If you want a 800pf under 5 figures, this is what the 400mm f4 PF will be. Put on a 2x TC to get a 800 f8 pf. This will be a full stop slower than the 800f5.6 that cost $17k.
I wouldn't be surprised that we may never see a 800mm f5.6 in Z mount and that this 800f6.3pf is the replacement.
How many 800f5.6 FL did they actually sell? It's big and really heavy and real pricey.
scott f wrote:
Yes, I think I could stomach $10K, but beyond that, I won't bother. I wonder if Nikon will ever offer a mount conversion for their big lenses? It'd be nice to send in my 500pf and get it converted to a Z mount so I don't have to bother with the FTZ.
this is me wrote:
800f6.3 PF will be a 5 figure lens and 600mm f4 will have a TC built in.
That's my story and I'm sticking with it. I just don't see them releasing the 600mm f4 without the TC since they have the technology and they already got a 560mm f4(400mm f2.8 TC) that can take external TC.
Besides, they already got the technology and the first to come out with 400mmf2.8 with built in TC. I think they would capitalize on that.
It's not easy for them to make the front element of 500PF. The 800f6.3 is much much bigger. Even if there's more demand at a lower price, they will not be able to make it fast enough.
Remember this. 500mm pf is a full stop slower than the f4 counterpart. 800mm PF is a 1/3 stop slower than the 800f5.6 counterpart.
But we all can dream. So dream on....Show more →
Just remember the PF/DO elements don't have to be the front element...the Canon 400DOII's DO element is the yellow element in this diagram. So they don't necessarily have to make 127mm diameter PF elements for the 800PF depending on the lens design.
arbitrage wrote:
Just remember the PF/DO elements don't have to be the front element...the Canon 400DOII's DO element is the yellow element in this diagram. So they don't necessarily have to make 127mm diameter PF elements for the 800PF depending on the lens design.
I’m not an optical designer and I don’t know much about Canon. If Canon can bury the Fresnel element in the lens so that it can be smaller, why haven’t they completed their DO line up with the 600mm F4 DO that they patented years ago. I thought I heard they couldn’t produce the fresnel element effectively.
arbitrage wrote:
After seeing the new roadmap image my interest in this lens went from barely any to none.
I imagine for most people the 200-600mm will be the wildlife lens of choice. Personally I'm not switching to mirrorless until I see where the chips fall. The 500mm pf is just too good.
It was "barely any" to start with because I don't like to have a big lens that only starts off at f/6.3. I also find 800 too long for a lot of my shooting. I've never once had an inkling to buy a Canon or Nikon 800/5.6 and the only reason I sort of had a little interest in the 800PF is because it looked like it could be a lot more portable than an 800E and maybe fairly lightweight. I'd much rather have a 600mm where I can get to 800 via TC when needed.
Now seeing that the lens is longer and larger than it appeared on the roadmap previously I think it just isn't something I'm interested in at all.
What I want is a 600/4 PF that is shorter than a traditional 400/2.8....ie what Canon showed off in 2015 and then bailed on.
Funny thing is that if Nikon made a 600 f/4.5 PF it would take a 1.4TC to become an 800/6.3 anyways and it should be able to be as short as the Canon prototype.
jwolfe wrote:
I imagine for most people the 200-600mm will be the wildlife lens of choice. Personally I'm not switching to mirrorless until I see where the chips fall. The 500mm pf is just too good.
Yes, I'm looking forward to the 200-600, although it would take a lot to pry the 500pf out of my hands. It works great with the Z9 so I'm pretty happy with my long lens situation. But a reasonably priced(lol) 800 would supplement the 500 nicely.
Something else Nikon could do would be to make that FTZ adapter so that it would accept their new teleconverters, then I could use that Krazy glue to weld on the adapter!
500mm PF is selling everywhere in stock, BH, AMAZONs, etc. Yes, it was sort of harder to make the PF element comparing to conventional design but don't forget it all come down to economical decision. It's not as hard as making a spaceship. I still believe economies of scale and learning curve from making 500PF could have helped Nikon's making of 800PF be more efficient. Glass technician can be trained and that most part is also scalable. If made in Chinese factory you'd be happy that could happen. Just double of the 500PF asking price of $3500, ie $7000 still be more reasonable for Nikon. If it sells at triple to $10500, I'd say no to it. Of course everyone can dream and guess.
Easyshot wrote:
500mm PF is selling everywhere in stock, BH, AMAZONs, etc. Yes, it was sort of harder to make the PF element comparing to conventional design but don't forget it all come down to economical decision. It's not as hard as making a spaceship. I still believe economies of scale and learning curve from making 500PF could have helped Nikon's making of 800PF be more efficient. Glass technician can be trained and that most part is also scalable. If made in Chinese factory you'd be happy that could happen. Just double of the 500PF asking price of $3500, ie $7000 still be more reasonable for Nikon. If it sells at triple to $10500, I'd say no to it. Of course everyone can dream and guess.
I hope it comes in at $7k, I don't hold out much hope, but I think a price like that is reasonable for a specialized lens like the 800. My worry is Nikon sees the F mount version price, and think by losing 1/3 of a stop and weight and size, it will make it worthwhile to charge a high price for the Z mount successor.
Just looking at the numbers different ways here, but both the 300pf and 500pf are ~36% the cost of their 1-stop faster alternatives. The 800pf is only 1/3 stop slower. So instead of a 64% discount for a whole stop, you could be looking at a 22% discount, which would make the 800pf as high as $12,500 or so.
On the lowest end, the 300pf to 500pf is a 80% price increase ($2000 vs $3600) for a 66.7% increase in focal length. The 500 to 800 is only a 60% increase in focal length, but let’s say it’s still a 80% price increase for the 500mm to 800mm focal length jump = $6400. This doesn’t take the aperture different into account. This won’t happen. Not sure where I was going with that 🤣
The 500/4 is 84% more expensive than the 300/2.8
The 800/5.6 is 58% more expensive than the 500/4
Not sure what that adds to the discussion either 😂
Basically I’m going to guess $12,249, maybe $11,500 on the low end for the 800. That puts me out lol
I was initially hoping for $8k or less but am less hopeful as we go along.
Lauchlan Toal wrote:
Keeping in mind the scaling up is both increasing the focal length (with the 800mm f5.6 being pricier than the 500mm f4), and increasing the aperture (with 800mm f6.3 being 1/3 stops different from 800mm f5.6, versus 500mm f5.6 being 1 stop different from 500mm f4).
This is probably the hardest supertele to predict price on, IMO.
Good point. Given the minimal max aperture difference you've got me thinking it will be priced closer to the F-mount 800/5.6 - ouch! Nikon probably isn't planning a Z 800/5.6 - this PF is it- and it will be priced accordingly. Oh well, I can always rent one for special weeks.
F number is not a good approach to guesstimate 800PF price. An example to be the 24-70 F2.8 and the 28-75 F2.8. They are exactly same F number. The price of 24-70 is twice of that of the 28-75. PF lens is Nikon's important product if not the most. Over all single lens camera market is still diminishing. Nikon can't just rely on NPS member or those pro products for living. If they price the 800PF more than $10000, I'd say it too aggressive (the english term little tricky here). 500PF lens is more toward prosumer market, this is the bigger chunk that Nikon should grasp, and that will let Nikon be much more healthy in the future. Sony doesn't have PF lens, so to leverage its market share strategically, Nikon can't screw up by making wrong decision on the pricing. Still my guess any way.
It has to be a significantly less than the 600 f/4 or else folks would go with that as it also gives you 840 f/5.6. So, I am pretty sure it will be less than $9K
