neuroanatomist said:AlanF said:neuroanatomist said:AlanF said:There is more than one data point: the conventional Nikon 300mm f/4D is 222.5mm long and weighs 1440 g, the Nikon equivalent to a DO, the 300mm f/4 E PF, is 148mm long and weighs 750g.
When I mentioned a comparison to the Canon 300/4, you replied:
AlanF said:The 300/4 is an antique lens with poor IS and takes a TC poorly. If it had modern configuration....neuroanatomist said:...Compare the [Canon] 300/4...
The Nikon 300/4D is an 18-year-old lens. So I should refrain from making comparisons to old lenses lacking a modern configuration, but it's fine for you to do so. Interesting application of a double standard…
I am not applying double standards. Let's compare it with another very modern 300mm/f4, the Olympus Zuiko, described as compact and lightweight, https://www.olympus.co.uk/site/en/c/lenses/om_d_pen_lenses/m_zuiko_pro/m_zuiko_digital_ed_300mm_1_4_0_is_pro/m_zuiko_digital_ed_300mm_1_4_0_is_pro_specifications.html
The fine Olympus is 227mm long and weighs 1220g, which is very similar to the Nikon's 222.5mm length and 1440g. The Nikon DO equivalent is substantially shorter and lighter.
Nikon has announced the development of a 500/5.6 PF lens https://www.nikon.com/news/2018/0614_lens_01.htm "that is significantl smaller and lighter than comparable predecessors due to the adoption of the same type of Phase Fresnel (PF) lens element used in the AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED".
We should probably drop the tangent. I have no argument with the fact that incorporation of DO elements makes a lens smaller and lighter. I do take issue with your initial comparison of the Sony 400/2.8 to the Canon 400/4 DO – that comparison is obviated by the difference of a full stop of aperture (regardless of the DO).
What I have been arguing consistently and unambiguously is that the DO technology is better than the Sony optical innovation of using smaller glass elements further back in the body. The Sony has managed to decrease weight and move the centre of gravity closer to the body. The DO technology does both of those and reduce size as well. There is a huge great (waste of) space behind the front element of the Sony, but Canon and Nikon have been able to move the front element back into that space and make the lenses shorter.
Upvote
0