The Nikkor 500/4 FL VR & 600/4 FL E VR are coming. Plus 16-80/2.8-4 E

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I agree that it's more important for new cameras to support old lenses than for (very) old cameras to support new lenses, but I would still like to see at least one 35mm film camera support all the new lenses fully. I would not buy it for my use (my archive of film based images that are still not digitized is already too great to consider shooting more film) but I think there is something to the magic of working in the film darkroom that I would like to be preserved for future generations. Probably the traditional darkroom is better employed in medium format though. Anyway this is not a big issue.

I love the Df concept and would like to see this product line continued. There are some minor issues that I have with the first model which put me off purchasing it for now. I don't know if I'm sending the right signal to Nikon "I want it but with these changes ..." ;-) 1. Battery type should be the same as in the D750, D8x0 family and D7x00 family. 2. Optional user-installable and officially supported focusing screens with calibration service at Nikon authorized service centers. 3. If possible Advanced Multi-CAM 3500FX II. With at least two out of these three improvements, I would buy the camera and probably feel deep satisfaction inside when using it. 

I generally think the E aperture control is nice and the way to go but with careful consideration of if some additional camera bodies could be made to support these lenses. I am not entirely convinced that the E aperture works better though. I have had one lens problem with the original VR 70-200/2.8G where the aperture mechanism got stuck in the cold and would stay wide open during exposures. This was solved by service, I think some dirt inside the mechanism must have been the cause. However, now that I'm using my 300/4E I have run into a problem with the TC-14E III of individual exposures overexposed by several stops, this I have never seen before in the Nikon system (apart from that one case with the stuck aperture in the 70-200 I just mentioned). I don't know what is going on with it I should probably send my files to Nikon for investigation. It was a situation where I had just installed the TC and decided to stop down the aperture a bit and the first exposure was greatly overexposed. After that the frames seemed normally exposed. Perhaps there was a contact problem, or firmware glitch. I will do more shooting and investigation if I can repeat the problem and find the cause of the problem. When using the lens without TC I haven't seen any exposure issues with the 300/4E.

[Akira]

...and they are already on Nikon's official website!

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/index.htm

[Akira]

All new lenses are due on July 16th in Japan.

The 16-80 "kit" zoom is also fluorine coated.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I will do more shooting and investigation if I can repeat the problem and find the cause of the problem.

It seems to be possibly related to some kind of malfunction of the camera's Auto ISO function. The shutter speed in the overexposed shot is slower than the allowed range (1/320s instead of 1/500s as specified in the auto ISO settings) yet the ISO selected by the camera is 1-2 stops higher than in the other images of the set. It is peculiar. The large ISO setting and long exposure time recorded in the EXIF explain the overexposure, so I have no need to blame it on the E diaphragm control system. But still I have no explanation as to why the camera didn't obey the instructions given by the user and why the realized exposure fluctuated by such a degree.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Hm. Bracketing unintentionally engaged? Has happened to all of us, yours truly inclusive.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Since I now, at last, got my own 300 PF, I went outside and shot sequences with the TC nearest at hand which happened to be TC 1.7E.Mk2. Exposure spot on, VR worked, AF a little slower but acceptable if not pushed into action or sports photography (done on a Df). 

[Asle F]

With digital SLRs all the recent cameras support E lenses and the old ones (i.e. D2 generation, D70) are losing their interestingness due to the rapid improvement in image quality that has occurred.

I have a D200, and the image quality of that one is good enough for me. When looking around on my walls, I see most picture made by even older cameras. D200 is not my primary camera, it has never been, but it is in unregular usage.  The 16-80mm could be of interest for me if I could use it on D200. Because of the 'E', and no other reason, it is not. The lens with this size and f/2.8-4 is what I have missed in the DX-linup. 300mm/4 is as made for usage on my D200, but the newest 300mm/4, the one with 'E' in the letters soup is not because the 'E'.

But this has happened before. The first G-lenses actually came before the last camera (FM3A) that do not support G-lenses was introduced. But then it was the cheapest lenses that was meant to be sold with new cameras that got the 'G' first.

When the 'E' is here, I want to see a lens made for usage on bellows and/or reversed, and an adapter like the one Novoflex has made for use with Canon EOS http://www.novoflex.com/en/products/macro-accessories/reverse-adapter-eos-retro/

[Bjørn Rørslett]

That kind of adapter surely is possible to produce, but likely going to be neither small nor cheap. It has to provide power to the lens, plus act as an intermediary in the communication link camera <> lens.

It is worth keeping in mind that digital photography, despite the enormous advances of the last decade, still is in its infancy. So it follows that obsolence occurs quite rapidly. Sometimes the old cameras can be funny to use, and I still on occasion shoot with my Fuji S3 Pro (UV/IR Limited Edition) that by now is  approx. 10 years old.

[ColinM]

Apart from the possible implications of the "E" design, good news that

• Early adopters will have some new (and hopefully improved) toys to play with
• The supply of used lenses in this specialised end of the focal length range will increase as older models then become available

Ahhhh, something for everyone

[Roland Vink]

I added the three new lenses to my database and refreshed my website just now so you can make simple comparisons with the new and old lenses. Please let me know if you find any errors, or have access to better pictures (600 x 800 or 750 x 1000 size is good)

One thing which struck me while entering the specifications, the new telephotos focus closer than previous VR models, but the magnification at close range is the same or only barely improved. That means they have more focal length shortening at close range (focus breathing). Also, previous models allowed manual focus to nearer distance than with AF. That distinction is not mentioned with the new models which implies they AF all the way to the close limit. For birders who want to photograph small birds at close range, that is mixed news - you have to get even closer to your subject to gain the same magnification, but AF is available at the near limit.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

You can upload the product  images I provided, Roland. They should be big enough for your purpose.

I did notice the change in near limit too, but it remains to be seen how important those changes are in field use. I'll get at least the 500 FL E in about 4 weeks' time so will try this in depth.

[Roland Vink]

The pictures you uploaded are about twice as big as those I usually use. I guess there is no harm in that but I try to maintain some consistency with the product shots.

A question: When specifying maximum magnification, Nikon used to express it as a ratio "1:6.6", now they use a number like "0.15x". Which do you prefer? I like the older style as it's easier for me to understand.

[Erik Lund]

The pictures you uploaded are about twice as big as those I usually use. I guess there is no harm in that but I try to maintain some consistency with the product shots.

A question: When specifying maximum magnification, Nikon used to express it as a ratio "1:6.6", now they use a number like "0.15x". Which do you prefer? I like the older style as it's easier for me to understand.

Thank you for keeping the pages updated Roland!
I agree with keeping constancy also in image size for the product images!
If you have room maybe add an extra column for maximum magnification so we have both  "1:6.6" and "0.15x".

[Roland Vink]

Thanks. No problem to add the new lenses, but  it is hard to keep up with the serial numbers (especially kit zooms which are churned out so quickly)

I prefer not to display both ways of measuring magnification, don't like to have redundant information unless there is a very good reason. I'll stick with "1:6.6" format since that was used for all lenses until a few years ago. It's easier for me to understand too: image is about 1/6th life size. I can convert the current measure easily enough

[PedroS]

OK decision made... 

Selling my 600VR, in perfect condition

By the way, where can we put our sales?