Wow the f/2.8 really gives a dreamy character--just curious, have you had any experience with the 70-200 f/4? is it relatively comparable in terms of subject isolation and bokeh?
I have only really had 2.8 lenses. If the F4 is anything like the Fuji 50-140 2.8 then yes this has superior bokeh and isolation. This might also be better than Nikon's 2.8FL, which I have, sharper than Sony's 2.8 GM which I also have, build quality is way better than the Tamron G2, which I also had. I need to use this more, but it's a stunner. gogojojoe wrote:
Wow the f/2.8 really gives a dreamy character--just curious, have you had any experience with the 70-200 f/4? is it relatively comparable in terms of subject isolation and bokeh?
JadedWriter wrote:
I have only really had 2.8 lenses. If the F4 is anything like the Fuji 50-140 2.8 then yes this has superior bokeh and isolation. This might also be better than Nikon's 2.8FL, which I have, sharper than Sony's 2.8 GM which I also have, build quality is way better than the Tamron G2, which I also had. I need to use this more, but it's a stunner.
Thanks for the input! For the longest time I've been torn between settling for the Nikon 70-200 f/4 or the f/2.8 FL ED vs. just saving up for the f/2.8 S
I briefly had the f/4 but had to return it due to defective VR. Though to be honest probably worked out for the best since the new Z glass just seems to be sharper across the board, as we can see in your photos
If I needed a lens in this class today and didn't have the money for the S I'd get the FL. If you're not running an F mount system in conjunction with Z just get the S lens. I have both, the Z lens is actually very very sharp. That's probably the sharpest duck pic I have to be honest, same with a sparrow. The only thing annoying about Z mount is that there's no native long glass yet. gogojojoe wrote:
Thanks for the input! For the longest time I've been torn between settling for the Nikon 70-200 f/4 or the f/2.8 FL ED vs. just saving up for the f/2.8 S
I briefly had the f/4 but had to return it due to defective VR. Though to be honest probably worked out for the best since the new Z glass just seems to be sharper across the board, as we can see in your photos
JadedWriter wrote:
If I needed a lens in this class today and didn't have the money for the S I'd get the FL. If you're not running an F mount system in conjunction with Z just get the S lens. I have both, the Z lens is actually very very sharp. That's probably the sharpest duck pic I have to be honest, same with a sparrow. The only thing annoying about Z mount is that there's no native long glass yet.
Your last statement is the one that continues to haunt me. The lack of transparency about the release of the Z mount 100-400, 200-600, 400, and 600mm lens has made me question the likelihood of seeing an actual telephoto lens by the middle of 2021. At this point, we have seen shadow diagrams, but know nothing about their aperture, zoom design parameters (i.e. internal or not), price point, release date, or potential availability. Because of this, I have considered buy the 70-200S w/ converters. However, I hesitate to throw $3200 into this lens if the 200-600 matches Sony's performance.
Because Nikon has been less than forthcoming about the release of the glass I need, I am beginning to consider what I swore I would not... The purchase of an A9 and 200-600G. Both can be had for about $4200 from the B/S board and provide me with a viable move away from the much heavier and less responsive Z6II + 200-400VR.
At this point, the Nikon Z6II is more than adequate for my needs... the sensor produces beautiful images and I like Nikon's color science better than Sony or Canon, however the lack of native telephoto Z-glass is becoming a real concern for me.
I have just been using the Nikon 200-500 for the last year and change. It's sharp, it's heavy and it's pretty affordable especially if you find someone trying to just unload the thing. Is it the latest in mirrorless technology? No. Does it get me the shots I'm currently doing? Yes. I'm just being patient with Nikon and hopefully by the end of the year they'll show something. I'd get the Sony but I honestly don't trust Sony build quality as much as I trust Nikons. Even the Sony part of the forum has had some complaints about the 200-600. OwlsEyes wrote:
Your last statement is the one that continues to haunt me. The lack of transparency about the release of the Z mount 100-400, 200-600, 400, and 600mm lens has made me question the likelihood of seeing an actual telephoto lens by the middle of 2021. At this point, we have seen shadow diagrams, but know nothing about their aperture, zoom design parameters (i.e. internal or not), price point, release date, or potential availability. Because of this, I have considered buy the 70-200S w/ converters. However, I hesitate to throw $3200 into this lens if the 200-600 matches Sony's performance.
Because Nikon has been less than forthcoming about the release of the glass I need, I am beginning to consider what I swore I would not... The purchase of an A9 and 200-600G. Both can be had for about $4200 from the B/S board and provide me with a viable move away from the much heavier and less responsive Z6II + 200-400VR.
At this point, the Nikon Z6II is more than adequate for my needs... the sensor produces beautiful images and I like Nikon's color science better than Sony or Canon, however the lack of native telephoto Z-glass is becoming a real concern for me.
JadedWriter wrote:
I have just been using the Nikon 200-500 for the last year and change. It's sharp, it's heavy and it's pretty affordable especially if you find someone trying to just unload the thing. Is it the latest in mirrorless technology? No. Does it get me the shots I'm currently doing? Yes. I'm just being patient with Nikon and hopefully by the end of the year they'll show something. I'd get the Sony but I honestly don't trust Sony build quality as much as I trust Nikons. Even the Sony part of the forum has had some complaints about the 200-600.
I get your point, and have stuck with Nikon because I really like the camera design and am comfortable with the ergonomics. I have a lot of a glass... 70-200E, 300PF, 500PF, 200-400G, and Z wide-angle lenses. I definitely get the value of being patient. I, however, think that Nikon needs to be a bit more forthcoming here. The slow trickle of information about these future lenses is not doing much to build my confidence in them. Seeing Canon roll out a 100-500, 70-200 f/2.8, & 70-200 f/4 w/ little stock-related issues makes me wonder why Nikon can not do the same.
I think Nikon's intentions are quite clear. The -2021 roadmap included the 100-400 and 200-600 mm lenses, so one can expect them to be launched this year (or early next year if there is a production delay). The new roadmap extends to 2022 and includes the 400mm and 600mm primes, so again we can assume they will be released by the end of 2022. This is already a lot of information. If these time schedules are far too late for you or if you are concerned about the autofocus in the camera bodies then I can understand that you may be better served by another brand's equipment for now. Just get the equipment you need from whoever makes it - if it just about one lens and camera body then there is not a huge reason to stick to one brand. For me I think of camera and lens purchases in much longer time span and use a greater variety of specialist lenses so brand-switching is never really possible or sensible for me.
Nikon's priorities were a bit all over the place. I think it took them too long to divert assets and engineering from F mount. While Canon on the other hand just dropped EF mount like a bag of bricks and just prioritized RF mount. I know Nikon is also dealing with pandemic craziness (granted everybody is so that's not 100% a valid excuse). I do hope they show something regarding their 200-600 within the next six months though. They probably had to re-engineer it to be more like the Sony one I'm going to assume (I hope that's what they're doing). Nikon is quite horrible with marketing, that's for sure. I'm basically giving the system a year, I like it more than Sony, but they really do have to let people know they're putting resources into it. Personally I'd like them to release info on a 35 1.4 and something in the 105-135 range as well for portraits. OwlsEyes wrote:
I get your point, and have stuck with Nikon because I really like the camera design and am comfortable with the ergonomics. I have a lot of a glass... 70-200E, 300PF, 500PF, 200-400G, and Z wide-angle lenses. I definitely get the value of being patient. I, however, think that Nikon needs to be a bit more forthcoming here. The slow trickle of information about these future lenses is not doing much to build my confidence in them. Seeing Canon roll out a 100-500, 70-200 f/2.8, & 70-200 f/4 w/ little stock-related issues makes me wonder why Nikon can not do the same.
