NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Erik Lund on October 19, 2016, 09:03:43
-
New PJ do all Zoom that does away with focus breathing and comes a lot closer, Minimum focus distance to match the rivals! Apparently Nikon is capable of super optimizing lens design ;)
-
Dear Santa...
Sorry wrong thread.
-
One significant change is that the zoom and focus rings has switched, like some of the 'cheap' zooms. will be interesting if it usable in real life to have the hand so far forward,,,
-
Dear Santa...
Sorry wrong thread.
it's on the other thread :o :o :o
glad to see the buttons back!
-
Ahh yes the buttons are back as well from the Mark I ;) Very nice
-
I think I could get used to the reversed focus and zoom given that it's an FL and doesn't breath.
There must be a technical reason for the switch.
Dave
-
I think I could get used to the reversed focus and zoom given that it's an FL and doesn't breath.
There must be a technical reason for the switch. ...
Nikon clearly states the switch of zoom and focus collars is done to improve [hand-held] handling of the lens.
They do not anywhere mention a reduction of focus breathing. I wonder from where that assertion originates.
-
I have to find some space for it... :P
-
Sample images are,,, impressive! Again just JPG files but wow.
http://www.nikon-image.com/products/lens/nikkor/af-s_nikkor_70-200mm_f28e_fl_ed_vr/sample.html
-
Nikon clearly states the switch of zoom and focus collars is done to improve [hand-held] handling of the lens.
They do not anywhere mention a reduction of focus breathing. I wonder from where that assertion originates.
I looked at the images, close up portraits and noted the look, the minimum focus distance and from that concluded that focus breathing is not an issue like it is with the Mark II version.
The Mark II version is incapable of close up portraits anywhere close to the new Mark III
Edit to add image link:
http://imgsv.nikon-image.com/products/lens/nikkor/af-s_nikkor_70-200mm_f28e_fl_ed_vr/img/sample/pic_05_l.jpg
-
IMO the switch of the zoom ring to the front may be a mistake. The further away the arm has to be held, the more strain on the neck is radiated and I wouldn't be able to support my elbow on my chest as well as I can with the current version. However, the distribution of weight in the lens may influence the hand held ergonomics so it would be best to try.
-
The sample photos were chosen because they look sharp. Since they are down sampled we know nothing yet. Let's hope Nikon went for more than just sharp. That's the easy one to check off and sadly about all many know. What about flare & ghost and many other potential faults. Chances are good that this lens raises the bar at least above the last model but we don't know yet.
Are there any full size JPG with full EXIF data?
Dave who is a poorer man than he was a day or so ago.
-
How about the flourite element thats been incorporated from what i understand quite fragile when exposed to sudden temperature changes.
-
How about the flourite element thats been incorporated from what i understand quite fragile when exposed to sudden temperature changes.
Where did you hear that it is fragile?
-
Canon has been using fluorite in their high end telephoto lenses across the board for decades and I have never heard of anyone having had a problem as a result. Perhaps manufacturing technology has evolved and the materials are no longer as fragile as they were in the 1970s, or it can be that the image quality requirements are now so high that they have no choice if they want to improve sharpness and reduce chromatic aberration further.
-
A simple search on the element
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoride_glass (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoride_glass)
where i got curious after listening to the rant of the tatoo dude with the plastic shirt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFijq6CL_fA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFijq6CL_fA)
Got me thinking ;)
-
Calcium fluoride = fluorite. It's not glass.
-
Well, I think who's on crack is not Nikon...
Used my 400mm FL in harsh cold weather, and imagine what, still perfect the FL element...
-
Nikon mentions this in their NIKKOR Lens Glossary under ED glass (and not under fluorite lens) and I assume was a justification not to use fluorite lenses. The Nikon position has changed on this I think and hence this statement may require updating.
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/glossary.htm (http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/glossary.htm)
However, fluorite easily cracks and is sensitive to temperature changes that can adversely affect focusing by altering the lens' refractive index.
So Nikon designers and engineers put their heads together and came up with ED glass, which offers all the benefits, yet none of the drawbacks of calcium fluorite-based glass.
-
Used my 400mm FL in harsh cold weather, and imagine what, still perfect the FL element...
Right but that's a new lens. Use it every day for 20-30 years, bump it around as you go, drop it a few times, and then we can look at statistics of how common fractured fluorite elements have been with this technology. :)
-
Right but that's a new lens. Use it every day for 20-30 years, bump it around as you go, drop it a few times, and then we can look at statistics of how common fractured fluorite elements have been with this technology. :)
For that long, no statisticals here, because I'll got a new one... ;)
-
One significant change is that the zoom and focus rings has switched, like some of the 'cheap' zooms. will be interesting if it usable in real life to have the hand so far forward,,,
It is only engineering solution to shrink the FB problem - its giving 8-10mm more for inside zooming, and allows shorter working distance - from 1.4 to 1.1 meters. Wise move! LZ
-
Nikon doesn't mention the focus breathing on its own website.
-
So far nothing about the lens makes me want to take a hit on selling my 70-200 2.8G vr II. Money would be better spent on the 105 1.4. I use my current lens primarily for sport (soccer , when the play is coming at me and close) events and portraits. Just took some shots at min. focus of my wife and son on a D750 that has not been fined tuned for the lens. They are happy. I use it on the D3S most of the time.
Cheers,
Tom
-
Nikon doesn't mention the focus breathing on its own website.
Hope this problem is reduced to the very minimum, with this new version. Rings are switched for the reason. LZ
-
Nikon doesn't mention the focus breathing on its own website.
Now that is a surprise ;) . If it is a factor, we will probably hear about it from users/reviewers.
Tom
-
LZ, the placement of the rings now is fine with me. I would just have to get my hand to used to the new positioning after using the lens extensively for 8 years or so. I never used the buttons on either version of the 70-200vr. The buttons on the 300 2.8 vr and 500 f4 vr are a different matter but not used that often.
-
LZ, the placement of the rings now is fine with me. I would just have to get my hand to used to the new positioning after using the lens extensively for 8 years or so. I never used the buttons on either version of the 70-200vr. The buttons on the 300 2.8 vr and 500 f4 vr are a different matter but not used that often.
The same with me, but, to judge by my 80-400G, (zoom ring in the front), is extremely convenient, for me, at least! Looking forward for your opinion on that new amazing lens! LZ
-
Large JPG files,,,
http://www.cameraegg.org/af-s-nikkor-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-ed-vr-lens-sample-images/
Slow loading,,, sorry all the way from CN
-
Large JPG files,,,
http://www.cameraegg.org/af-s-nikkor-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-ed-vr-lens-sample-images/
Slow loading,,, sorry all the way from CN
Some little vignetting, very high resolving power, extremely high color/contrast ratio! To judge by those JPG's, the lens will be sold by itself! THX for sharing! LZ
-
Strange you don't see the large JPG - This is the first image,,,
http://www.nikon.com.cn/tmp/CN/4016499630/3760176746/3015334490/1887721864/1781229958/1008545405/1479778378.jpg
-
Strange you don't see the large JPG - This is the first image,,,
http://www.nikon.com.cn/tmp/CN/4016499630/3760176746/3015334490/1887721864/1781229958/1008545405/1479778378.jpg
Its done! A little change to the browser options, and I can see all of beauties of that new lens! Thanks for pointing me! LZ
-
A lot of old lenses are thrashworthy these days. I wonder if anyone is getting away with using the old glass tubes nowadays? It hard to stay ahead in the rat race ;)
-
NOT at all, I use old lenses as well, it's just nice to see Nikon is keeping a high pace to keep up with competition;)
Currently I shoot 14mm and 180mm AF-D ED 2.8 in lack of better from Nikon,,, when I state lack of better its ' my use' the 14-24mm and 70-200 mark I and II all didn't perform to my liking for various reasons,,, So I sold them farily quick same with the 24-70mm AFS 2.8 (mark I)
-
I use some old lenses as well, and I really enjoy them. But I could hardly justify changing the older 70-200 with the new one. I´m just not that good. I dont think I´ll ever be. But if I didn't have the 70-200 and needed that lens I would off course buy the new one. I´m rather simple that way :)
-
The $3700.00 CDN price tag is ridiculous, my VRII will do just fine.
Until we have actual reviewers handling this lens with side by side comparisons, we don't know if it is that much better than the current one.
-
It doesn't need to be better,,,, it could be that it's just different in the right way ;)
For most applications even the Mark I is super good! On DX it's perfect in almost all situations!
-
On focus breathing, here is the new lens (in red) with close focus distance and maximum reproduction ratio compared to other similar lenses:
Lens Focus Ratio
---------------------------
Canon 70-200 II 1.2 1:4.7
AFS 70-200 VR E 1.1 1:4.7
AFS 70-200 VRII 1.4 1:8.3
AFS 70-200/4 1.0 1:3.6
AF 70-210/4 1.1 1:3.9
AIS 80-200/4 1.2 1:4.2
As you can see, the new Nikkor needs to focus a little closer than its Canon counterpart to achieve the same magnification. Compared to the ancient AF 70-210/4 it focuses to the same distance but the magnification is less. The AFS 70-200/4 can focus a little closer and achieve higher magnification, I would guess the magnification is still higher when focused at 1.1m. Overall I would say there is still a fair amount of focal length shortening (breathing) when focusing close - more than the Canon and 70-200/4 - but not nearly as much as the older AFS 70-200 VRII.
-
I have a 70-200mm f/2.8 on my wish list. But if I purchase one, it will be around spring. In the meantime prices will have stabilized. One should know that prices announced by Nikon / Nikon price lists have historically always been higher by about 20% compared to the street price.
-
So far as I understand, the focus breathing is not only affected by the focal length when focusing.
AF-S 50/1.8G uses the rack focus method, and thus its focal length is firmly fixed. I surely observe the breathing when I tried focus at a subject.
The Camera Store TV reports that Sigma 50-100/1.8 zoom suffer from significant focus breath, and Chris Nichols says that Canon's current 70-200/2.8 shows much less breathing.
Perhaps the optical system should work to cancel the change of the magnification factor when focusing by changing its focal length.
-
AF-S 50/1.8G uses the rack focus method, and thus its focal length is firmly fixed. I surely observe the breathing when I tried focus at a subject.
Perhaps the optical system should work to cancel the change of the magnification factor when focusing by changing its focal length.
The problem is that people are using "breathing" to mean two different things. The first is cinematic definition, which is that objects change apparent size as they move in and out of focus. That's what you see with your 50mm f/1.8G and virtually every other lens designed for still cameras. Zeiss Master Primes and a few other cine lenses use "dual floating elements technology" to greatly reduce this type of breathing and were marketed as "Breathless." But as a result, unlike the 50mm f/1.8G, they do change focal length with focus distance.
The second use of the term is to describe lenses which change focal length with focus distance. If a lens has floating elements, be they to provide rear focusing, internal focusing, CRC, or for other reasons, it's extremely likely that it exhibits this type of "breathing" to some extent. Lenses like the 70-180mm Zoom-Micro-Nikkor, the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR-II, and the 28-300mm's do this to a greater extent than people were used to. I can't speak to the 28-300mm's, but in the case of both the 70-180mm and 70-200mm it was a deliberate design decision. For the 70-180mm, the designers wished to cancel out the "bellows effect" and keep an effective aperture of f/5.6 through the focus range. For the 70-200mm VR-II, the designers used the compensator group to focus the lens, which limited the amount of glass they needed to "push around," resulting in faster focus speeds.
My back of the envelope calculations show that at minimum focus and maximum zoom, the new lens has an effective focal length of about 191mm. So the second type of "breathing" will be less of a factor. My guess is that we won't know how much "breathing" it has by the cine definition until the inevitable unboxing videos.
-
Benveniste, thanks for clarifying the term. I would think that the term breathing became popular when the DSLRs and ILMCs incorporate the video capability, which resulted in the confusing use of the same term. I suspect the term has originally been used in the cinema world?
-
Good observations by Benveniste.
In the interest of clarity, it might be best for our correspondents to specify 'focus breathing' and 'focal length breathing' respectively.
I first heard the term "focus breathing' in the cinema world, in the late 1980's. A review of old editions of American Cinematographer magazine from the 1970's and 1980's might yield earlier examples of the term's usage. At that time, the most modern newly designed Angenieux and Cooke zooms...which had moved from front group to internal focusing.... were said to have "less focus breathing" than the old units.
-
Good observations by Benveniste.
In the interest of clarity, it might be best for our correspondents to specify 'focus breathing' and 'focal length breathing' respectively.
I first heard the term "focus breathing' in the cinema world, in the late 1980's. A review of old editions of American Cinematographer magazine from the 1970's and 1980's might yield earlier examples of the term's usage. At that time, the most modern newly designed Angenieux and Cooke zooms...which had moved from front group to internal focusing.... were said to have "less focus breathing" than the old units.
We may want to simplify the terms with FB and FLB?
-
It's always a little more complicated than one thinks ;)
We have made reference to this site several times before, re the talk on focal length in another thread this reminded me of these brilliant graphic pages:
http://www.pierretoscani.com/echo_telezooms_english.html
Be aware currently this site is not available! _ use The Way Back Machine
-
further take on new 70-200 announcement....
https://photographylife.com/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-ed-vr-announcement#more-133991
-
It's always a little more complicated than one thinks ;)
We have made reference to this site several times before, re the talk on focal length in another thread this reminded me of these brilliant graphic pages:
http://www.pierretoscani.com/echo_telezooms_english.html
Oh, yeah, I bookmarked the website sometime ago, and enjoy watching the flash animations occasionally. Again, thanks for sharing! :)
-
www.photographylife.com have had a opportunity to have a hands on experience with the 70-200mm lens at a show in America.
The team have released a second article on the lens relating to the handling experience.
It may confirm a few of the queries raised about the lenses handling.
-
John can you put up a direct link to the article please ;)
-
People are complaining... that's what they like the most, nothing new here.
Handling issue? Just look at the majority of zooms and see where they have the focusing ring...
If some are afraid to touch the focus ring while holding the lens, just turn the foot down...
Personally I like this lens a lot, and want to try it sooner than later. And if it shines where my MkII struggles... the issue comes then to my bank account :P
-
How about the flourite element thats been incorporated from what i understand quite fragile when exposed to sudden temperature changes.
I've read the same. I think this applies to an FL element as the front element. I think I've seen photos but I can't remember. I would hope Nikon designers and engineers have taken this into consideration.
The 180/2.8 ED AIS has an ED element in front. I've heard of pitting by blasts from canned air.
Dave Hartman
---
Canon has been using fluorite in their high end telephoto lenses across the board for decades and I have never heard of anyone having had a problem as a result.
I would think designers would avoid useing a fluorite element as the front element and there would be no particular problems. Just a guess...
Dave Hartman
-
I never had a 70-200 mm Lens, just sticking to the AF-S 80-200 mm f/2,8 and i rarely use it.
Always considereing back and forth but i think 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR might be the one i will go for the upcoming future
Good experience with FL so far BTW.
-
John can you put up a direct link to the article please ;)
I think this is the most recent news - pre-production sample of the new 70-200
https://photographylife.com/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-vr-handling-concerns#more-134036
terrible audio on this video, but it clearly shows the dilemma of the focus vs zoom ring positions
-
Thanks!
If you're used to shoot with many different lenses your used to use different positions for you hands, just look at the tele and tele zoom lenses, they are very different in how far away the zoom or focus rings are from the camera ;)
BTW the Canon guy here in the video has the lens foot in the wrong position, it should point down, like feet normally doo,,, :o The lens foot should rest in the palm of your left hand, like always with the Nikkor 70-200mm lenses, and rotate it when use in portrait mode
-
I find it curious why some claim that inadvertently shifting focus is a significant problem with the new ring positions. The VR II version's focus ring has quite a lot of rest friction and at least on my copy it would never turn unintentionally even if I hold it from around that position. Even with other lenses where the ring moves more easily, I rarely have any problems with unintentional manual focusing.
I take the foot off when hand holding the VR II. I find it more comfortable that way and I can get a firmer hold of the lens.
-
I think this is the most recent news - pre-production sample of the new 70-200
https://photographylife.com/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-vr-handling-concerns#more-134036
terrible audio on this video, but it clearly shows the dilemma of the focus vs zoom ring positions
Clearly shows the dilemma for who? It will be fair and nice to speak about yourself or myself only! I believe it will be the problem for you - why not? But not for me, I consider it absolutely convenient, as well as most of my colleagues - to judge by 80-400G, and by some lenses else. LZ
-
Clearly shows the dilemma for who? It will be fair and nice to speak about yourself or myself only! I believe it will be the problem for you - why not? But not for me, I consider it absolutely convenient, as well as most of my colleagues - to judge by 80-400G, and by some lenses else. LZ
Actually I happen to agree with you :-) Further, i'll wait until I can handle the lens next year; my post simply took the time to track down, and check and pass on a link that had been requested for this thread....
Pure and simple Free info for NG community to ignore or not in good taste. As with everything on the www it's up to each of us to filter its veracity
-
Actually I happen to agree with you :-) Further, i'll wait until I can handle the lens next year; my post simply took the time to track down, and check and pass on a link that had been requested for this thread....
Pure and simple Free info for NG community to ignore or not in good taste. As with everything on the www it's up to each of us to filter its veracity
Indeed! THX. LZ
-
Even with other lenses where the ring moves more easily, I rarely have any problems with unintentional manual focusing.
I had a problem at first with the AF-S 20/1.8G ED but haven't noticed it lately. Unless a problem is significant one learns new reflexes. If I need to use the focus ring it just happens, if I don't the fingers stay off the ring.
Dave
-
I think this is the most recent news - pre-production sample of the new 70-200
https://photographylife.com/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-vr-handling-concerns#more-134036
terrible audio on this video, but it clearly shows the dilemma of the focus vs zoom ring positions
The person in the video never once holds the camera to his eye, so I don't think there is any "clear" demonstration of the alleged problem. The tripod foot could be turned to be underneath the lens, to remedy the alleged problem. That has helped me handling long lenses hand-held.
(Reallyrightstuff and Kirk enterprises could find a new market in making cushions to attach underneath the tripod foots on long lenses, what about USD 150,- a piece... :o )
-
In the current Post-Truth era, until there is something concrete to report, getting hits on blogs seems to be achieved by making striking claims.
-
The FL element is behind the front element. There should be no issues.
The original 400/5.6 Nikkor-P which was not badged "ED" had an FL element according to Nikon tech sheet. I've got a copy here somewhere. Later version like my 400/5.6 ED AI may or may not have an FL element.
I seem to remember issues with early Canon FL type lenses when the front element was an FL lens. I think I've seen photos but I have no clear memory.
Dave
-
The original 400/5.6 Nikkor-P which was not badged "ED" had an FL element according to Nikon tech sheet. I've got a copy here somewhere. Later version like my 400/5.6 ED AI may or may not have an FL element.
The tech sheet claimed new glass with Fluorite-like properties. As far as I know, the Nikon's first use of Fluorite elements was in the 105mm UV-Nikkor.
-
FYI here's more information on the new design / tripod foot - and some mention of 19 PCE
https://photographylife.com/interview-with-nikon-usa-on-70-200mm-and-19mm-pc-e-lenses#more-135705
And regrettably, another terrible video.
kind regards
woody
IMO the switch of the zoom ring to the front may be a mistake. The further away the arm has to be held, the more strain on the neck is radiated and I wouldn't be able to support my elbow on my chest as well as I can with the current version. However, the distribution of weight in the lens may influence the hand held ergonomics so it would be best to try.
-
Having watched the video I'm concerned that the new AF-S 70-200/2.8E ED FL VR appears to bounce in the hands quite freely. Not withstanding I want one. Also from watching the video I think reversing the zoom and focus positions will be good for most photograpers.
Thank you for the link!
Dave
-
He he - indeed the lens seems to be unusable it just bounces around in his hand ::)
The worst audio in any interview ever,,,
-
Delivery seems to start this week. Got a note from my dealer earlier today.
rgds, Andy
-
I had a problem at first with the AF-S 20/1.8G ED but haven't noticed it lately. Unless a problem is significant one learns new reflexes. If I need to use the focus ring it just happens, if I don't the fingers stay off the ring.
Dave
I lied! :)
Just two days ago I was shooting a garden and trees for a friend's tree ID class. I had several instances where I blew the focus with my AF-S 20/1.8G ED while switching from horizontal to vertical. I caught the error each time. There is virtually no dampening on the focus ring and it's a bit wider than needed.
In time the fingers will learn. In time I'll have the reflex I need.
Dave Hartman
---
People who shoot the new 70-200/2.8E frequently will gain the reflexes they need quickly so switching the focus ring and zoom will be a short problem for most.
-
Just two days ago I was shooting a garden and trees for a friend's tree ID class. I had several instances where I blew the focus with my AF-S 20/1.8G ED while switching from horizontal to vertical. I caught the error each time. There is virtually no dampening on the focus ring and it's a bit wider than needed.
In time the fingers will learn. In time I'll have the reflex I need.
One of the handling problems of current AF-S lenses is that you cannot switch off the manual focus, especially the lenses of 50mm and shorter. You can only select M or M/A. On my 50/1.8G, I try to make it into a habit to support the lens on the lens hood.
-
Really excited about this lens, because it will make the 70-200 VR1 drop even further!
The focus breathing issue, to my understanding is very likely to be a deliberate decision to allow the 70-200 VR2 focus faster, and it does focus really really fast.
(http://gallery.photo.net/photo/16797873-lg.jpg)
It really does seem scary for such a setup, I decided to ask some other pros who use it and they simply didn't care at all.
All 70-200 lenses exhibit some degree of breathing, but the VR2 is probably the most seriously one here. Not trying to say two wrong makes a "who cares about the flaws".
I'll be getting either the 70-200 f4 VR3 or the 70-200 AF-S VR1. Great job Nikon :)
-
Really excited about this lens, because it will make the 70-200 VR1 drop even further!
The focus breathing issue, to my understanding is very likely to be a deliberate decision to allow the 70-200 VR2 focus faster, and it does focus really really fast.
(http://gallery.photo.net/photo/16797873-lg.jpg)
It really does seem scary for such a setup, I decided to ask some other pros who use it and they simply didn't care at all.
All 70-200 lenses exhibit some degree of breathing, but the VR2 is probably the most seriously one here. Not trying to say two wrong makes a "who cares about the flaws".
I'll be getting either the 70-200 f4 VR3 or the 70-200 AF-S VR1. Great job Nikon :)
I would prefer people would refer to this issue as focal length/distance breathing and not focus breathing.
-
I would prefer people would refer to this issue as focal length/distance breathing and not focus breathing.
"Focal length breathing" might be more clear.
Maybe we could call it "Positive Breathing" for when the apparent angle of view shrinks with close focus(as with the old unit focusing primes), and call it "Negative Breathing" when the apparent angle of view widens with close focus(as with the newer zooms and primes).
-
Unit focusing keep focal length with distance I believe,,,
Some CRC designs, very few I believe,,, has positive focal length breathing like 55mm 2.8 Ais
-
"Focal length breathing" might be more clear.
Maybe we could call it "Positive Breathing" for when the apparent angle of view shrinks with close focus(as with the old unit focusing primes), and call it "Negative Breathing" when the apparent angle of view widens with close focus(as with the newer zooms and primes).
I personally find the concept of focus breathing to be more appropriate. What this really means is in the near range you cannot focus without a significant change of magnification occurring concomitantly. There is no degrees of freedom left so to speak. This behaviour is a nightmare when you are doing close-up photography and the camera is tripod-mounted. One of the many reasons I ditched the AFS 105/2.8 Micro-Nikkor in favour of the 125/2.5 APO-Lanthar.
-
I just got a review sample of the 70-200E so will check it out over the weekend.
-
Ok, you will be busy! ;)
-
Unfortunately, yes. ... Girl friend visits are postponed. I need to focus (sic).
-
Unfortunately, yes. ... Girl friend visits are postponed. I need to focus (sic).
At least you have your priorities sorted out
-
Nikon had a presentation at my preferred photo vendor yesterday. Got the opportunity for a first trial and a few quick shots of the new 70-200 with FL. Got a good impression ergonomics-wise- and I am ok with the zoom ring being in front of the focus-ring
-
Justifies emerging consensus on the new 70-200 Nikkor - albeit this recent test is restricted to MTF scores at the main focal lengths BUT using 10 copies of each model in pairwise comparisons
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/11/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-ed-af-s-vr-mtf-tests/
and then there's the more sensationalized follow up videos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0I7kIxDmGA
http://froknowsphoto.com/nikon-70200e-vs-g/
-
In the last link, the reviewer evidently was so happy with the performance of the new 70-200 that he forgot all about the grudges initially expressed of the swap focus/zoom rings. My guess is that most users will do the same when they actually start using the lens instead of reading, writing, or moaning about it.
It is a real pity this is not a lens I need for my own shooting ... I don't even have any previous model of 70-200 or 80-200/2.8 Nikkor, with the exception for the very first model, the manual AIS 80-200/2.8 ED a real beast weighing nearly 2 kg and using 95 mm filter size :D
-
In the last link, the reviewer evidently was so happy with the performance of the new 70-200 that he forgot all about the grudges initially expressed of the swap focus/zoom rings. My guess is that most users will do the same when they actually start using the lens instead of reading, writing, or moaning about it.
It is a real pity this is not a lens I need for my own shooting ... I don't even have any previous model of 70-200 or 80-200/2.8 Nikkor, with the exception for the very first model, the manual AIS 80-200/2.8 ED a real beast weighing nearly 2 kg and using 95 mm filter size :D
Yes I agree on the focus-zoom switch as hyperbole by these who've yet to test drive this new lens. While across from the Cape, and in London last week, I have been fortunate to handle 2 models of this new lens on my D500. Well, it's definitely one i am now budgeting for mid next year (and facing up to pending bankruptcy!) Nikonitis is one crippling affliction that I have come to rank on a par with the 4+ bouts of acute malaria I have endured :-) :-)
Flying birds....wildlife portraits etc are the projected uses in Afrotropical climes
.
-
I'd consider the F4.0 new incarnation of this lens, when(IF!) it will hit the shelves. I'll welcome the distinguishable difference in size and weight to already existed models, including 80-400, when I do not need the long end. Or 105-135/2 stabilized one, from any manufacturer. LZ
-
I'd consider the F4.0 new incarnation of this lens, when(IF!) it will hit the shelves. I'll welcome the distinguishable difference in size and weight to already existed models, including 80-400, when I do not need the long end. Or 105-135/2 stabilized one, from any manufacturer. LZ
I doubt there will be a FL version of the 4/70-200.
BTW i rarely use 80-200 because i consider a range to 200 mostly as to short for me
-
I think the 70-200/4 is close to perfect as it is; it is sharp wide open, has very pleasing rendition, maintains its focal length quite well upon close focus, and focuses down to 1:4 magnification. It is quite well built (for a lens of this class), the focusing and zooming rings operate smoothly. Its VR implementation gives a steady image and is effective.
If I can criticize the 70-200/4 a bit, in my experience the image softens a bit upon close focus. Also I noticed the VR malfunctioned in cold winter weather when I was doing some hand held landscape shots; I realized I needed to switch to a tripod. Perhaps the VR mechanism froze inside.
It is a recent lens and of the three f/4 zooms (16-35, 24-120, and 70-200) it is easily the best in image quality. Its relatilvely small size makes it much less consipicuous than the f/2.8 variants. Eventually, of course, most lenses may be updated, but this lens cannot really afford a significant price hike (FL) if it is to remain a high quality relatively affordable telephoto for the widest possible audience. I think improving the 24-120/4 and 16-35/4 to a similar image quality standard should more more important than updating the 70-200/4. Perhaps a 24-70/4 is something that Nikon could consider.
The 70-200/2.8 E seems to bring the more steady VR of the f/4 version into the f/2.8 world. I have tested the f/2.8 E now a bit and find the VR performance to be very good. The autofocus is almost instantaneous even in dim light however, sometimes the AF won't even start if there isn't sufficient contrast apparently. I was surprised that it wouldn't focus on my laptop screen where there was black text on white background. Only by moving the focus sensor on the edge of the laptop display did it initiate autofocus. This was with a D810. Anyway, it is understandable that sometimes AF won't work.Mostly the AF seems to work perfectly in indoor environments and I didn't notice any immediate need to apply fine tuning on either of my cameras.
I find the custom buttons on the lens to be very easy to use on this lens, with some of my fingers around the zoom ring, I could easily use my thumb to activate the lens button and switch to 21-point area AF (I normally keep the camera on single point focus but for some subjects I would like easy access to an area around the selected points). I really like it that I can use my left hand to perform some functions instead of having to find the buttons on the right hand side (on the D5, there is a column of buttons on the front side, Pv, Fn1, Fn2, but I don't find locating the right button so easy especially when swiching between horizontal and vertical orientations). So I press the lens button to switch area mode temporarily and AF-ON with my thumb to activate AF. I have had these lens buttons on the 200/2 but there were not so many useful functions available to program them to carry out with older cameras, and with just one lens with the buttons, I didn't develop the routine of using them. The 70-200/2.8E's lens buttons probably get enough use that I will start to intuitively reach for them when shooting sports etc. I've usually settled on single point AF most of the time because switching between area modes is too slow. I programmed my Fn1 and Fn2 buttons to reset the focus point to a "default" position which is in the top center part of the frame (for a people photographer this is where the face is most commonly located) and depends on the orientation. I quite find this feature (and the orientation sensitivity) to speed up shooting. If I want to go back to center point I can get that by pressing on one of the multi-selector buttons with my thumb.
Unfortunately weather is very gloomy at the moment so I can't get any outdoor experience with the new lens. I think during the weekend we will get some fresh snow so I can try doing some landscapes and maybe test the autofocus capabilities in an outdoor environment.
I noticed that the RRS foot for the 70-200G and G II fits but is not a perfect match for the new lens as the length and height of the dovetail are different and I noticed that RRS is working on a new foot for the E version of the lens, but it is not yet available. For now I will use a QR plate attached to the standard Nikon foot.
I find the weight reduction to be surprisingly noticeable and especially when lifting the camera body with lens attached, one can do it with one hand comfortably. When the tripod foot is in place and is in my left palm, the new position of the zoom ring seems perfect for easy access, but without the foot, I appear to instinctively reach for the focus ring. I guess 15+ years of using this type of zooms with the rear ring being the zoom ring means I need to learn a new habit. :) I don't really want to keep the foot on the lens when I'm hand holding it especially with a QR plate it would be uncomfortable. I often see people shoot like this though, with their palm holding the foot. I think the best way to hold the new lens (without foot) is probably to hold my thumb and ring finger around the gap between the two rings and operate the zoom ring as needed. The zoom ring is very light to operate and gives an even resistance. I guess the main difference here is that with the VR G II version the holding position is such that the weight of the lens and the camera are mostly the responsibility of the left hand, and the right hand just operates the controls on the camera. With the VR E FL version, the right hand holds most of the weight of the camera + lens and the left hand has a minor role, basically operating the zoom ring and the lens buttons, if held in the way I described. If the foot is in place then holding the overall weight of the lens+camera setup can be done using the left hand as in the past. If I take off the foot and let the lens barrel rest on my left hand, this feels at least initially a bit uncomfortable as my left wrist needs to bend too much. Anyway this is just something to get used to, and mostly I think the ergonomics is improved thanks to the reduced weight and less front heavy setup. The left hand has now more functions to operate through the buttons, if the user should choose to take advantage of them.
-
Its relatilvely small size makes it much less consipicuous than the f/2.8 variants. Eventually, of course, most lenses may be updated, but this lens cannot really afford a significant price hike (FL) if it is to remain a high quality relatively affordable telephoto for the widest possible audience.
Thats what I tried to address above
-
Basic outdoor stuff looks good. It's a very contrasty lens. VR is very steady and autofocus nearly instantaneous.
f/4, 1/160s, ISO 1000, 160mm.
-
Few lenses in my experience can focus on the eye consistently when the subject walks towards the photographer and is fairly close. This is partly due to the difficulty in holding the focus sensor on the eye on the photographer's side. The 70-200/2.8E seems to do a good job in this scenario. 200mm, f/2.8, 1/400s, ISO 2000.
-
Out of focus areas seem quite nice at least at relatively short distances (this is cropped into a vertical from a horizontal original image, distance between camera and subject should be about 5m). I haven't run into any double line or ring artifacts in out of focus areas so it is an improvement from the VR G II version in that respect.
200mm, f/2.8, 1/320s, ISO 400.
-
Very nice samples. Thank you
-
It's a great lens. It's so sharp wide open it can be used on all Nikon camera's, also the older ones as with the E aperture, you won't need to stop down.
Here some samples published before in the Weekly Blog
Z6
(https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10851.0;attach=60545;image)
Z9
(https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10851.0;attach=60564;image)
Z9
(https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1610.0;attach=60566;image)
D700
(https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10851.0;attach=60598;image)
Z9
(https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10851.0;attach=60569;image)
Fujifilm Finepix S3 Pro
(https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10877.0;attach=60651;image)
D3X
(https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10877.0;attach=60675;image)
Z9
(https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10877.0;attach=60728;image)
-
Completely agree. Lovely shots by the way. Day and night, close or far away this lens can do it. Very good and precise focus. I just took it yesterday for a spin.
It is invaluable for stage work.
-
I have an earlier version the 70-200mm f/2.8 vrii
Here wide open @195mm