NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Jan Anne on July 27, 2015, 22:24:26
-
Now these are some interesting rumours, Nikon is apparently about to announce the highly overdue D400 and as a bonus a 200-500VR.
D400 rumour on Cameraegg:
http://www.cameraegg.org/rumors-nikon-d400-will-have-a-24mp-aps-c-sensor-to-be-announced-in-september/ (http://www.cameraegg.org/rumors-nikon-d400-will-have-a-24mp-aps-c-sensor-to-be-announced-in-september/)
200-500VR rumour on NR:
http://nikonrumors.com/2015/07/26/nikon-rumored-to-announce-a-new-200-500mm-lens.aspx/#more-95462 (http://nikonrumors.com/2015/07/26/nikon-rumored-to-announce-a-new-200-500mm-lens.aspx/#more-95462)
The D300 was one of my main cameras for a long time even while owning the D700, for instance with the 200-400/4VR on the NG safari in Southern Africa where some extra length was needed.
What do you guys think, is there still room for a pro DX camera in the full frame era?
-
I think the 200-500 will see the light, no so for the D400...
-
I'm tempted to D7200 for its vastly improved image quality and reduced shutter/mirro shock compared to D7000. So, why not D400? :)
I would seriously like to see an improved user interface, expecially the placement of video start buttons and the confusing co-existance of "i" button and "info" button.
I'm not sure if it is true, but this is also intriguing:
http://www.cameraegg.org/af-s-dx-nikkor-35mm-f1-0g-lens-patent/
The optical construction looks like a Gaussian lens plus speedbooster. :)
In order for the "pro model" to make sense, the dedicated lens lineup is mandatory, methinks.
-
I believe in D400 if it really hits the shelves.
Nikon cut into their sales by not having this camera yet. But will it still be selling after such a long wait?
probably yes. it will replace all the d300 and 300s that are still in use.
-
I think there is definitely a market for a less expensive fast Nikon DSLR than the D4s. I think Nikon had a chance to make a great success story with the D750 which strikes a good balance between image quality, price and speed, but its sales were interrupted by the flare scare and recall.
A D400 may be successful if it offers action photographers a less expensive alternative than the D4s, but it is not the right type of camera for me.
If a 200-500 has a maximum aperture of f/4-f/5.6 and if the lens is of very high quality, it could be very useful and yet less expensive than the Canon 200-400/4 Extender (which is really expensive). I'm wondering what the advantage of making a 2x zoom lens with a built in 1.4x teleconverter instead of a slightly larger 2.5x zoom range is. Yes, constant aperture in sections of the range, but I think a continuous zoom range would be more useful as it allows continuous framing of an approaching subject, and the longest focal length in a telezoom is usually the most used, so having to switch on a TC doesn't seem like the best plan, instead I would prefer they optimize the lens to perform its best at its longest focal length wide open and allow perhaps slightly lower quality at shorter focal lengths if a compromise is mandatory.
I would be interested in the 200-500mm if it turns out to be a high quality lens and if it is fairly priced. One additional point: it would be great if the center of gravity would not move as the lens is zoomed. This would allow the effective use of the zoom on a gimbal head.
-
Ilkka, and here I thought this site was the only one without a D400 Rumour any place to be found ;D
The initial Nikon publicity, Action Camera, for the D750 really had many of us expecting a fast Sports camera or something totally new. I really enjoy the D750 and have had zero problems but, 1/4000, and the buffer, were a disappointment. Also the AF spread could have been better.
Nikon has really let the average sports shooters down(not to mention Wildlife) . Have to go FX with longer lenses (good for lens sales I guess). It is either give up the 2.8 and use a TC1.4 or buy longer/heavier. A proper D300/D300s replacement would certainly get my attention since I still use the D300s, 300 2.8vr as my main camera for shooting soccer before dusk with the D3S, 70-200vrII for the fast, close in action.
The 200-500mm is a few days late...and a $ short . I fully expected something similar as a replacement for the 80-400vr D. So with Tamron and Sigma going to 600mm???? The afs 80-400 works for me as a Nature Walkabout. The 200mm is too long and the 500mm is too short. It would have to be an extremely good lens at a good price and using the light weight Tech to get me interested.
Tom
-
If this D400 rumor turns out to be right, I will probably preorder one. However, I would be quite surprised if the D400 becomes available as early as in September; if that were the case, Nikon Rumors should normally have noticed this already.
-
The DX format as such holds more promise than most of the cameras made to serve it - until now. Not only have the cameras become smaller and more awkward to handle, they also tend to have dumbed down user interfaces, being overloaded by amateurish features, and having tiny finders of atrocious quality.
The D2X/H were good examples that DX itself can be delivered by quality gear, but of course their specifications otherwise are hopelessly outdated these days. A 24 MPix D400 with a robust build like a D300 on steroids would interested me, and probably a lot of other potential users as well.
-
If the rumored 200-500 has an aperture of f/4-5.6, it could be considered a replacement for the 200-400/4 and TC-14E combination. You get the faster aperture of the 200-400 at the wide end, and the longer reach and slower aperture of the 200-400 with TC, but with continuous zooming and no need to attach or remove a TC. Could be an interesting addition to the Nikon lineup now that longer tele zooms are becoming popular.
-
If the rumored 200-500 has an aperture of f/4-5.6, it could be considered a replacement for the 200-400/4 and TC-14E combination. You get the faster aperture of the 200-400 at the wide end, and the longer reach and slower aperture of the 200-400 with TC, but with continuous zooming and no need to attach or remove a TC. Could be an interesting addition to the Nikon lineup now that longer tele zooms are becoming popular.
Now that AF at f8.0 has become more common (D7100/7200 can do that), 500/5.6 at the longest end still leaves the possiblity of using a 1.4 TC.
-
According to Petapixel it's a constant F5.6 and will be released on August 27 together with a 24/1.8 and a 24-78/2.8VR
And look at the price: about $1,375. I find that hard to believe, but I hope it's true. ;D
(http://petapixel.com/2015/07/29/nikon-lenses-leaked-24-70mm-f2-8-vr-24mm-f1-8-and-200-500mm-f5-6-vr/)
-
Constant f5.6 of the 200-500 makes it less of a competitor for the 200-400/4, and more of a long lens companion for the 70-200/4 VR. I'm sure it will be popular.
-
If that picture of the 200-500 is real, the tripod collar appears straight from a nightmare.
-
For that price it's a competitor for the Sigma/Tamron 150-600
-
By the way those who have used the Sigma or Tamron 150-600's, does AF function with all AF sensor points at 600mm, or is it limited like with an f/8 lens to a few central sensor positions? Thanks.
-
Ilkka's question would also apply to the 18-300/3.5-6.3 which is the same aperture at the long end. Maybe someone who owns the 18-300 will be able to tell us. The manual makes no statement about this so I would assume it works with all the AF sensors (maybe not terribly well). After all, F6.3 is only 1/3 stop slower than f5.6.
-
I hope "all" the up-and-coming Nikkor lenses to have fluorine coating on the outer elements.
-
Every time I read about the launch of a 150-600 or thus 200-500 I get excited, but then I wonder if it would be any better than my 300 AFI with the 1.7 TC combination.
You do get the luxury of a zoom range and stabilisation, but I'm not yet convinced it will produce optically better results?
-
If all of the rumours are right, or at least partially, August and September could prove to be really interesting :) If memory serves me right the D3 came winging in without many rumours and that was after a constant' Nikon will not make an Fx Body'. Maybe a D400 (or some such) could make a surprise appearance. A smaller, lighter 24-70 2.8 vr could get my attention ;), Same size and weight , or heavier, would not.
Cheers,
Tom
-
Tom: I'm with you there, a lighter 24-70mm would certainly catch my attention. Would fit my D750 quite well.
-
Tom: I'm with you there, a lighter 24-70mm would certainly catch my attention. Would fit my D750 quite well.
Adding VR in a lens tend to increase its weigth and size, unfortunately. And if those photos of the new lenses are real, it does not look very much smaller. My hope is for a better 24-70. The current is decent on the D810, but not stellar.
-
I'm keeping my hopes up because of this rumor: http://nikonrumors.com/2015/02/03/some-interesting-nikon-patents-including-a-nikkor-24-70mm-f2-8-pf-vr-lens.aspx/
"In May, 2014 Nikon filed a patent for a new 24-70mm f/2.8 lens with Phase Fresnel (PF) element (diffractive lens). I already mentioned few times that a new 24-70mm f/2.8 VR lens is on the horizon - if Nikon really uses a PF lens in the next version, the size and weight will be significantly reduced. Adding VR will make this a very desirable lens for every Nikon shooter."
-
I'm keeping my hopes up because of this rumor: http://nikonrumors.com/2015/02/03/some-interesting-nikon-patents-including-a-nikkor-24-70mm-f2-8-pf-vr-lens.aspx/
Right but in this interview
http://www.fotosidan.se/cldoc/interview-with-nikon-rep-about-nikkor.htm
the Nikon manager basically said that the PF design would not make the 24-70 much smaller. I think they must have investigated the option but probably will go with a conventional refractive optics design.
-
Thanks for saving me a bunch of money ;D
-
I am generally happy with the existing 24-70 Nikkor but in the out of focus background there is some color fringing towards the corners. Also the autofocus while it works fairly well it is not quite as consistently accurate as with the 70-200/2.8 II. I hope for improved autofocus accuracy in the new version of the 24-70. Optically, the existing lens has some field curvature and it can be tricky to get a group shot towards the 24mm end to be sharp also in the outer areas of the frame. I've found that using another lens can give a better result in this situation but it can be inconvenient during an event to have to remember to switch lenses for groups when the 24-70mm range would otherwise work well.
If the new 24-70 has fluorine coating I will be very happy as sometimes one must enter into places where there is "stuff" in the air. For example in weddings it is common nowadays that some documentary photographs of the hair salon are made, and the hair spray makes for a beautiful visual effect (but I imagine it would not do the front element anything good if exposed). I also think the 14-24 should get it in the future as this lens can not really take any protective filter and I did use mine sometimes close to water, too close for comfort.
I hope the 200-500 can get a Kirk style aftermarket collar. It looks like there may be space for it.
-
The current 24-70mm 2.8 AFS is very weak in the corners at 24mm also it has a lot of barrel distortion up close.
-
The current 24-70mm 2.8 AFS is very weak in the corners at 24mm also it has a lot of barrel distortion up close.
I agree, and it also has barrel distortion on further distances at 24mm. That is the weakest focal length on the 24-70. I normally use the 14-24mm at 24mm when I need that angle, it is so much better than the 24-70.
-
Well, it would make sense that Nikon would launch the D400 now, as I have (after waiting two years for them to do just this) just given up and bought a D750...
;)
-
Well, it would make sense that Nikon would launch the D400 now, as I have (after waiting two years for them to do just this) just given up and bought a D750...
;)
You did what Nikon wanted you to do...
As a small consolation there must be loads of people who did like you.
-
I am sure you are right.
Sorry, drifting off topic a bit here, but having used it for just two days, I can't say I am sorry. The D750 is a huge step up from the D7000!
I guess most guys with long lenses point them at the moon sometimes, and I am certainly one of them. This one was taken last night, using the same 500mm f4 and TC1.4EII I have used several times on the D7000. And despite having less pixels on target, being in a built-up area (thus possible light pollution) and hand-holding it instead of putting it on a tripod, there is a lot more detail than I have ever managed to capture with the D7000.
-
By the way those who have used the Sigma or Tamron 150-600's, does AF function with all AF sensor points at 600mm, or is it limited like with an f/8 lens to a few central sensor positions? Thanks.
All AF sensors on my D810 functions at 600mm with my Sigma 150-600 Sport.
I upgraded from a Sigma 150-500 and the new one is a big improvement. The only drawback is the weight, but I usually use it on a monopod or a tripod with a Jobu jr 3 gimbal head.
-
I found this review of the 200-500/5.6 Nikkor:
http://www.cyberphoto.se/info.php?article=200500vr
It's in Swedish but should be readable to some of us. ;-) The review is quite complementary of the lens. They say good things about the quality of the tripod mount, which is encouraging.
-
I noticed on the the Finnish store verkkokauppa.com's web pages that their "number of lenses in stock" saldo for the 200-500/5.6 was -6 a few days ago, and today it is -2. They got four samples of the lens today!