Author Topic: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR  (Read 31598 times)

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 6529
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #30 on: October 19, 2016, 14:12:23 »
Erik Lund

longzoom

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 769
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #31 on: October 19, 2016, 14:23:20 »
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 

BW

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 864
  • You ARE NikonGear
    • Børge Wahl-Photography
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #32 on: October 19, 2016, 16:07:00 »
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 ;)

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 6529
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #33 on: October 19, 2016, 18:42:26 »
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)
Erik Lund

BW

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 864
  • You ARE NikonGear
    • Børge Wahl-Photography
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #34 on: October 19, 2016, 19:35:33 »
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 :)

JBPhoto

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #35 on: October 19, 2016, 21:00:12 »
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.

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 6529
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #36 on: October 19, 2016, 21:12:53 »
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!
Erik Lund

Roland Vink

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1535
  • Nikon Nerd from New Zealand
    • Nikon Database
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #37 on: October 20, 2016, 01:01:06 »
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.

MFloyd

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1800
  • My quest for the "perfect" speed blur
    • Adobe Portfolio
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #38 on: October 20, 2016, 01:42:58 »
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.
Γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Akira

  • Homo jezoensis
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 12807
  • Tokyo, Japan
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #39 on: October 20, 2016, 04:00:26 »
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.
"The eye is blind if the mind is absent." - Confucius

"Limitation is inspiration." - Akira

benveniste

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 86
  • I think, therefore I am. I think.
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #40 on: October 20, 2016, 05:18:39 »
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.

Akira

  • Homo jezoensis
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 12807
  • Tokyo, Japan
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #41 on: October 20, 2016, 05:49:55 »
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?
"The eye is blind if the mind is absent." - Confucius

"Limitation is inspiration." - Akira

pluton

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 2679
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #42 on: October 20, 2016, 06:15:43 »
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.
Keith B., Santa Monica, CA, USA

Akira

  • Homo jezoensis
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 12807
  • Tokyo, Japan
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #43 on: October 20, 2016, 06:45:07 »
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?
"The eye is blind if the mind is absent." - Confucius

"Limitation is inspiration." - Akira

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 6529
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
Re: 70-200mm AFS f/2.8 E FL ED VR
« Reply #44 on: October 20, 2016, 11:13:54 »
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
Erik Lund