Nikon announces updated 400mm F2.8 telephoto and 1.4x teleconverter

[xps]

Nikon announces updated 400mm F2.8 telephoto and 1.4x teleconverter @ Dpreview.com

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/05/14/nikon-announces-updated-400mm-f2-8-telephoto-and-1-4x-teleconverter?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_0

Sometimes I think, the "Year of Lenses" excludes Canon....
Where are the new primes and other "L" lenses?

 

[Loswr]

Nikon announced the 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR lens. It's an update, but not a MkII version – it receives the designation FL because it now contains two fluorite elements. So Nikon's new lens incorporates something that Canon has been using for many, many years. Woo hoo.

Even more interesting, check out Nikon's updated glossary. There's now an entry for fluorite (FL) touting it's advantages, but apparently they forgot to update their entry for ED glass, clearly intended to bash Canon's use of fluorite, where they state, "In the past, correcting this problem for telephoto lenses required special optical elements that offer anomalous dispersion characteristics - specifically calcium fluoride crystals. However, fluorite easily cracks and is sensitive to temperature changes that can adversely affect focusing by altering the lens' refractive index." Despite that easy cracking and adverse effects on focusing, they're now saying it's great for their telephoto lenses.

Make up your minds, Nikon…or at least pay attention to your own ad-speak. :

 

[9VIII]

The old lens is 14elements and 11 groups, this one is 16 elements and 12 groups, sounds like a new formula to me.

More importantly, hopefully the tripod foot is a little more solid than some of their other offerings.

 

[dolina]

Odd that Nikon can only outdo Canon by 50g & 10cm and that 50g & 10cm savings translates to $500 more. To think they had more than 3 years to figure it out.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Looks like a nice lens. A bit expensive but thats to be expected with this type of lens.

Good on Nikon though.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Nikon is well behind in telephoto lenses, and does need to catch up. Their TC's, have been horrible compared to Canon.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

The thing is...Canon's 400 f2.8 LIS and it's subsequant mkII version are a two of Canon's finest lenses todate. They are some of the sharpest and most optically impressive lenses ever made by anyone. Nikon will have a hard time comeing close to Canon's products in this niche. Nikon's 400 f2.8 hasn't been in the same league as Canon's for some time and trucst me when I say that even the mkI LIS version is truely exceptional optic. On my 5DIII i can see very little difference wide open and stopped down and wide open with 1.4x TC...better than a 70-200 f2.8 II L

 

[Dylan777]

The thing is...Canon's 400 f2.8 LIS and it's subsequant mkII version are a two of Canon's finest lenses todate. They are some of the sharpest and most optically impressive lenses ever made by anyone. Nikon will have a hard time comeing close to Canon's products in this niche. Nikon's 400 f2.8 hasn't been in the same league as Canon's for some time and trucst me when I say that even the mkI LIS version is truely exceptional optic. On my 5DIII i can see very little difference wide open and stopped down and wide open with 1.4x TC...better than a 70-200 f2.8 II L

Current canon 400mm f2.8 IS II is solid. Will be a challenge for them.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

The thing is...Canon's 400 f2.8 LIS and it's subsequant mkII version are a two of Canon's finest lenses todate. They are some of the sharpest and most optically impressive lenses ever made by anyone. Nikon will have a hard time comeing close to Canon's products in this niche. Nikon's 400 f2.8 hasn't been in the same league as Canon's for some time and trucst me when I say that even the mkI LIS version is truely exceptional optic. On my 5DIII i can see very little difference wide open and stopped down and wide open with 1.4x TC...better than a 70-200 f2.8 II L

Current canon 400mm f2.8 IS II is solid. Will be a challenge for them.

There's no IQ upgrade from the mkI to mkII unlike all the other new white teles, which says a lot about the Canon mkI 400 LIS. Sure the new one is lighter but from an optical point of view, there is little between them.

 

[Dylan777]

The thing is...Canon's 400 f2.8 LIS and it's subsequant mkII version are a two of Canon's finest lenses todate. They are some of the sharpest and most optically impressive lenses ever made by anyone. Nikon will have a hard time comeing close to Canon's products in this niche. Nikon's 400 f2.8 hasn't been in the same league as Canon's for some time and trucst me when I say that even the mkI LIS version is truely exceptional optic. On my 5DIII i can see very little difference wide open and stopped down and wide open with 1.4x TC...better than a 70-200 f2.8 II L

Current canon 400mm f2.8 IS II is solid. Will be a challenge for them.

There's no IQ upgrade from the mkI to mkII unlike all the other new white teles, which says a lot about the Canon mkI 400 LIS. Sure the new one is lighter but from an optical point of view, there is little between them.

Even with weight reduction on mrk II, it's still on heavy side for handheld. I can shoot 2-3 photos still subject. I hate it when I have to track the moving subject....it's no fun.

I used mrk II at least 3-4 times a month for indoor swimming and ballet. IQ amazed everytimes

 

[Menace]

The thing is...Canon's 400 f2.8 LIS and it's subsequant mkII version are a two of Canon's finest lenses todate. They are some of the sharpest and most optically impressive lenses ever made by anyone. Nikon will have a hard time comeing close to Canon's products in this niche. Nikon's 400 f2.8 hasn't been in the same league as Canon's for some time and trucst me when I say that even the mkI LIS version is truely exceptional optic. On my 5DIII i can see very little difference wide open and stopped down and wide open with 1.4x TC...better than a 70-200 f2.8 II L

Current canon 400mm f2.8 IS II is solid. Will be a challenge for them.

There's no IQ upgrade from the mkI to mkII unlike all the other new white teles, which says a lot about the Canon mkI 400 LIS. Sure the new one is lighter but from an optical point of view, there is little between them.

Even with weight reduction on mrk II, it's still on heavy side for handheld. I can shoot 2-3 photos still subject. I hate it when I have to track the moving subject....it's no fun.

I used mrk II at least 3-4 times a month for indoor swimming and ballet. IQ amazed everytimes

+1

It sure is amazing - esp the weight reduction compared to V1

 

[weixing]

Hi,

Nikon announced the 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR lens. It's an update, but not a MkII version – it receives the designation FL because it now contains two fluorite elements. So Nikon's new lens incorporates something that Canon has been using for many, many years. Woo hoo.

Even more interesting, check out Nikon's updated glossary. There's now an entry for fluorite (FL) touting it's advantages, but apparently they forgot to update their entry for ED glass, clearly intended to bash Canon's use of fluorite, where they state, "In the past, correcting this problem for telephoto lenses required special optical elements that offer anomalous dispersion characteristics - specifically calcium fluoride crystals. However, fluorite easily cracks and is sensitive to temperature changes that can adversely affect focusing by altering the lens' refractive index." Despite that easy cracking and adverse effects on focusing, they're now saying it's great for their telephoto lenses.

Make up your minds, Nikon…or at least pay attention to your own ad-speak. :

May be they mean that "their new AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR easily cracks and is sensitive to temperature changes that can adversely affect focusing"... ha ha ha ;D

The funny part is that DPReview said that "Nikon’s 800mm F5.6 FL ED VR and 400mm F2.8 FL ED VR lenses earn the 'FL' in their names from the coating of fluorine applied to the lens elements."... ha ha ha ;D

Also, Nikon’s 800mm F5.6 FL ED VR don't have a flourine coating as the AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR and AF-S TELECONVERTER TC-14E III is the first to have it... just wonder does DPReview check their facts before publish their article??

Have a nice day.

 

[Loswr]

The funny part is that DPReview said that "Nikon’s 800mm F5.6 FL ED VR and 400mm F2.8 FL ED VR lenses earn the 'FL' in their names from the coating of fluorine applied to the lens elements."

Fluorine, fluorite…what's a calcium ion among friends. Actually, the 'fluorine coating' is a clever bit of marketing-speak…fluorine is a highly toxic element that's gaseous under standard conditions, so the 'fluorine coating' certainly isn't just fluorine. It's most likely a polymer of fluorine and carbon…but neither Canon nor Nikon want to say they're using fluorocarbons as lens coatings…

 

[3kramd5]

The funny part is that DPReview said that "Nikon’s 800mm F5.6 FL ED VR and 400mm F2.8 FL ED VR lenses earn the 'FL' in their names from the coating of fluorine applied to the lens elements."

Fluorine, fluorite…what's a calcium ion among friends. Actually, the 'fluorine coating' is a clever bit of marketing-speak…fluorine is a highly toxic element that's gaseous under standard conditions, so the 'fluorine coating' certainly isn't just fluorine. It's most likely a polymer of fluorine and carbon…but neither Canon nor Nikon want to say they're using fluorocarbons as lens coatings…

Can't say I blame them. Consumers are easily swayed by words and phrases to which they have a predisposition. Note how almost everyone drops the "RP" from "CFRP" because everyone likes Carbon Fiber but nobody likes (Reinforced) Plastic.