Author Topic: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.  (Read 13187 times)

Birna Rørslett

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 2448
  • A lesser fierce bear of the North
Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
« Reply #45 on: March 04, 2020, 15:02:02 »
Oh dear. Another highly tempting Nikkor.

Ilkka Nissilä

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1215
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR Lens announced, with the D6.
« Reply #46 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.

chambeshi

  • Woody
  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 619
  • Woody
    • Chambeshi Photography FCotterill Photographic Explorations
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

#chambeshiphoto
D850, Z7, 20 f4 AI 28 f2.8AIS 45 f2.8AIP 55mm 2.8AIS+60 f2.8G Micro 58 f1.4G, 85 f1.4D, 400 f2.8E VRII 300 f4E PF 500 f5.6E PF, 70-180 Micro f4-5.6D 70-200 f2.8E FL, Zeiss Distagons -15 f2.8, 21 f2.8

Frank Fremerey

  • engineering art
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 11581
  • Bonn, Germany
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.


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!!!
You are out there. You and your camera. You can shoot or not shoot as you please. Discover the world, Your world. Show it to us. Or we might never see it.

Me: https://youpic.com/photographer/frankfremerey/

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 5389
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
Wow, that is one fine lens! and yes agree, funny old school Nikon design for a new zoom ;)
Erik Lund