Nikon 70-200 f/4 to be announced this week

gman said:
I'd always take an extra stop over VR as for me I find VR more restrictive what with subject movement.
Click to expand...

what he said

i see no point in this lens at all

i cant carry a lot of weight but the F2.8 aint that bad and the quality :love:
 
Dimensions 3.1×7.0 in. (Diameter x Length), 78.0×178.5mm (Diameter x Length) (f4 lens)
Dimensions 3.4×8.1 in. (Diameter x Length), 87×205.5mm (Diameter x Length) (f2.8 lens)
Weight 30.0 oz. (850g)for the f4, compared to the f2.8 which is 54.3 oz. (1540g)


So not a massive difference in dimensions, but a big difference in weight.
 
Nikon today announces a new FX-format zoom lens with versatile 70–200mm focal range and constant f/4 aperture.

The lens extends Nikon’s range of high-performance f/4 NIKKOR lenses, and it is the first NIKKOR to be equipped with Nikon’s next-generation Vibration Reduction system that allows for up to 5-stop compensation.

Well-suited to events, travel, wildlife, and even sports, the strong combination of extended vibration reduction capability and high-grade Nikon optics make this lens a smart choice for enthusiast photographers and pros alike.

Hiro Sebata, Product Manager for professional products at Nikon UK says: “This new NIKKOR f/4 lens offers high quality performance and flexibility, ideal for enthusiast and professional photographers looking for a versatile, portable tele-photo lens, with the added benefit of the enhanced Vibration Reduction system.”

One stop further

The next-generation Vibration Reduction system incorporated in this lens allows for up to 5-stop compensation, enabling photographers to shoot at shutter speeds five stops slower than would otherwise be possible. A significant upgrade, the increased stability greatly minimises the effects of camera shake and extends opportunities for low-light shooting.

Three modes are available: Normal for everyday shooting, Active to minimise the high-frequency camera shake experienced when shooting from a moving vehicle and Tripod Detection mode. Both Normal and Active modes offer a stable viewfinder image, which ultimately makes focus-point acquisition and framing far more comfortable and precise. Tripod Detection mode reduces vibration due to shutter release when the camera is mounted on a tripod.

No compromises

Despite its lightweight build, this lens doesn’t cut any corners when it comes to performance. Crafted to deliver outstanding resolution and contrast in diverse conditions, the optical construction boasts 20 elements in 14 groups, and Nikon’s Nano Crystal Coat is employed to combat flare and ghosting.

Well-balanced
Well-balanced in terms of size, weight, price, and image quality, this lens also has a dedicated tripod collar ring, the RT-1. This optional accessory helps to improve tripod balance and allows quick, smooth transition between vertical and horizontal orientation when shooting in either portrait or landscape format. This lens comes with a lens cap (LC-67), a lens hood (HB-60), and a lens case (CL-1225) included.

Sales start date: 29th November, 2012. Cost £1,172.00 inc. VAT.

ORDER YOURS TODAY! Tel: 020-7828 4925

Kind regards,


Tabitha Hardy

Grays of Westminster - Exclusively... Nikon
40 Churton Street
Pimlico
London SW1V 2LP
Tel: +44 020 7828 4925
Fax: +44 020 7976 5783
Website: http://www.graysofwestminster.co.uk/
 
1172 here, defenitly get it under 1k from abroad. Coolies :) Just need to wait for some real world images.
 
Last edited:
Five stops? Blimey that's good, even if it were just four stops! This has got me thinking a little more about the VR. I can see how an f1.4 lens compared to an F4 could be a world of difference but would the difference between an f2.8 and an f4 make all the difference whilst taking into account how well some of the latest cameras can handle higher ISO ratings?

Here's what I'm thinking, say you needed 1/250s @ ISO 1600 to freeze some motion with the f1.4 lens - a modern pro body would deal with this ISO with no problem. However, you'd need to ramp the ISO up to 12,500 for an F4 lens which may present a problem, especially with the dynamic range. So I can see how appealing the very wide lenses can be.

However, if you need 1/250s @ ISO 1600 to freeze some motion with the f2.8 lens, then you'd only need to raise the ISO to 3200 with the F4 lens - still acceptable me thinks. Perhaps in more extreme cases you could get a problem where the f2.8 is shooting at ISO6400 then the jump to ISO12,500 is perhaps more considerable.

Now looking at the VR facility....

Let's say the subject movement were fairly gentle and required a shutter speed of 1/30s to freeze the motion but as you were shooting at 200mm then you need to shoot at 1/250s to avoid camera shake which is 3 stops difference.

Let's say that due to the available light the f2.8 had to shoot at ISO 12,500 fully wide to achieve 1/250s so the image isn't going to be great. The f4 lens would lose a stop due to the aperture, however, it could then gain 4 stops thanks to the VR so an overall gain of 3 stops meaning it could shoot at 1/30s and still freeze the motion, with the slower shutter speed allowing the ISO down to 1600 so gaining more dynamic range and less noise.


I'm not sure if I've got my figures correct here and although it's perhaps more applicable to slower moving subjects, I am starting to see how VR can be more than just a tripod replacement, especially when we are talking about 4 to 5 stops compensation.

(does subject movement increase with focal length? If so then ignore half of the above!)
 
But in low light conditions where the shutter speed required to eliminate camera shake is faster than that to freeze motion, would this not be a situation where the VR can be of an advantage? I'm thinking of a dim church wedding during the ceremony where there may be little movement.
 
I`m really struggling to see who would actually buy this over a 2.8?
 
Weedy people.

With the 2.8 you get a free work out while you shoot. Win, win.
 
If you want a workout go to a gym. The 70-200 f/4 has always been a hole in the modern Nikon lens line up, it's good to see it filled. Now they need an update of the 80-400.
 
Why pay gym fees when you get a free work out and some fresh air?

And yes, my post was in jest, I know how that goes above your head ;)

I'm glad they've brought this out. I don't need it, but maybe some day I might get a back up FX cam and an assistant, and may appreciate it.
 
fracster said:
I`m really struggling to see who would actually buy this over a 2.8?
Click to expand...

me for one. I dont need 2.8 in the studio or the bulk. If its as sharp as the graphs are claiming then it will be great. Will have to wait on some to actually get out there and be used by first adopters though :)
 
Laudrup said:
I wish you were joking.
Click to expand...


I wish you had a sense of humour. Because if you think I actually meant it was a good replacement for a gym, you've no idea how busted up my back is.

Actually, I don't wish that ... because you're funny as you are, miserable ;)
 
Do you people really think the 70-200 F2.8 is heavy?
 
Not me. After a good few hours it can be alright. I used mine on a 1.7x TC last weeks for about 3 hrs, hand held, without any fuss.
 
fracster said:
Do you people really think the 70-200 F2.8 is heavy?
Click to expand...

on its own, not really, but by the time youve bolted it all together with a grip then youve one lumpy bit of camera gear. Every bit of saving helps.
 
Fair does.
 
Not tried mine with the grip attached. That would start to become a bit of a proper weight. Can't imagine many taking just that combo' out for a very long walk though, without a bag.
 
essexash said:
on its own, not really, but by the time youve bolted it all together with a grip then youve one lumpy bit of camera gear. Every bit of saving helps.
Click to expand...

Ya big softies, at this years Super League Grand Final after the game getting presentation pics i was using a Nikon D3S with a 400mm f/2.8 and TC-14E attached on a pod, then on the black rapid i had another D3S with a 70-200mm f/2.8 and kenko 1.4 attached along with a gripped D700 and Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR attached and slung from the chest strap in a bag was a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8
 
Gary Coyle said:
Ya big softies, at this years Super League Grand Final after the game getting presentation pics i was using a Nikon D3S with a 400mm f/2.8 and TC-14E attached on a pod, then on the black rapid i had another D3S with a 70-200mm f/2.8 and kenko 1.4 attached along with a gripped D700 and Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR attached and slung from the chest strap in a bag was a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8
Click to expand...

Small potatoes cheif, try hand holding a Siggy 3-800 whilst tracking ospreys............;)
 
i saw it has a closer minimum focus distance but is there any accurate information on the "breathing" that people chastise the 2.8 for :shrug:
 
well you all obviously eat 3 shredded wheat oop north. That or you have trained pack ferrets to lug it all round for you.
 
Cagey75 said:
Lighter means more plastic, no weather sealing and the lack of collar. Also the 2.8 has one more chunk of glass, and is divided up differently, one more group [21/15 V 20/14]

I'll take the 2.8 over one extra stop of VR
Click to expand...

No it doesn't... Means a lot less glass than the 2.8 as you don't need the glass diameter...

As for the optional collar, I think the Canon version also relies on an optional collar as well.

Anyone got a link to the actual specs (weight/size) the above links don't have anything like that.

EDIT: Ah! I see, it doesn't actually have sealing, well that's a big disappointment. :(
 
Last edited:
Lads, before I bust my back I would have lifted all of YOU at arms length no problems :D

The testosterone in here, phew!
 
essexash said:
well you all obviously eat 3 shredded wheat oop north. That or you have trained pack ferrets to lug it all round for you.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Summat like that........:)
 
Cagey75 said:
Try not to lose sleep over it, because I know I won't ;) As I said,that's MY thoughts/guesses on it.

The new one has ONE less element of glass, as I mentioned earlier. Btw.
Click to expand...

Just for comparison the Canon 70-200 f/4 IS weighs in at around 130g less than the new Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR and that is certainly not plasticky... The Canon is also weather sealed so it's a little odd Nikon haven't sealed theirs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top