NikonGear

Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Macro_Cosmos on September 04, 2019, 08:00:46

Title: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Macro_Cosmos on September 04, 2019, 08:00:46
So what exactly is SR? Super resolution? Super refractive?
Your guess is as good as mine...

What we can expect is another zoom lens that performs like a prime, which comes with a hefty pricetag. It's probably the dream lens for low light sports and wildlife photography, or maybe it's a bit too short for wildlife? Really looking forward to this lens although I cannot afford one.

Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Erik Lund on September 04, 2019, 08:49:26
Wow, it has been a long wait for that focal length range zoom and fixed f/2.8


Sure it will be expensive  8)  Start saving  ;) 
Front zoom ring,,, Omg  :-X  there will be opinions shared  ;D




Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Jan Anne on September 04, 2019, 09:23:51
Used to have a couple of Sigma 120-300/2.8, the AF wasn't very usable and the optics were so so but the 120-300 range was very usable and due to the fast aperture worked great with extenders. Bring an FX and DX body and you're set for most of the tele work out there with a single lens.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: chambeshi on September 04, 2019, 09:34:42
In celebration of the 60th anniversary of the Nikon F mount  And who predicted no more new F-Nikkors?     

As the short official blurb says, this is aimed at sports genres. However with TC14 III, it should be versatile for wildlife, but limited for smaller birds at some distance

The current 300 f2.8G VRII weighs 2.9kg. The fluorite should trim down this 120-300 Nikkor closer to 2 kg (?)

This new fast "exotic" medium telephoto zoom means it is now unlikely that Nikon will update the fast 300 prime to a f2.8E FL. Similar uncertainty hangs over the future of the legendary 200 f2. It's hard to justify the release of a fluorite upgrade (Unless perhaps Nikon do this in a Z-Mount model). And in this case trimming off VR should shed it of a pound, or so, of mass.

The 200 f2 is a great niche prime for indoor sports and portraits. Lowlight ISO on the top-end Nikon action cameras has become really excellent; so the extra stop of a 200 f2 is really for DoF.... But, this depends IF the 120-300 f2.8 has great bokeh (which is likely), who will pay out for another heavy fast prime? The release of this encompassing zoom has interesting implications for the future values of the current fast primes in 200 and 300 F-Mount. A Used 200 f2 is hard to find, but 300 f2.8 is far more common by comparison in used inventories.

Here is the official Nikon link: https://www.nikon.com/news/2019/0904_dslr_01.htm
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: tommiejeep on September 04, 2019, 09:45:14
Used to have a couple of Sigma 120-300/2.8, the AF wasn't very usable and the optics were so so but the 120-300 range was very usable and due to the fast aperture worked great with extenders. Bring an FX and DX body and you're set for most of the tele work out there with a single lens.
JA, I used the Sigma ( a friend's) for a couple of Soccer matches thinking I could have a single lens/body solution but 120mm was too long so I still had to use a second body with 70-200 f2.8.   I did not find the AF too bad on the D300S and D3S.  At one point I could have bought new Sig. 120-300 f2.8 and 500 f4.5 for less than the Nikon 300 2.8 G vr.   If this lens is lighter it wold really have suited me but now I am thinking 300 f4E , age  ;) .
Some really nice lenses for Wildlife shooters these days, this is the first one aimed at sports.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: golunvolo on September 04, 2019, 09:55:38
A fx body with the 70-200 and a dx body with this and I´ll be in theater heaven  :)
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on September 04, 2019, 11:02:45
Front zoom ring,,, Omg  :-X  there will be opinions shared  ;D

Most zooms have the zoom ring at front, so this is pretty normal.

Sigma's 120-300/2.8 weights 3.39kg. Given that Nikon use fluorite, it is likely to be a bit lighter and less front heavy. The Sigma is definitely a monopod (or tripod) lens, and typically even 300/2.8 users at sports arenas use monopods, I don't think the new 120-300 Nikkor will be an exception. Once you are using it on a monopod, the zoom ring position matters less. Where it matters is when hand-holding the lens, as an extended arm (to reach the zoom ring) can get uncomfortable quickly (if you are thin, in particular). But I expect that most users will have it on monopod (if shooting sports).

I don't think this does anything to the 200/2; one stop is one stop. This will, however, probably delay the launch of a lightweight 300/2.8 FL, which is the lens I want. Although I think the 120-300mm range is useful for many things, the reality is that most of us who would consider these lenses, already have a 70-200/2.8 and it is a much smaller and easier to hand hold lens than any 120-300mm f/2.8 could be.

While I appreciate the availability of such options, I don't think zooms, in general, are a replacement for primes, and think Nikon should get on with modernizing their medium telephoto prime lineup.  Primes can be lighter, they have fewer elements and simpler construction, so often they focus faster (though not always), they can optionally be faster or have macro capabilities, and usually (with the exception of PF lenses) have nicer out-of-focus rendering than zooms. In the short to medium telephoto range I find the bokeh to be of particular importance and this is why it is disappointing to me that Nikon puts such emphasis on zooms in this range. It's not that I don't want this lens to exist - I am glad they will offer it, and hope they do well in the market, but it's not quite the lens I would prefer.

My guess is the price will be around 8000-9000€, looking at the prices of the current 300/2.8, the typical fluorite premium,  and the cost of the 180-400/4.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Erik Lund on September 04, 2019, 14:23:25
Most zooms have the zoom ring at front, so this is pretty normal.


I'm not going to count, but for sure not Nikon Pro f/2.8 lenses,,,
I was referring to Nikon lenses,,, Specifically the 70-200mm AFS FL f/2.8 when it came out there was a lot of comments,,, because of the zoom ring being on the front,,,
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on September 04, 2019, 14:44:16

I'm not going to count, but for sure not Nikon Pro f/2.8 lenses,,,
I was referring to Nikon lenses,,, Specifically the 70-200mm AFS FL f/2.8 when it came out there was a lot of comments,,, because of the zoom ring being on the front,,,

Yes, but that's a lens that is designed for hand-holding so extending the left arm further makes it harder to hold and follow action, so the earlier design was easier to use. But the 120-300/2.8 is probably not light enough to hand hold anyway, so the left arm doesn't have to support its weight and the position of the zoom ring doesn't matter as much.

Let's take a look at other zooms that reach 300mm focal length:

Canon 200-400/4: zoom is front, focus ring back.
Nikon 180-400/4: zoom is front, focus ring back.
Sigma 120-300/2.8: zoom is front, focus ring back.
Nikon 80-400 AF-S: zoom is front, focus ring back.
Canon 100-400: zoom is front, focus ring back
Sony 100-400: zoom is back, focus ring front
Sigma 100-400: zoom is front, focus ring back
Tamron 100-400: zoom is front, focus ring back
Sigma 150-600: zoom is front, focus ring back
Tamron 150-600: zoom is front, focus ring back

I would therefore argue that having zoom in front is the norm in this type of lens, and of the current mainstream long zooms, the Sony (which has the zoom ring behind the focus ring) is the exception.

Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: chambeshi on September 04, 2019, 14:46:38

I'm not going to count, but for sure not Nikon Pro f/2.8 lenses,,,
I was referring to Nikon lenses,,, Specifically the 70-200mm AFS FL f/2.8 when it came out there was a lot of comments,,, because of the zoom ring being on the front,,,
The 80-400 G before the 70-200 f2.8 E FL, then 180-400 f4E TC....

Front zoom works well with the supporting hand, as (usually) MF correction to the AF are the exception
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on September 04, 2019, 15:13:41
The 80-400 G before the 70-200 f2.8 E FL, then 180-400 f4E TC....

Front zoom works well with the supporting hand, as (usually) MF correction to the AF are the exception

Well, if you hand hold the lens, with the new configuration of the 70-200/2.8 it's not possible to hold one's elbow against the chest while using the zoom ring and following action in different directions, unless the photographer has rather large body thickness. With the older design it was easy to use the zoom ring with elbows tucked in, leading to better stability.

The new position of the zoom ring isn't good for 70-200/2.8 hand held use, in my opinion. I usually find myself using the 70-200mm FL as a fixed focal length lens, only occasionally adjusting zoom, as it is so inconvenient to move arm to the front to adjust, and I always find myself moving the hand back in to hold the lens properly when shooting.

But in a lens used on monopod or tripod, this doesn't make much difference so it's not going to be a problem for typical user of 120-300/2.8 (just looking at sports shooters, they typically have any larger lens on monopod).
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Erik Lund on September 04, 2019, 15:34:05

Well, most other Nikkor zooms are rear zoom even the 200-400mm AFS f/4 So that what I'm used to  ;)  sure there a a lot of vintage that are push pull as well!


The preference is so personal and really this was the only point I would make out of it, so feel completely free to like it, I have not owned a front zoom lens ever but maybe 20 or more rear Nikkor zoom lenses. Maybe this will be the first one!


Anyway, take care not to strain something if you try to hold your elbow against your chest when taking pictures - just rest the elbow against your lower body at a comfortable height  ;)
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on September 04, 2019, 18:06:18
Well, most other Nikkor zooms are rear zoom even the 200-400mm AFS f/4 So that what I'm used to  ;) 


Looks like the currently available are approximately evenly divided, on nikon.fi, I counted 18 Nikkor zooms with zoom ring at front and 15 with zoom ring at the back.


Quote
The preference is so personal

Yes.


Quote
Anyway, take care not to strain something if you try to hold your elbow against your chest when taking pictures - just rest the elbow against your lower body at a comfortable height  ;)

Not straining anything. But if I use the 70-200/2.8 FL zoom ring, no part of my left arm touches my body while zooming. With the rear zoom ring position lenses, my left arm is supported by my chest.

Anyway, although I prefer the ergonomics of the rear zoom lenses, it doesn't make a difference in what lenses I purchase. I consider other aspects of the lens design more important. For example the 70-200/2.8 FL allows tight close-ups from distance (e.g. concert) whereas the 70-200/2.8 II presents a much wider crop at the same distance at the 200mm setting. Thus I prefer the FL. Also it is lighter and optically I prefer it also, it has the VR SPORT mode which I really like and the tripod foot doesn't vibrate and the focus motor jitters less. So there is a lot to like in the FL lens. But the ring position if I could swap it, I would. Anyway, as you say, this is very personal.

I would have preferred a prime 300/2.8 FL to a zoom because the zoom is likely to be more expensive and heavier. However, I can see the added value of the zoom as well.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Roland Vink on September 04, 2019, 23:40:29
So what exactly is SR? Super resolution? Super refractive?
Your guess is as good as mine...
Super Refractive is the best guess I have seen so far, but Nikon already have a couple of lenses with HRI (high refractive index) glass, so maybe not.Yet Nikon have ED and super ED, so maybe they can have different high refractive glass too?

This lens pretty much replicates for FX what the 70-200/2.8 is for DX. I wouldn't have guessed this lens was a priority, but it would be very useful for sports photographers. We now have a comprehensive set of telephoto zooms:
  70-200/2.8, 120-300/2.8, 180-400/4 (and 150-560/5.6 with TC)
We just need a 300-800/8 to complete the set.
Or how about a smaller 50-140/2.8 portrait zoom?  :)


Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: MILLIREHM on September 05, 2019, 22:26:42
My 2 cents:
Also curious what the SR means and whether it makes this lens specific interest
It is a know pattern that nikon releases a remarkable pro lens when a new pro body is launched. The best thing for me is the signal that the Nikon F system is still alive (despite the mirrorless hype).
A lens good for sports, for wildlife it is too short- good for large mammals, too short for birds. There cant be enough choice in the lineup - and as long as Nikon can afford to keep a huge system it can still be associated with the qualities that made Nikon leading in the past.
The zoom rings? I'd prefer the focus ring in front of the zoom ring (as the 200-400 configuration), the new nikon "feature" is to place it the other way round. Thats OK when it comes to the 80-400, the 200-500. I havent used the 180-400 so far, it couldbe OK, so does the new 120-300. The 70-200 FL is a super stellar lens, but here the front zoom position is some kind of mess hard adapt and the only downside of this lens.

will the 120-300 replace the 300/2,8? Who knows? Probably there won't be an FL version in the near to mid term future but hope is not lost (also for the 200/2) as there wer rumors of patents for new versions of these lenses. The 300/2,8 was the classical pro lens for Sports photographers (Besides the 400/2,8) press photographers (no use for a 400) so it has some tradition.
Is there a need for a 200/2 FL? It could be more lightweight but i consider it hard to beat this gem in terms of quality.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Akira on September 06, 2019, 03:37:57
What is tricky is that "SR" is located right between the designations of special glass type (FL, PF, ED) and the mechanical specialty (VR).

Traditionally, Nikon hasn't emphasized the use of high-index refractive glass in its cross section, unlike some other manufactures.  Also, judging from the proportion of the image of the lens posted above, it doesn't appear particularly small or light, compared to Sigma equivalents.

So, I would guess that "SR" refers to some newly employed mechanism.  (Stress Reduction?!)
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on September 06, 2019, 10:28:44
What is tricky is that "SR" is located right between the designations of special glass type (FL, PF, ED) and the mechanical specialty (VR).

My vote is on super refractive.  :)
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: longzoom on September 06, 2019, 11:00:53
It will be interesting to compare this one to the new 100-300/4, in 1-2 years.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Bill De Jager on September 06, 2019, 18:44:08
It will be interesting to compare this one to the new 100-300/4, in 1-2 years.

Presumably that refers to this unconfirmed leak (https://petapixel.com/2019/09/05/leaked-nikon-z-lens-roadmap-shows-10-lenses-planned-for-2020-and-2021/).

EDIT:

It's interesting that the list includes a 35/1.2 and 85/1.2.  I was just thinking about future Z-mount f/1.2 lenses in the last day or so, and was even going to post something here about that.  We've known all along about the upcoming 50/1.2.  I was going to suggest that the 35/1.2 and 85/1.2 are likely, and maybe even a 105/1.2.  That last one would be audacious, but if it's feasible (i.e. cost not totally extravagant) you can imagine the appeal.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: MILLIREHM on September 06, 2019, 20:40:40
Thanks for the list though it switches to the Z-System (probably because of the 100-300/4)

As the list is here I'd like to express regret that there is no dedicated Micro Nikkor on this list, so no native close-up capability in the Z System over 4 (or even more years),that be considered as a wise planning as this can be considererd as essential for a lot of users. (There is a pattern in offering 1,8 and 1,2 versions of primes, so maybe we will see an 28 f/1,2 as well.) I doubt if evolving a lens system in one direction (fast and superfast primes of conventional focal length) is the right thing for Nikon to do.

I might be wrong (if the 65 and 105 mm f/1,8 will turn out as Macro lenses)
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: longzoom on September 06, 2019, 20:46:38
65/105 - probably yes.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Akira on September 07, 2019, 01:12:33
Presumably that refers to this unconfirmed leak (https://petapixel.com/2019/09/05/leaked-nikon-z-lens-roadmap-shows-10-lenses-planned-for-2020-and-2021/).

EDIT:

It's interesting that the list includes a 35/1.2 and 85/1.2.  I was just thinking about future Z-mount f/1.2 lenses in the last day or so, and was even going to post something here about that.  We've known all along about the upcoming 50/1.2.  I was going to suggest that the 35/1.2 and 85/1.2 are likely, and maybe even a 105/1.2.  That last one would be audacious, but if it's feasible (i.e. cost not totally extravagant) you can imagine the appeal.

Apparently, there will be no compact Z lenses at least for a few years to come...
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: MILLIREHM on September 07, 2019, 08:40:13
Apparently, there will be no compact Z lenses at least for a few years to come...

That might be a critical failure as well
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Akira on September 07, 2019, 08:55:03
That might be a critical failure as well

I wish I would be wrong.  All the manufacturers, Nikon, Canon Sony or even Fujifilm were emphasizing the compactness and light weight of the mirrorless system.  The only compact and lightweight things they have offered so far are the camera bodies...
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: tommiejeep on September 07, 2019, 09:20:52
Akira, the entire size thing went away with top class lenses being introduced for MILC (both size and weight) .   The ergonomics of my D750 were better than my a7rii a7iii , Z6 and EM1 for my shooting.   I can still keep my sizes and weights down by using adapted lenses when I travel by air.    Manual Focus has become more enjoyable with MILC focus aids.   The weight of the MILC bodies keeps increasing.  The weight of my Df (and dead D750) are not that far off the a7iii and Z6.   I do not travel by air with the D500 and never took the D3S on a flight.   There are things I really like about shooting a MILC (for certain shooting) and things I like about DSLRs for other types of shooting.
Tom
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Akira on September 07, 2019, 10:33:15
Tom, I enjoyed shooting with D750 and thought it was the best balanced DSLR I had ever used or handled.  The AF-S 50/1.8 was a humble little gem in my opinion.  I'm still occasionally tempted to go back to the combo.

Although I enjoy my current combo (X-E3 with its genuine grip and Zeiss Touit 1.8/32), I hadn't abandoned the possibility to go back to Nikon by switching to Z series.  However, the size and weight of what are supposed to be "humble little" Z lenses 50/1.8 and 35/1.8 virtually shit the door.  Z6 and Z 50/1.8 combo is heavier than D750 and AF-S 50/1.8!  (Although the difference is only 65g, and the lens is optically superior.)
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: MILLIREHM on September 07, 2019, 15:35:37
Missed chances, that photographers who want to have lightweight compact equipment will enter the Z-system in the mid-term future although the Z bodies itself are compact and lightweight despite these customers might be crucial for its success. So far its just speculative that the S-line might be accompanied by a C-line.

Of course those people wont buy a fast FL lens like the 120-300 mm as well
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: longzoom on September 07, 2019, 16:39:55
IBIS only, so far, is a most powerful driving motive for some, including me.  Unnecessary FT for native Nikkors are very important, too. That's why all of my D-bodies are gone. All of them. But it is my situation only. Everyone's way should vary.  LZ   
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on September 10, 2019, 16:37:28
So far its just speculative that the S-line might be accompanied by a C-line.

Nikon have stated in the launch events of the Z system that there will be other lines that will be less expensive (than the premium S-line) and this has been quoted by reputable web sites (I was not there). It's not speculation when it is coming from Nikon, it speaks of their intention. They have also said that  the Z6 and Z7 are "high end" and there will be lower priced camera bodies as well.

I think it will happen quite soon, within 1 year. This is because the number of people who want premium optical quality at premium prices are always in the minority, and the viability of a system cannot be based on such a small group of buyers. There will have to be a DX camera in the Z system and accompanying lenses to get a lens and camera kit within $1000. This taps into a huge number of potential buyers.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Frank Fremerey on September 10, 2019, 18:28:14
A fx body with the 70-200 and a dx body with this and I´ll be in theater heaven  :)

yes!!!

and the price is????

H E F T Y

I guess, how far north of a 2.8/300G???
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Frank Fremerey on September 10, 2019, 18:39:42
Presumably that refers to this unconfirmed leak (https://petapixel.com/2019/09/05/leaked-nikon-z-lens-roadmap-shows-10-lenses-planned-for-2020-and-2021/).

EDIT:

It's interesting that the list includes a 35/1.2 and 85/1.2.  I was just thinking about future Z-mount f/1.2 lenses in the last day or so, and was even going to post something here about that.  We've known all along about the upcoming 50/1.2.  I was going to suggest that the 35/1.2 and 85/1.2 are likely, and maybe even a 105/1.2.  That last one would be audacious, but if it's feasible (i.e. cost not totally extravagant) you can imagine the appeal.


yes. the 1.2-S-Line makes my mouth water ...

35, 50, 85 ... these sell the Z6 or Z9 to me ...

PS: where are the 105ers and the Micro-Nikkors???
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Macro_Cosmos on September 10, 2019, 19:27:00
My guess is on super refractive too.

This lens is going to be a really good portrait lens as well. Its placement is sort of odd for wildlife, yes.

I don't think it will render the 200/2 obsolete but depending on how well it performs, the hope of 300/2.8E FL could be too much. Not sure about everyone else, but if I had the budget to get one of the two, there's really no reason for me to get the 300/2.8E. Both lenses will sit on my monopod, why not have the versatility of a zoom? Unless Nikon is able to make the 300/2.8E weigh the same as a 70-200, handholding for long periods isn't going to be an option for me and frankly most people. I did handhold the 300/2.8 AIS for half a day, let's just say it wasn't a good idea... 
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: longzoom on September 10, 2019, 20:34:36
Apparently, there will be no compact Z lenses at least for a few years to come...
   Too bad... Yes, I agree, this mistake could bi crucial... Small/cheap primes of high quality would re-take the market. But, unfortunately, I am not a Nikon's top officer, what is a real surprise for me...
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Frank Fremerey on September 10, 2019, 21:07:00
Apparently, there will be no compact Z lenses at least for a few years to come...

yes, a compact APO 2.8/45 or, let us be bold, a 3.5/50S pancake would be great. Everyone would guess you carry a cheapo compact, but it i a real full frame professional setup underdressed.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: MILLIREHM on September 10, 2019, 23:30:40
Nikon have stated in the launch events of the Z system that there will be other lines that will be less expensive (than the premium S-line) and this has been quoted by reputable web sites (I was not there). It's not speculation when it is coming from Nikon, it speaks of their intention. They have also said that  the Z6 and Z7 are "high end" and there will be lower priced camera bodies as well.

I think it will happen quite soon, within 1 year. This is because the number of people who want premium optical quality at premium prices are always in the minority, and the viability of a system cannot be based on such a small group of buyers. There will have to be a DX camera in the Z system and accompanying lenses to get a lens and camera kit within $1000. This taps into a huge number of potential buyers.
We have got a roadmap not showing anything compact - but some kind of "more of the same". But maybe this roadmap is not for Z but just for S-lines and the release of other more compact series is independent (has its own not yet published roadmap).
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on September 11, 2019, 09:46:49
A 300/2.8 FL can be much lighter than a 120-300/2.8. Canon's 300/2.8 is 2.4kg, whereas Sigma's 120-300/2.8 (though not using fluorite) is about 3.4kg.

Furthermore because a prime can be highly corrected with a smaller number of elements, there would most likely be less flare and ghosting, and a lower t-stop. Also it is typical that the out-of-focus rendering is not as nice in zooms as it is in (non-PF) primes. Autofocus can be faster in a prime because there is more flexibility in making an optical design where the focus group is light weight. Teleconverters typically work better with a prime than a zoom.

I would prefer Nikon to update the 200/2 and 300/2.8 to FL versions and do it sooner than later. But for the moment there is this 120-300/2.8 coming and I do understand that it is better for Nikon to not launch a 300/2.8 prime at the same time so that both lenses get their time in the spotlight.

I don't own the current 300/2.8; I do have the 200/2 II which has similar weight. I typically use it hand held because I need to follow rapid movement. Although I can feel it in my neck after I've used the 200/2 to shoot for a few hours hand-held, I have not had any more severe after-effects from using it. A 120-300/2.8 would most likely require me to use a monopod or tripod as it would be a longer and possibly (but not certainly) a heavier lens. I don't mind the use of a camera support per se, but its use requires some space and a monopod intrinsically frees movement around its axis of rotation but limits movement up/down. I never liked to use a monopod for that reason (I prefer to have the same freedom of movement up and down as left and right). A monopod with gimbal might work well though, but is a larger construction.

For me a 2.4kg 300/2.8 would definitely be much easier to work with from the hand-holdability point of view than a (say) 2.9-3.2 kg 120-300/2.8. Yes, the zoom feature would be invaluable, but in my opinion it doesn't eliminate the need for a prime.

Depending on the cost of the 120-300/2.8 it may still be an option for me, but my preference would have been a prime.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Frank Fremerey on September 11, 2019, 19:24:10
If it is good or better I will sure get one when my construction is finished. I am really interested in the weight/performance relation. After my construction job, the price is a smaller issue ... currently I have to be careful with every penny
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Airy on September 11, 2019, 19:37:57
yes, a compact APO 2.8/45 or, let us be bold, a 3.5/50S pancake would be great. Everyone would guess you carry a cheapo compact, but it i a real full frame professional setup underdressed.

My vote would go to a compact, +/- apo MF 50/2 with close focus ability (1:4). A kind of compromize lens, so probably not marketable.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Akira on September 12, 2019, 02:03:46
My vote would go to a compact, +/- apo MF 50/2 with close focus ability (1:4). A kind of compromize lens, so probably not marketable.

The new Sigma 45/2.8 DG DN can be the closest candidate, if they make a Z-mount version.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Frank Fremerey on September 12, 2019, 09:02:43
And what about Micro-Nikkors?

One if the most useful lenses of all time was the 70-180 mm Micro-Nikkor. Nikon: Just do it. Or a MF 105 APO Micro that beats the Lantars and Otusses. Nikon can do it, if they want, look at the older AMED Series for the Large Format.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Macro_Cosmos on September 12, 2019, 09:55:20
I would like to see the PC-E lenses updated, at least with better mechanics. Canon updated their entire line of tilt-shift lenses a while ago with the addition of a 135mm, Nikon haven't updated any since I don't know when. All they did was add a very pricey (and good) 19mm. I like the 24 since it does 1:2.4ish close focus, but the mechanics can be way better. The tiny knobs and latches are frustrating to work on, not being able to tilt and shift on the same axis without modification is also a bummer.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on September 12, 2019, 10:32:01
The 24 PC's shift locking mechanism could definitely use a remake. There is however no such issue on the 45mm or 85mm. While more liberal movements are beneficial, the cost also seems to go up. I would be happy to see improvements in the PC-E lineup, of course, as well as a 135mm.  In fact any new Nikon 135mm, AF-S 135/2.8, AF-S 135/2.0, AF-S 135/4, PC 135/4, etc. it would show that Nikon recognize that that focal length exists.  ;)
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: MILLIREHM on September 12, 2019, 21:04:20
And what about Micro-Nikkors?

One if the most useful lenses of all time was the 70-180 mm Micro-Nikkor. Nikon: Just do it. Or a MF 105 APO Micro that beats the Lantars and Otusses. Nikon can do it, if they want, look at the older AMED Series for the Large Format.

I second that. Nikon sucks when it comes to new glass for Macro capability. The 60mm is good, the 105mmVR ambiguous, nothing longer in AF-S (no 180/200mm, no zoom ...) no attempt to go in the Voigltänder, Zeiss league (though nikon is indeed capable of and would support both it image as well as its sellings). Nothing like the Canon 65 mm that goes way beyond 1:1. That was the F-System
The Nikon 1 -nothing
The Nikon Z- Zero macro (Canon RF offers the  35 mm)

Missed chances
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Macro_Cosmos on September 13, 2019, 12:59:32
The 24 PC's shift locking mechanism could definitely use a remake. There is however no such issue on the 45mm or 85mm. While more liberal movements are beneficial, the cost also seems to go up. I would be happy to see improvements in the PC-E lineup, of course, as well as a 135mm.  In fact any new Nikon 135mm, AF-S 135/2.8, AF-S 135/2.0, AF-S 135/4, PC 135/4, etc. it would show that Nikon recognize that that focal length exists.  ;)

You're right, yes the 45 and 85 doesn't have the problems that exist on the 24. That (likely fake) Z "leaked roadmap" did show a 135mm/1.8 S lens. I'm 80% sure that roadmap is fake though.
I wouldn't really fancy a 135/4 PC-Micro-Nikkor unless is goes to 1:1 and it's able to beat the printing-nikkor 105mm at 1:1. But then, it will likely cost a lot and become a one-trick-pony, as I don't do any portrait stuff. It's definitely too long for food (for me) while travelling, don't want to grab too much weird stares when I snap a food pic.

The 19mm PC-Nikkor however has superior mechanical control compared to both the 45 and 85. I sold my 85mm due to the annoying LoCA and somewhat quirky FL. I like to take photos of food and landscapes when I'm out wandering, I like close-ups as well. The 24 while being great for landscapes and close-ups, it's too wide for food.
Downward tilt, bit too wide.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48590772927_629eb66247_h.jpg)

I am actually considering the last "latest" PC-E Nikkor I've yet to own, the 45mm. It should be wide enough for landscapes, it's marked as a micro-nikkor, and 45 FL should be great for food. I'm not sure if it has the same LOCA issues found on the 85 however, hopefully not! 
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: chambeshi on March 04, 2020, 13:40:15
Here is more information, including MTFs for Wide / Tele. The SR element is distinctly slim - appended images

https://www.nikon-image.com/products/nikkor/fmount/af-s_nikkor_120-300mm_f28e_fl_ed_sr_vr/spec.html

https://petapixel.com/2020/01/06/nikon-af-s-120-300mm-f-2-8e-fl-ed-sr-vr-a-versatile-9500-pro-lens/

contrary to orthodoxy, this lens should outperform the venerable 300 f2.8G primes for many wildlife subjects. Teleconverters work really will the "latest" 300 f2.8G, for which Nikon optimized the TC2 III. We can expect the new 120-300 f2.8E to match if not better this performance. See Brad Hill's take wrt shooting large mammals at f2.8 with the ability to zoom out to frame his Animalscapes: 11 Feb 2020: More Thoughts on the AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E  http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html#500mm_wars_1

We read the claim "Numerous considerations for ease of use, condensed into a lightweight mobile body...." Well, this zoom weighs 3.25kg (slightly less than the older tank of the Sigma). It's a pity Nikon did not consider a honeycombed chassis used by Canon and Sony in their lighter telephoto primes. No less serious, is where this Nikkor exotic departs from tradition. It lacks the rear-filter apparatus to use a CPL easily; this exotic takes 112mm filters out of reach deep under the hood?!

according to Nikon [added in edit]:

"The optical system uses one newly developed SR lens in addition to one ED lens and two fluorite lenses. Chromatic aberration has been greatly reduced, and high expression power equivalent to a single focus 300mm lens has been achieved in both resolution and blur throughout the zoom range."

SR lens [NEW]
"A lens that uses Nikon's proprietary special high-dispersion glass, which has the property of refracting light with wavelengths shorter than blue. By controlling light with short wavelengths that are difficult to correct, light of each wavelength can be condensed to a higher degree, enabling highly accurate chromatic aberration correction. In addition, since it can be used in the same way as ordinary optical glass, the degree of freedom in lens configuration is improved, and it contributes to downsizing and weight reduction of the lens while realizing high optical performance."

"Despite being a zoom lens that covers a wide focal length range of 120-300mm, it realizes high image quality that can be satisfied by professionals. Especially at infinity with a focal length of 300mm f / 2.8, it offers higher resolution than a single-focus 300mm lens *. In addition, shooting that makes use of the beautiful bokeh of a single focus lens, such as a sports portrait, is also possible."
*Comparison with AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f / 2.8G ED VR II.2


Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Birna Rørslett on March 04, 2020, 15:02:02
Oh dear. Another highly tempting Nikkor.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on March 05, 2020, 13:17:19
Oh dear. Another highly tempting Nikkor.

Perhaps a review would be possible to evaluate those temptations? ;-)

I think it's amazing that they are able to make a zoom that has higher MTF at 300mm f/2.8 than the 300/2.8 VR II which in itself is at the top of the list for image quality among lenses of its kind (according to tests such as lenscore and dxomark). It's understandable that the zoom is heavier given the 25 elements and zoom mechanism. The front also seems to be packed with some large lens elements. I imagine the weight reduction from a barrel structure and material redesign would be relatively small given the large volume of optical elements in the lens. In a 400/2.8 or 600/4, if there is only one large front element, the barrel weight must be a significant part of the whole.

However, as the new zoom lens is 9000+ EUR it requires some commitment of funds to purchase. I would personally prefer a 300mm f/2.8 E FL SR VR prime at a lower price point, shorter physical length and lighter weight. I currently mainly use the 200/2 II for sports and 500/5.6 PF for wildlife. A 120-300/2.8 would be great to have but I believe it would be more difficult to handle than the 200/2 (which is much shorter, though front heavy). I hope to have a chance to try the zoom out some time to see if it would be possible to hand hold it. I never really got used to monopods and either use a tripod or hand hold, most of the time. I guess if I were to purchase the 120-300, I would need to use a monopod.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: chambeshi on May 15, 2020, 12:39:41
LensRentals dissection and testing - confirms this an impressive optic - not least, confirming: "First, like every law, Roger’s Law that Zooms Are Never as Good as Primes has at least one very expensive exception. At one of its focal lengths. This zoom is ‘prime good’ at 300mm." ie compared against the 300mm f2.8G VRII

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2020/05/a-peak-inside-the-af-s-nikkor-120-300mm-f2-8-fl-ed-sr-vr/
"The lens is well built in the old, classic Nikon F way. Obviously, we don’t think that’s pretty, and it’s not fun to work on. But it’s been an effective method of manufacturing for decades. The moving parts are solid, the chassis and assembly are solid, the weather resistance is as good as anything, maybe better."

MTF testing of a single copy against Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 at 300mm: "...the Nikkor is significantly better than the Sigma. The Sigma, BTW, is a really good lens, so the Nikkor is just awesome...the Nikkor is significantly better than the Sigma. The Sigma, BTW, is a really good lens, so the Nikkor is just awesome...Again, I want to remind you this is just one lens. Whether other copies will behave this way, I have no clue yet. This one is great at 300mm, not so great at 200mm, and really good at 120mm, although not quite as good as at 300mm."

compare LR tests to Nikon's MTF curves: - https://www.nikon-image.com/products/nikkor/fmount/af-s_nikkor_120-300mm_f28e_fl_ed_sr_vr/spec.html

Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Frank Fremerey on May 15, 2020, 14:52:10
You're right, yes the 45 and 85 doesn't have the problems that exist on the 24. That (likely fake) Z "leaked roadmap" did show a 135mm/1.8 S lens. I'm 80% sure that roadmap is fake though.
I wouldn't really fancy a 135/4 PC-Micro-Nikkor unless is goes to 1:1 and it's able to beat the printing-nikkor 105mm at 1:1. But then, it will likely cost a lot and become a one-trick-pony, as I don't do any portrait stuff. It's definitely too long for food (for me) while travelling, don't want to grab too much weird stares when I snap a food pic.

The 19mm PC-Nikkor however has superior mechanical control compared to both the 45 and 85. I sold my 85mm due to the annoying LoCA and somewhat quirky FL. I like to take photos of food and landscapes when I'm out wandering, I like close-ups as well. The 24 while being great for landscapes and close-ups, it's too wide for food.
Downward tilt, bit too wide.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48590772927_629eb66247_h.jpg)

I am actually considering the last "latest" PC-E Nikkor I've yet to own, the 45mm. It should be wide enough for landscapes, it's marked as a micro-nikkor, and 45 FL should be great for food. I'm not sure if it has the same LOCA issues found on the 85 however, hopefully not! 

great POP in this food shot. I would even contemplate to eat the pizza ... hahaha!!!
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Erik Lund on May 15, 2020, 14:56:06
Wow, that is one fine lens! and yes agree, funny old school Nikon design for a new zoom ;)
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: chambeshi on July 22, 2020, 15:54:42
Many of us, including me, will not be buying this lens. However it is interesting to read these recent field tests by Brad Hill. They testify to the excellence achieved by the Nikon engineers with their top end optics (including QC etc), and optimizing image quality with teleconverters. These are comparisons include top quality primes using TC14 III:

scroll down to 20 July: http://www.naturalart.ca/artist/fieldtests/fieldtest_Nikkor_120-300.html#120-300_Wrap-up

short summary: " The Nikkor 120-300 f2.8E is EXCELLENT when shot with the TC-14EIII at 420mm: While I anticipated good optical performance of the Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E/TC-14EIII combination, I did not expect it to be THIS good! At 420mm it outpaced both the Nikkor 300mm f2.8G VRII plus TC-14EIII (a combination many owners of the 300mm f2.8G swear by) and the Nikkor 180-400mm f4E with its built-in TC engaged. And, at 400mm it tied Nikkor 180-400mm f4E (shot without its TC engaged) in optical performance...which is really quite remarkable."

Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: MILLIREHM on July 22, 2020, 22:24:18
Thanks for the link and the summary
short summary: " The Nikkor 120-300 f2.8E is EXCELLENT when shot with the TC-14EIII at 420mm: While I anticipated good optical performance of the Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E/TC-14EIII combination, I did not expect it to be THIS good! At 420mm it outpaced both the Nikkor 300mm f2.8G VRII plus TC-14EIII (a combination many owners of the 300mm f2.8G swear by) and the Nikkor 180-400mm f4E with its built-in TC engaged. And, at 400mm it tied Nikkor 180-400mm f4E (shot without its TC engaged) in optical performance...which is really quite remarkable."

It seems no wonder that  If the 120-300 mm is better than the 300 mm prime it is better with TC-14EIII as well. That it was able to outpace the 180-400 (I am considering to aquire) even without TC is indeed remarkable. Seems that the 180-400 needs an SR-update (which is not likely to come at all).
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Roland Vink on July 22, 2020, 23:33:16
Thanks for the link and the summary
It seems no wonder that  If the 120-300 mm is better than the 300 mm prime it is better with TC-14EIII as well. That it was able to outpace the 180-400 (I am considering to aquire) even without TC is indeed remarkable. Seems that the 180-400 needs an SR-update (which is not likely to come at all).
The 180-400 was only outpaced when the inbuilt TC was engaged to increase the reach to 420mm (in other words, zoomed to 300mm with 1.4x TC in place). Probably not a fair comparison. At 400mm without the TC the 180-400 the performance is equivalent. Brad Hill also rates the 180-400 extremely highly. In his blog http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html he writes:

I can honestly say that from an optical perspective the 180-400 is one of the most "solid" lenses I have ever owned - at every aperture, every focal length (including those accessed only by engaging the built-in 1.4x teleconverter), and at all camera-to-subject distances, this lens delivers stunning edge-to-edge sharpness. And note that when I say that optically it is "...one of the most "solid" lenses I have ever owned"

If the 180-400 focal length suits you better than 120-300, I don't think you need to hesitate about the quality.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on July 23, 2020, 09:42:41
If the 180-400 focal length suits you better than 120-300, I don't think you need to hesitate about the quality.

I also think so. Moose Peterson had some aviation images and other examples made with the 180-400 in his review in the Nikon Owner magazine and I was very impressed with the quality of the printed images. 
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: MILLIREHM on July 23, 2020, 10:12:39

If the 180-400 focal length suits you better than 120-300, I don't think you need to hesitate about the quality.

You are perfectly right. The 180-400s image quality appears to be superb so  the quality differences are of no practical relevance. (I'd like to have them both ;-) ). With a more practical approach the range of the 180-400 mm suits my needs better, and the built in TC gives more versatility for fast switches. Still considering wether it is promising enough to upgrade from my 200-400, and would need to get together the money.
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: chambeshi on July 23, 2020, 11:10:18
There are quite a few options to get to 400mm and/or 600mm in the Nikon system. Cost is the big filter, but these two new tele-zooms open up choices even among the "exotics"

Brad Hill has just added his tests using TC2E III on the 120-300 f2.8E SR.  As expected, the image sharpness is penalized but mainly at closer distances. However, it is most impressive for a zoom+teleconverter to read: "In my experience the prime super-telephoto that pairs up best with the TC-20EIII is the Nikkor 400mm f2.8 (both G and E versions). I believe the Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E pairs up just as well with the TC-20EIII - which is nothing short of amazing."

http://www.naturalart.ca/artist/fieldtests/fieldtest_Nikkor_120-300.html#120-300_2xTeleconverter
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: MFloyd on July 23, 2020, 16:55:01
Wonderful lens. But the 120-300 range is not very suitable for my sport activity. For indoor sport should be just the right choice. In mid 2019 I tried to purchase the 180-400 TC, but unavailable. I replaced this with the “poor man’s version” i.e. the 70-200E FL mm with TC 2.0, together with the 500mm f/5.6E PF; which makes a flexible combo, being still lighter and cheaper.

But despite the foregoing, I will ask if I can borrow one from NPS for a fortnight. You never know.  ;)
Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: MILLIREHM on July 23, 2020, 20:08:22
Brad Hill has just added his tests using TC2E III on the 120-300 f2.8E SR.  As expected, the image sharpness is penalized but mainly at closer distances. However, it is most impressive for a zoom+teleconverter to read: "In my experience the prime super-telephoto that pairs up best with the TC-20EIII is the Nikkor 400mm f2.8 (both G and E versions). I believe the Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E pairs up just as well with the TC-20EIII - which is nothing short of amazing."

I can confirm that the TC20EIII is surprisingly good combined with the 400/2,8 E (different to a lot of other superteles). I wonder how closethe 120-300 mm is to the 400/2,8 IQ wise.

Title: Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
Post by: golunvolo on July 24, 2020, 01:09:53
Wonderful lens. But the 120-300 range is not very suitable for my sport activity. For indoor sport should be just the right choice. In mid 2019 I tried to purchase the 180-400 TC, but unavailable. I replaced this with the “poor man’s version” i.e. the 70-200E FL mm with TC 2.0, together with the 500mm f/5.6E PF; which makes a flexible combo, being still lighter and cheaper.

But despite the foregoing, I will ask if I can borrow one from NPS for a fortnight. You never know.  ;)
Indeed, it will be an excellent choice for stage too. I'm thinking a ff and dx bodies, with 70 200 and 100-300.Ahhh...will see