p.8 #1 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
- versatility
- range coverage.
- perspective
- i have its lesser cousin from sigma.
using a single focal length as long as you are in its limits is great if everything stays within a range. back when i shot ultimate frisbee and a few other high energy sports it made a difference between getting and not getting a shot. yes the lens has weight. i worked off a MP or a gimbal depending on a number of factors. its a matter of perspective
May 18, 2020 at 06:07 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.8 #2 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
ilkka_nissila wrote:
While heavy, the Nikon 120-300 is lighter weight than Sigma's 120-300/2.8 Sport and higher MTF as well. I don't see how it can be criticised as "heavy for what it is" since a lighter-weight and better-performing lens of its type has not been made by anyone yet. Heavy? Yes. Heavy for what it is? No.
For many sports photographers it can replace the combination of 70-200/2.8 and 300/2.8 with one lens, reducing missed shots (while switching between lenses or cameras and lenses) and bag weight. Sports events where I go to typically last around six hours (figure skating), and I can't recall ever having seen anyone hand-hold a 300/2.8 at those events. Thus the slight increase in weight in use on the monopod is likely a small issue compared to the saved weight in the bag, and the additional shots that the photographer can provide by having the 200-300mm range covered and not having to swap lenses in the heat of the action.
However, now there are no sports events, and that'll certainly hold back sales of this lens. It will be interesting to see what happens as the sports season in the fall opens, whether they will have an audience, and what kind of surges in the epidemic may result if they do....Show more →
Another interesting aspects of sports seasons opening when they do is whether there will be fans at the events. Photography might be more important and likely will be quite different if sports occur for some time without fans.
p.8 #6 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
Lensrentals test lenses at infinity focus and wide open only, but they often also include multiple samples. Imatest-based testing sites test at a shorter distance and typically provide results for multiple apertures. Both long and short distance image quality are important and may not follow from each other.
Looking at lensrentals graphs, the Sigma appears almost as sharp in the frame center but the Nikkor maintains higher sharpness better outside of the very center. With the Sigma, the sharpness falls off rapidly when leaving the very center of the frame at 300mm. The 300/2.8 VR II Nikkor appears to be better in the outer areas than the new Nikon zoom but not quite as good in the center.
Real-world comparisons of the AF performance should be interesting to see as Nikon have improved the SWM in many newer lenses.
p.8 #8 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
as far as the weights go he does include the hoods in said weight. those of us who have the Sigma know that the hood is not made from CF. it is instead made from metal alloy and polymer and weighs in at 9.9oz by itself. and in my case has taken many a hit from various sources w/o showing. replacement price $120us
his statement on the nikon hood is interestingly amusing:
• Lens Hood? Carbon fiber - and called a HK-41. Interestingly, it's the same hood as on the 180-400mm f4E. Nice and light, but super-expensive to replace if you break one (listed on the Nikon Canada website for a cool $829.95 CAD)*.
*priced at approx $579us at the popular outlets down south here. couldn't find the weight though.
p.8 #9 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
So Nikon puts in two Fluorite elements and the new SR element that Nikon claims: "It also allows for more flexible optical designs, which allows for compact, lighter lenses to be designed." And yet this lens weighs more than the 300/2.8VRII
You'd think in 2020 they could have shed some weight on this thing despite making it a zoom vs a prime.
p.8 #11 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
arbitrage wrote:
So Nikon puts in two Fluorite elements and the new SR element that Nikon claims: "It also allows for more flexible optical designs, which allows for compact, lighter lenses to be designed." And yet this lens weighs more than the 300/2.8VRII
I don't understand the complaint. Without question the FL elements allow a lighter-weight design (and one that is less front-heavy) than similar quality lens of similar specifications would have using e.g. ED and Super ED elements. Since the Sigma's MTF falls of immediately when one looks outside of the very center of the frame, it cannot be considered of comparable quality as the Nikkor. A better quality lens that is slightly lighter was achieved by Nikon.
You'd think in 2020 they could have shed some weight on this thing despite making it a zoom vs a prime.
They did, compared to lenses of similar quality and specifications.
Nikon's other high-quality long telezoom (180-400/4 at 3500g) is also slightly lighter than Canon's 200-400/4 (3620g). So both of Nikon's professional supertele zooms are lighter than the competition's offerings.
It is normal that high-quality zooms are substantially heavier than primes of the same maximum aperture and maximum focal length. The primes can be made lighter because they typically need far fewer elements and the zoom mechanism is not implemented.
p.8 #12 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
and it took them what 10 years and added $6500 to the cost. the sigma is a more then competent lens if i shot everything according to the MTF almost nothing would look good.
p.8 #13 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
ilkka_nissila wrote:
I don't understand the complaint. Without question the FL elements allow a lighter-weight design (and one that is less front-heavy) than similar quality lens of similar specifications would have using e.g. ED and Super ED elements. Since the Sigma's MTF falls of immediately when one looks outside of the very center of the frame, it cannot be considered of comparable quality as the Nikkor. A better quality lens that is slightly lighter was achieved by Nikon.
They did, compared to lenses of similar quality and specifications.
Nikon's other high-quality long telezoom (180-400/4 at 3500g) is also slightly lighter than Canon's 200-400/4 (3620g). So both of Nikon's professional supertele zooms are lighter than the competition's offerings.
It is normal that high-quality zooms are substantially heavier than primes of the same maximum aperture and maximum focal length. The primes can be made lighter because they typically need far fewer elements and the zoom mechanism is not implemented....Show more →
The thing is a brick. I can buy a 600 f/4 or 400/2.8 prime that is lighter than this thing. Nikon seems to be stuck back in 2012....you are saying that by shaving off 180gm (which is probably mostly the difference in the hoods) for a 2020 lens vs something Sigma did without fluorite, without SR and without 8 years of advancements in lens design is some sort of achievement?
And I have no complaints with the weight of the 180-400 so that is irrelevant. I'm happy Nikon shaved off 120g with a lens that is 5 years newer....WOW
p.8 #14 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
I think Nikon would have been smarter to have released a super-light (if not compact) fixed 300mm f2.8 rather than the still-heavy-zoom. Sans their 300PF and 500PF, I'm wondering if Nikon recognizes that LIGHT WEIGHT has become THE defining attribute of the next generation of superteles. Maybe sports pros don't need that or care as much, but the not-insignificant enthusiast market certainly does.
p.8 #15 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
Gary Irwin wrote:
I think Nikon would have been smarter to have released a super-light (if not compact) fixed 300mm f2.8 rather than the still-heavy-zoom. Sans their 300PF and 500PF, I'm wondering if Nikon recognizes that LIGHT WEIGHT has become THE defining attribute of the next generation of superteles. Maybe sports pros don't need that or care as much, but the not-insignificant enthusiast market certainly does.
Agree fully!
The overwhelming incentive for LIGHTER telephotos is the growing market in Flying Naturalists, and also those who will pay for lighter gear for other reasons, provided it's of excellent optical quality. In not very distant past, pre 2020, the increasing numbers taking up photo tours to desirable destinations packed at least one telephoto.
The 300 f2.8G is popular because it's (1) relatively affordable (especially Used) (2) works well with teleconverters, and it is the exotic many of us can handhold, especially in vehicles/hides. It is often the first Exotic owned by the emerging wildlife photographer, even if they already own a 200-500 f5.6E or a Sigma supertele zoom. The 300 f2.8 is distinctly end-heavy and a FL upgrade will be better balanced, besides slimmed down close to 2.5kg: thus similar to the 200-500 f5.6 Nikkor (which many can handhold).
The other new reality Nikon cannot afford to ignore is the latest primes by Canon and Sony. Their respective 400 f2.8 and 600 f4 are significantly lighter. The lighter honeycombed chassis as well fluorite combine to slim down these exotics. These innovations really show up the obsolescence of Nikon's thinking that the Super Telephoto = sports and used in Olympic class stadia particularly. In this respect, if they had strived to use a lighter chassis for the 120-300 f2.8E SR, it would have weighed < 3kg.
p.8 #16 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
chambeshi wrote:
The other new reality Nikon cannot afford to ignore is the latest primes by Canon and Sony. Their respective 400 f2.8 and 600 f4 are significantly lighter. The lighter honeycombed chassis as well fluorite combine to slim down these exotics. These innovations really show up the obsolescence of Nikon's thinking that the Super Telephoto = sports and used in Olympic class stadia particularly. In this respect, if they had strived to use a lighter chassis for the 120-300 f2.8E SR, it would have weighed < 3kg.
Nikon can do this and do it better. They are arguably the best qualified and equipped company to refine the concept of the Slim Exotic Telephoto. Thus 200 f2E @<2.3kg, 300 f2.8E @ 2.5kg, 400 f2.8E SR @2.8kg, 600 f4E SR at 2.9kg. The 200 f2E is the one telephoto prime that will likely also sell well in Z mount being legendary for portraiture (besides action).
What about the 4.6 kg 800 f5.6E and also the fastest 600 of f4? This is where Nikon could set a new precedent in R&D. It's also overdue for Nikon to extend the boundaries of what constitutes the aperture ceiling of the Exotic telephoto. Using space age alloys and carbon fibre composites, it should be possible for Nikon to design a 600 f3.3E SR FL of ~3.3kg and a 800 f4E SR FL weighing < 4kg. These primes will need respective windows of 181 and 200mm; they will be 2 and ~5cm wider than the existing 600 f4E and 800 f5.6E
Not only do Nikon engineers have FL and SR elements in their optical arsenal, with the ED and perhaps Super-ED all such telephotos should use the new ARNEO coating. Certainly they will be expensive, but they will not only certainly sell in traditional volumes but distinguish Nikon for what it really stands for in optical innovation!
p.8 #17 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
Since the Sigma's MTF falls of immediately when one looks outside of the very center of the frame, it cannot be considered of comparable quality as the Nikkor
300/2.8 at a distance of 107.5 ft. the MTF fall off is "interesting". this is the left edge of the FOV. image is quarter resolution
p.8 #18 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
sjms wrote:
300/2.8 at a distance of 107.5 ft. the MTF fall off is "interesting". this is the left edge of the FOV. image is quarter resolution
So you're resampling the image to a lower resolution when we discuss how a lens resolves detail? Really?
You are also looking at the edge of the DX area. If you take an image with the D850 and look at what happens outside of the DX area, and not resample the image to a lower resolution I suspect you may find corroborating evidence to lensrentals' results (unless you have an unusual sample of the lens). Of course, if your intention is to use the lens on DX and you don't need the detail capabilities of the 20 MP sensor then there may not be any issue, just mount it on a D2H and fire away, and save yourself from the unnecessarily large images.
It's not about "ability to live" with something, but a question of how good the image can be. If photographing, e.g., vertical images of athletes, the head can be quite close to the edge of the frame and this may be where you want the lens to give the most detail in that situation.
p.8 #19 · AF-S NIKKOR 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR is coming
no i am simply making the image usable on this site per its restrictions. you are smart you can tell
you know your right i did not take in account the D500 factor sorry about. later i will reshoot with another more appropriate camera body.
