Well, FINALLY we get an updated 80-400

bland

For what I shoot this lens is a must. I want the first one!!!

dissent

Nasim is going to do some comparisons of the new 80-400 with other lens combos (in a few weeks; see comments) -

http://photographylife.com/nikon-80-400mm-f4-5-5-6g-ed-vr-announcement#more-47747

PeterPhamWesley

Hi everyone, first time I am posting on NR.

I have the old 80 - 400 lens that I bought from Adorama used for $850. Yes a lot of people have complained about the lens being too slow for fast action. Or that the lens was f4.5 - 5.6. Or the lens was too soft at maximum focal length.

Well, I was aware of these complaints so I hesitated to buy one. When I did, I was pleasantly surprised by its performance for the price. Sure it would be great to have had a better VR. Sure it would have been great to have more ED elements and more glass inside. Sure it would be nice if it was an AF-S lens. Problem was, if they did did do all of that, the price would go through the roof and nobody would buy it except for the professionals out there....

...10 years go by and when Nikon did do all of that - the price is now through the roof and beyond the reach of the photo enthusiast or pro hobbyist such as myself.

Well.. guess I can try to rent it when it comes out?

tcole1983

Does anyone even have any money left after all the new bodies released? I know my next monies are going to a new body.

The price...well I can't afford it and won't get getting it. Out of my lenses it would only really replace my 300 F4. If I had a different setup it would be nice to have, but you still need a wider lens and it isn't fast.

Msmoto

@ Lockon

I already have the 400mm f/2.8......

donaldejose

Look at it this way. The 80-400 at 400 on a D4 will give you a 16 mp 400mm image. The 70-200 on a D7100 shot in the 1.3 crop mode will also give you a 16mp 400mm image. How much different are those two images going to be on a computer monitor or printed 8x10 (full page magazine size)? If you are going to Africa, taking your 70-200 f2.8 and are tempted to buy the 80-400 would you do just as well to buy the D7100 for less than half the price and shoot that body in DX 1.3 crop mode with your 70-200 when you need 400mm? Yes, you won't have an FX size sensor producing the image but you still will have 16 mpixels and your D4 will have sharpness muted by its AA filter while the D7100 doesn't have that filter. Won't resolution be about the same since you have the same 16 mp? And won't you have an f-stop advantage in low light when using the D7100 plus 70-200 f2.8 combo? Perhaps someday when the D7100 is out someone can shoot the same subject with each and compare the two images.

SquamishPhoto

Im not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but the new lens has a super ED element in there. Its the only lens I know of in the line up that has one besides the 200 f2. Perhaps this thing is going to be worth every hard earned penny?

PB_PM

@SquamishPhoto It could be, but I'd sure want to see some in depth reviews before placing an order.

adamz

@donaldejose - DX camera with no matter what lens You put on it never gonna be the same as FX camera - we discussed this many times before. so N70-200/2.8 with TC in no matter which mode will not render the same image as N80-400. the bokeh will be different, the high iso will be different, the fps gonna be different. You can't just compare one factor and say that it doesn't matter. if it wouldn't, why ppl will buy 400/2.8 lenses for $$$$ and don't stick with N70-300 for $$$ and add some 3rd party TC to it?

@mike - indeed, though the price gap is still high... can't wait to see an independent review... and if I had the money right now I would also ordered it right away, it's gonna be a winner anyway.

itsnotmeyouknow

I predicted yesterday that the Nikon Coolpix A would end up being similar in price in pounds as the US dollar price. With the 80 - 400, the US price is $2696. equivalent price in £: 1786. UK price? £2449. Add 20% (VAT tax) to the US equivalent and it is more than £300 more expensive in the UK. Nikon and other electrical suppliers certainly don't look a gifthorse in the mouth!

Godless

Look at it this way. The 80-400 at 400 on a D4 will give you a 16 mp 400mm image. The 70-200 on a D7100 shot in the 1.3 crop mode will also give you a 16mp 400mm image.

Depends if you need to pump the ISO above 1600. After that, it´s a downward slope for the D7000 and probably D7100 as well. You can still get usable images, but the FX bodies do produce much cleaner images and you can pump the ISO even higher. So it all depends on what you are looking for.

sevencrossing

So how do people think this will compare with 200-400 f 4 ( number one on my wish list )
will be OK @ 400mm @ f5.6 or is it going to have to be stopped down to f8?
will be better than the 70-200 f 2.8 with x 2TC ( my current set up)

adamz

IMHO, it should be quite similar to 200-400 when stopped down to 6.3 @ 400 (at least that's how I interpret the MTF charts). comparing to N70-200/2.8 + TC20 it's gonna be better when wide open (again my interpretation of MTF, the based MTF of both is quite similar so when You add TC to the MTF will be lower).

bland

I guess it depends on what one shoots but I'm thinking of the benefits that the 80-400 will bring with the TC20.

Msmoto

With the TC-20EIII the issue of autofocus comes to play and at f/11 this will be a problem except possibly in bright light. The TC-14EII should be OK.

adamz

depending on the amount of light, with the new bodies I wouldn't be surprised if it will focus with TC20 - though only in very bright environment (safari, antarctic, etc.), I also guess that it shouldn't be a problem to put the TC17 on it.

adamz

just found some mores snaps of this lens: http://www.dcfever.com/news/readnews.php?id=7926

sevencrossing

IMHO, it should be quite similar to 200-400 when stopped down to 6.3 @ 400 ....... (

Thanks Adam
As it is half the weight of the 200-400 and has a greater range; will nearly cover the range of the 70 -200 + x 2 TC with out the need to keep taking it on and off
this could be my next lens

TaoTeJared

People waiting for this lens must be crying right now. $2700??? Nikon's marketing team must be drunk.

Considering the year (financially) Nikon is having, they must be front loading the payback cost on this. Consider the life span on most higher end lenses are 10 years, equipment is generally paid off (written down) in 7 years so the profit all comes in the last 3-4 years on the lenses. That would be a fairly normal accounting practice with most manufacturing with those parameters.

To me, I'm seeing various business practices that points to Nikon not doing too well at all for the moment.

DaveyJ

I believe at this price this lens and Nikon's hoped for big sales from it, it is a lost cause. The lens is WAY TOO EXPENSIVE!!! I am used to buying lenses based on MTF charts. For a G lens to be this expensive is just wishful thinking on Nikon's part. This also posts a very clear warning to all on the D400 initial price point as well.

sevencrossing

well its ~ half the price of the 200 -400 f4; which ( according to a UK Nikon rep I spoke to on Monday) is Nikon's best selling lens in 400mm range

SquamishPhoto

Think of it this way, does anyone think that a revamped 300mm f4 vr is going to check in anywhere south of $2000? In that light this price shouldn't be as big of a shock as it seems to be for some. Imagine the $300f4 comes in around $2200 then the price for the 80-400 doesn't seem so crazy. And something tells me that many will change their tune when the see more photos taken with the lens.

Godless

It is only logical that the consumers pay for the damage the tsunami did. That´s what this pricing b.s. is about

PB_PM

Think of it this way, does anyone think that a revamped 300mm f4 vr is going to check in anywhere south of $2000? In that light this price shouldn't be as big of a shock as it seems to be for some. Imagine the $300f4 comes in around $2200 then the price for the 80-400 doesn't seem so crazy. And something tells me that many will change their tune when the see more photos taken with the lens.

If anything a AF-S 300mm F4 VR will be more than the 80-400mm, I'd even hazard a guess at $3k.

zernicke

The 800 mm 5.6 is almost 20 grand so from that standpoint not so unreasonable. Also what is up with minimum f/40, normally this would not be possible (diffraction limitations) so must be some special optics.