Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
  

Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?

  
 
PA.Stone
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


Needs depends on the use case. I wouldn't carry my heaviest lenses everywhere, if in a "tourist" mood. Lightweight zoom on Z mount with good IQ at 300mm range would propably sell more than Nikon could produce, again.

When they introduce it, I hope they don't somehow downgrade the AF-P current version, but still try to improve optical performance.

I feel that the latest F-mount lenses released after about 2015 may be replaced only later (like 105mm 1.4ED, 500mm PF, AF-S 8-15mm, PC-E 19mm, AF-S 120-300 2.8, AF-P 70-300 4.5-5.6ED etc).




Jul 25, 2022 at 04:18 AM
agrumpyoldsod
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


GroovyGeek wrote:
Any ideas why the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z is conspicuously absent from the Nikon Z lens roadmap? It is such a glaring omission for a complete "light and reasonably fast" high quality travel kit: 14-30/4, 24-70/4, 70-300. Yes, we have the F mount version of the lens but who wants to deal with FTZ for this lens? Would have rather had Nikon spend the resources on this, rather than a a 28-75/2.8 that few seem to want.


Because the 100-400 exists.

And please don't assume that because you don't want a lens "few" don't want this great lens for video.



Jul 25, 2022 at 04:52 AM
PA.Stone
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


Again, Z 100-400 4.5-5.6 S and 70-300 4.-5.6 are not mutually exclusive.

70-300mm would be at sweet spot for many looking for decent and lightweight option. It would also fit the lineup after 24-70/4. The current AF-P 70-300 is propably the best bang for buck for many in this regard.



Jul 25, 2022 at 05:09 AM
sjms
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


well, if it is to happen, i truly hope the do a better optical design then the previous revision. i guess its cost and weight will make up for its lack of use in one's bag.


Jul 25, 2022 at 05:48 AM
GroovyGeek
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


PA.Stone wrote:
Again, Z 100-400 4.5-5.6 S and 70-300 4.-5.6 are not mutually exclusive.


Not only are they not mutually exclusive, they are not even comparable. Suggesting equivalency is like saying that a 17 inch laptop and a Macbook Air or a Microsoft Surface are both laptops and therefore interchangeable in their use.



Jul 25, 2022 at 10:21 AM
sjms
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


you do like to go to extremes don't you?




Jul 25, 2022 at 10:29 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


You can get a lot of setups with the slower zoom lenses.

Right now you have the pretty compelling kit of:

14-30 f/4S; 24-120 f/4S; and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6S

You can also do the, IMO, less compelling kit of:

14-30 f/4S; and 24-200 f/3.5-6.3

They obviously haven't made a slow zoom starting at 70mm yet. I expect the next one to be 70-200 f/4S, which would give, IMO, the quite compelling kit of:

14-30 f/4S; 24-70 f/4S; 70-200 f/4S; and 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 (probably)

Eventually I think they will make a 70-300 f/4.5-5.6. I don't think it will an S lens, however. It would give them the fairly compelling travel kit of:

14-30 f/4S: 24-70 f/4S; and 70-300 f/4.5-5.6

Nice for travel, but many would opt for the 14-30 and 24-200 instead (note I wouldn't). I think either of the latter kits are going to be less typical and that is why Nikon hasn't made the 70-200 f/4S or the 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 yet. They think the 14-30;24-120;100-400 is the kit for the non-traveling more serious photographer and the 14-30; 24-200 is the kit for the traveller. I agree with the OP that the option for the three lens kit with 14-30; 24-70; and 70-300 would be a better travel kit, but Nikon must not see that as a priority for now at least.



Jul 25, 2022 at 11:11 AM
RoamingScott
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


Steve Spencer wrote:
You can get a lot of setups with the slower zoom lenses.

Right now you have the pretty compelling kit of:

14-30 f/4S; 24-120 f/4S; and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6S

You can also do the, IMO, less compelling kit of:

14-30 f/4S; and 24-200 f/3.5-6.3

They obviously haven't made a slow zoom starting at 70mm yet. I expect the next one to be 70-200 f/4S, which would give, IMO, the quite compelling kit of:

14-30 f/4S; 24-70 f/4S; 70-200 f/4S; and 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 (probably)

Eventually I think they will make a 70-300 f/4.5-5.6. I don't think it will an S lens, however. It would give them the
...Show more

Very well broken down. Anyone thinking that any eventual 70-300 (whether a rebadged Tamron, or a Z mount adjusted F mount uplift) would be in the same league as the 100-400 is delusional. 70-300 lenses on every brand are geared for the "light and cheap" crowd, not to say the 14-30 or 24-70 are slouches! I think Nikon has one of the more compelling "light and cheap" lineups so far, and are just missing this one lens to flesh it out.

I'd buy a 70-300 for my son's Z50 in a heartbeat, that would be a fine telephoto for that purpose for instance...a poor man's 100-400 on DX.



Jul 25, 2022 at 12:07 PM
JadedWriter
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


Just get him a 24-200. That probably replicates it very closely. Slow as poop though aperture wise.
RoamingScott wrote:
Very well broken down. Anyone thinking that any eventual 70-300 (whether a rebadged Tamron, or a Z mount adjusted F mount uplift) would be in the same league as the 100-400 is delusional. 70-300 lenses on every brand are geared for the "light and cheap" crowd, not to say the 14-30 or 24-70 are slouches! I think Nikon has one of the more compelling "light and cheap" lineups so far, and are just missing this one lens to flesh it out.

I'd buy a 70-300 for my son's Z50 in a heartbeat, that would be a fine telephoto for that purpose
...Show more




Jul 25, 2022 at 01:06 PM
RoamingScott
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


JadedWriter wrote:
Just get him a 24-200. That probably replicates it very closely. Slow as poop though aperture wise.



Already have the 50-250 DX so that range is basically covered and then some, and it's ALSO slow as hell



Jul 25, 2022 at 01:34 PM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

jim allison
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


One of the prime reasons for mirrorless was to downsize and lighten camera bodies. I'm unable to carry either a 70-200mm 2.8[ or the 100-400mm. I would welcome a 70-200mm f4 a 300mm PF F4 and A 70-300MM. I don't want a replay of the current 75-300mm and would prefer a model designed to work well with the z 1.4 converter. Everyone knows that pros want 2.8 or even faster lenses. Travelers would very much enjoy having the smaller and lighter weight lenses.


Jul 25, 2022 at 03:26 PM
sjms
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


Everyone knows that pros want 2.8 or even faster lenses.

actually for a good deal of my shooting i find f4 more than usable for many situations.



Jul 25, 2022 at 04:11 PM
CanadaMark
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


There is definitely room for a Z 70-300, every major manufacturer makes one and Nikon even goes out of their way to make DX version of it. 100-400's are usually $2,500 and at least double the weight of a 70-300 - totally different class of lens and target market. Nikon's latest & greatest AF-P 70-300 is under $600. I don't know why it isn't on the roadmap but you can bet it will eventually be available. It's the go-to travel zoom or entry level zoom for a lot of people. Maybe they will announce it alongside an APS-C body or update to an entry level FF body in the future.

So far, it seems Nikon has been prioritizing new lenses that do not have a recent F mount equivalent where it makes sense to do so. The AF-P 70-300 is already very small, a fantastic performer, and adapts well to the Z bodies, so I doubt a Z version is a high priority for them.



Jul 25, 2022 at 05:24 PM
suteetat
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


I would not worry about roadmap so much. It only gives you some ideas of what is coming but not neccessarily everything that is coming. Some lenses stay on the roadmap for a long time before Nikon releases it and some made it on the roadmap for a short time and hit the market relatively quickly.
I heard of at least 2 lenses currently not on the roadmap that might make an appearance as soon as next year. If you look at Nikon's patents from the last few years, there are quite a few lenses that are not on roadmap either. Of course not all of of them will make it to production but Nikon does not always place lenses on the roadmap well in advance before releasing it.



Jul 25, 2022 at 05:33 PM
runamuck
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


GroovyGeek wrote:
Not only are they not mutually exclusive, they are not even comparable. Suggesting equivalency is like saying that a 17 inch laptop and a Macbook Air or a Microsoft Surface are both laptops and therefore interchangeable in their use.



Comparing a $400 lens versus a $2700 lens? Losing a $300 lens is far less painful than losing a $2700 lens. Not everyone can afford or even want to use a $2700 lens without a team of security guards. I for one would not risk a 100-400 in many areas. 20 years go I could work some double shifts over a few weeks and buy a $2700 lens. No more.



Jul 25, 2022 at 09:21 PM
GroovyGeek
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/nikkor-lenses/z-mount-lens-articles/the-patented-lenses-we.html

70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Some refer to this as 75-300mm, though I believe CIPA rounding would make it 70mm. The patent looks like a reformulated version of the F-mount AF-P lens, so this could be something we'll see in a future road map, as it should be simple to produce.



Jul 27, 2022 at 10:44 PM
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


Well why no 300 f/2.8, 500 f/4, 70-200 f/4 either? 100-400 is in no way a 75-300 replacement which would be 1/2 the price and much smaller and lighter.


Jul 27, 2022 at 11:37 PM
PA.Stone
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


GroovyGeek wrote:
https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/nikkor-lenses/z-mount-lens-articles/the-patented-lenses-we.html



Improve the optics, better weather sealing, and add focus range limit switch. It would certainly be a winner, even if it costs bit more than the current AF-P version.




Edited on Jul 28, 2022 at 02:40 PM · View previous versions



Jul 28, 2022 at 08:36 AM
CKrueger
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


My first autofocus telephoto was the Sigma 70-300 APO, for $200. Horrible and buzzy AF, extending focus, and a plastic build befitting a knock off GameBoy. But damn if that thing wasn't sharp. It also had zero CA, good FF corners, and worked pretty well at 300mm 1:2.

Years later, I still often used it instead of my 100-400 or any of my primes in that range because it was 99% as good, and much smaller/lighter. It was the perfect travel telephoto, and the perfect landscape telephoto.

A hypothetical Z 70-300 isn't necessarily going to be any worse than a 100-400. It'll just be half the size, cheaper, and you won't use it for birds.

Right now I'm using the Z 24-200. If you torture it, you can coax some CA in the corners. And it's obviously not quite as sharp as my 24-70/2.8 + 100-400 (mostly in the corners). But it performs better than you'd expect... you need to zoom in to 100% to notice any sharpness difference from the 100-400, and its AF is good enough that I've been able to use it for indoor sports on the Z9 in ISO 25600 lighting.

I love my 100-400's, but not every telephoto photograph requires such a heavy beast.



Jul 28, 2022 at 10:13 AM
gzim
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Why no 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Z on the roadmap?


I am going hiking in Rocky Mountain National Park in a few weeks. Nothing too long is planned. Bringing my Z6ii with the 24-70f4 and my 70-300PF with the FTZ2. will bring my 40f2 for the trip to play with at night in Boulder a few days before the hike. Temped to buy a Z14-30 - But I already own the 16-35VR F4 and its pretty bulky with the FTZ.


Aug 01, 2022 at 03:29 PM
1      
2
       3       end






FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username      Reset password