DocsPics wrote:
Internal Focusing
Employed in order to maintain an overall compact lens form-factor and to produce overall faster performance. The lens will not change in size during AF operation,
(From B&H description)
That is Nikon's description of IF from their own "feature list."
Actually, I just looked up the 70-300 which extends quite a lot during zooming and it, too, is described as an IF lens. Given the overall compact dimensions of the 80-400, I'm guessing it will extend during zooming just like its predecessor.
I'm sure it's great, I'll play with one, but damn the price is a little out there, I'll pass for now. Keep usin' my sigma 120-300 OS naked or with a 1.4x or 2x tc...I'm doubtful it'll be better than the sig with the 1.4x at 5.6...but of course the Nikkor will be a helluva lot lighter that's for sure. And weight is a huge deal. Still, the price is so high though that if I need a lighter smaller tele at this point I think I'd get the 70-200 f4 or one of the 70-300's or maybe 50-500 OS again...heh...
I'm optimistic about this lens though for the future. Knowing how Nikon has been lately, I bet within a year this lens will be available for just under 2k. And at that point, I bet it'll sell like hotcakes.
I may rent the current version and compare the 400mm end to my 400/5.6 ED AI, 70-200/2.8 VRII + TC20EIII and 70-200/4 + TC20EIII just to get a feel for the range of lenses currently available.
Andre Labonte wrote:
I think one of the more interesting aspects is that it takes TCs.
I agree. I mean, it's all well and good to have giant glass when it's available and convenient, but so many of my trips are not based solely around photography and I really need to carry a more convenient package.
So while a slightly optically compromised 600mm f/8 might not be the most awesome glass in the world, it's going to be better than the 70-300mm, which is the other lens I have room for.
VinnieJ wrote:
Very impressive. I'm still trying to figure out if it has focus breathing issues based on.....
Minimum Angle of View (FX-format)
6°10'
Maximum Reproduction Ratio
0.2x
Effective focal length at close focus is about 300mm based on the reproduction ratio (1/5) and minimum focus distance (1.75m). Personally I find the 0.2x more important than the effective focal length.
That is great. But personally, I would have prefered a 400/4 vr. Well maybe when the 400/2.8 Vr becomes to heavy and big for me,---it may be soon---Nikon may have the smaller one!
JRT64 wrote:
Collar looks the same. Likely to be a weak point. You'll probably want to spring for an aftermarket collar, bringing the total price close to $3k.
I suspect the OEM tripod collar is going to be just fine. You're right about the $3k though, because the collar is not included with the lens.
Elan II wrote:
I suspect the OEM tripod collar is going to be just fine. You're right about the $3k though, because the collar is not included with the lens.
Where did you see this?
edit: nevermind, I see - you must be going by the "included accessories" on B&H. Interesting - honestly, that will irk me if it's true. That's a big dollar lens to not include the collar. I understood the 70-200 f/4 because they were hitting a price point well under their f/2.8 version. This lens is adding nearly $1k worth of cost AND removing the collar, though, on a 400mm lens... Guess we'll find out.
Thanks for the heads up, Fred! Wow.... I've been wanting and waiting for this lens for so long that it's hard to believe that it's finally happened. Of course, the price is rather out of line, as expected, at about $1k more than they are selling the current version, which is way overpriced.... But, a pleasant surprise is that it comes with the tripod collar. I'd not have been surprised to see them sell it separately, as they do with the 70-200 f/4. So, this price isn't hugely out of line.
Unfortunately, I really needed this lens 3 or 4 years ago. Today, not so much, especially without a d400. So, I'll probably not be buying this lens for a while. Maybe next year, after the d400 comes out.
Don't get me wrong. I'm very happy that they have finally produced this lens. At first blush, it looks very good and I'm sure that it will make a lot of folks happy. At least I hope that it will. I really hope that the AF-S motor allows for very fast AF on most any body and that the VR really works well at 400mm. If so, it will be a real boon to the amateur wildlife crowd.
So, Kudos to Nikon. Better late than never, I guess.
Not sure about the confusion on whether the tripod collar is included. On B&H, it clearly states that it is included, in the specifications section. On Nikon USA, also in the specifications section, it is also mentioned in the Weight section, where is says 56 oz, including tripod collar.
Neither site mentions that the collar is a separate accessory, so it seems to me that it is included.
