800

 

[petert]

Knowing how.good and light that lens is I really don't understand why nikon have not produced something like it

 

[Stu Meech]

Knowing how.good and light that lens is I really don't understand why nikon have not produced something like it

Nikon have always said they do the 300 f/4 and tc so they don't see the point of a 400 f/5.6.

 

[petert]

Nikon have always said they do the 300 f/4 and tc so they don't see the point of a 400 f/5.6.

Which is silly I'd rather 400 and x2 of which the Canon is still superb than 300, if the tamron 150 600 hadn't come along I'd have switched, may still do at some point. After all canon do both

 

[snerkler]

So how are people thinking the new 24-70 will be better than the older version?

For the price it needs to be better in every conceivable way.

 

[petert]

For the price it needs to be better in every conceivable way.

Another lens I'm not convinced about or why they've chosen to do it? Are nikon on another planet

 

[petert]

Another lens I'm not convinced about or why they've chosen to do it? Are nikon on another planet

Are they hoping on the "I must get the latest and greatest brigade "?

 

[Mikechappers]

I crop 90% of my nature shot so I would be always at 500mm or 700mm, (with the x 14) ....... so I would always prefer a prime

As a birder already using the Nikon 500 f4 vr to me its all about range for the type of birding I do, how often have I being in a situation where the 500mm is to much lens, the answer is almost never, even with a 1.4 converter which is constantly fitted, so from my POV its a lens I will not be considering even with its weight advantage, of course it being a zoom will suit some, I understand that, its just that I am not one of them

 

[petert]

As a birder already using the Nikon 500 f4 vr to me its all about range for the type of birding I do, how often have I being in a situation where the 500mm is to much lens, the answer is almost never, even with a 1.4 converter which is constantly fitted, so from my POV its a lens I will not be considering even with its weight advantage, of course it being a zoom will suit some, I understand that, its just that I am not one of them[/QUOTE
With the 500f4 you'd be mad to even consider it :-D

 

[BillN_33]

As a birder already using the Nikon 500 f4 vr to me its all about range for the type of birding I do, how often have I being in a situation where the 500mm is to much lens, the answer is almost never, even with a 1.4 converter which is constantly fitted, so from my POV its a lens I will not be considering even with its weight advantage, of course it being a zoom will suit some, I understand that, its just that I am not one of them

Yep - most of my shots are taken with a 600mm f4 Nikon prime + the x 1.4TC
I have a 300mm f4 and a 300mm f2.8VR and the 14 and the 20TC TC's

what do I lack -

Obviously I cannot hand hold the 600mm f4 and the 300mm f2.8VR is no fun, (I'm approaching 69 years old)

I still travel quite a lot - I cannot take the 600mm to S Africa so it's the 300mm f2.8 and the 300mm f4 ...... the f2.8 is really a bind in hand luggage and takes a big chunk of the weight allowance

I have a big gap in BIF shots

My solution, was either to move to Canon, or to buy the 600mm f5.6 VR Nikon ..... but then the 300 f4 PF appeared, which is reportably v good with all the Nikon TC .... it has VR and now I have up to 600mm at f8 on an FX body ....... just what I wanted as f8 is my preferred shooting aperture for small birds....... ISO no longer worries me as Nikon have sorted that with the D750/810

but Nikon still have to produce a crop body as good as the Canon 7D ........ I don't think the D7200 is up to it ....... they need to produce something as good as the FX D750 but DX

I do not like (long) zoom lens and unless they are of the quality of the 70 200mm f2.8VR - but then I would always stop at 200mm - I (you) will always be a little disappointed with zooms and that means I would never be happy will the images they produce ....... I'm never happy anyway with the images that I produce.

Good zooms are heavy and carry a lot of baggage which is pointless unless you need it

 

[snerkler]

Another lens I'm not convinced about or why they've chosen to do it? Are nikon on another planet

It's a lens a lot of people have been asking for, myself included. Just not for £1800 though

 

[Stu Meech]

Another lens I'm not convinced about or why they've chosen to do it? Are nikon on another planet

Compete with Canon's IS based offering, not to mention other manufacturers, also improve the lens for use on higher MPs sensors.

It'll sell, the lens is a pro workhorse and the price will drop soon enough.

 

[Mikechappers]

Yep - most of my shots are taken with a 600mm f4 Nikon prime + the x 1.4TC
I have a 300mm f4 and a 300mm f2.8VR and the 14 and the 20TC TC's

what do I lack -

Obviously I cannot hand hold the 600mm f4 and the 300mm f2.8VR is no fun, (I'm approaching 69 years old)

I still travel quite a lot - I cannot take the 600mm to S Africa so it's the 300mm f2.8 and the 300mm f4 ...... the f2.8 is really a bind in hand luggage and takes a big chunk of the weight allowance

I have a big gap in BIF shots

My solution, was either to move to Canon, or to buy the 600mm f5.6 VR Nikon ..... but then the 300 f4 PF appeared, which is reportably v good with all the Nikon TC .... it has VR and now I have up to 600mm at f8 on an FX body ....... just what I wanted as f8 is my preferred shooting aperture for small birds....... ISO no longer worries me as Nikon have sorted that with the D750/810

but Nikon still have to produce a crop body as good as the Canon 7D ........ I don't think the D7200 is up to it ....... they need to produce something as good as the FX D750 but DX

I do not like (long) zoom lens and unless they are of the quality of the 70 200mm f2.8VR - but then I would always stop at 200mm - I (you) will always be a little disappointed with zooms and that means I would never be happy will the images they produce ....... I'm never happy anyway with the images that I produce.

Good zooms are heavy and carry a lot of baggage which is pointless unless you need it

At the end of the day Bill it comes down to what the buyer's purchasing power is and type of birding , if its for home use in the garden or at a zoo go for it, the zoom will definitely come into play. but if they are anything like myself then range is everything as in a lot of my birding is done walking on the cliffs of West Cornwall, fieldcraft does not really come into play very often especially with flying birds which can pop up from below a cliff an drop off just as fast, plus I enjoy trying for the over shooting rarities which from my experience are nearly always seen at long range.

I am happy hand holding the 500mm and i'm in my 60s I have used a 600mm, I could handhold it, but given the choice then no way would I get one, the 500mm is spot on for
me.

 

[petert]

It's a lens a lot of people have been asking for, myself included. Just not for £1800 though

Fair enough, just not what I need I thought the other was good enough always has been?

 

[petert]

At the end of the day Bill it comes down to what the buyer's purchasing power is and type of birding , if its for home use in the garden or at a zoo go for it, the zoom will definitely come into play. but if they are anything like myself then range is everything as in a lot of my birding is done walking on the cliffs of West Cornwall, fieldcraft does not really come into play very often especially with flying birds which can pop up from below a cliff an drop off just as fast, plus I enjoy trying for the over shooting rarities which from my experience are nearly always seen at long range.

I am happy hand holding the 500mm and i'm in my 60s I have used a 600mm, I could handhold it, but given the choice then no way would I get one, the 500mm is spot on for
me.

It comes down to cost for most. that's why best value is still canon 400 5.6 I certainly couldn't afford the Nikon primes

 

[rpsmith79]

As a birder already using the Nikon 500 f4 vr to me its all about range for the type of birding I do, how often have I being in a situation where the 500mm is to much lens, the answer is almost never, even with a 1.4 converter which is constantly fitted, so from my POV its a lens I will not be considering even with its weight advantage, of course it being a zoom will suit some, I understand that, its just that I am not one of them

Hardly a fair comparison price wise though, £1200 vs £5800.................

And i'm sure it's not aimed at people like yourself, i however am very interested as for the reach it would give me for the price it looks like a cracking piece of kit, assuming it is as good (if not better) than the competition (Sigma 150-600 Sport)

I would also like the zoom as i don't just shoot wildlife, i shoot airshows and motorsport too, so would make a fairly decent all round lens for myself