Nikon AF-S 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II available for pre-order
Pre-order options:
The lens is expected to be available in stores in late May, 2010. Availability will probably be very limited, especially before and during the FIFA world cup (June 11 - July 11, 2010).
Some more sample images from Amazon:
I could not find hi-res version of those images.
Related posts:
- Nikon AF-S 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED VR to be replaced in few weeks
- Nikon AF-S 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II announced
- Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D rumor
- Eyewitness report: New VR Zoom-NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED lens
- Pre-order options (Nikon 24mm f/1.4 & 16-35mm f/4)
This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged Nikon AF-S 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II. Bookmark the
permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
60 Comments
Interesting. Not interested.
Can anybody tell me why the AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED is still listed in the nikon lineup?
(http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/index.htm)
It is listed as “discontinued” everywhere.
Only 7k!
The World Cup lens, basically. All available copies would be in South Africa before the world cup ends!
cos nobody is going South Africa anyway
60% of the tickets not sold yet
I’d watch at home
hope they broadcast HD like the Olympics
Instead of VRII it should have VR WC (World Cup) Edition
added to cart, thx!!
more sample images with EXIF data:
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/zoom/af-s_nikkor200-400mmf_4g_ed_vr2/index.htm
Interesting; thanks.
I’m surprised by the lack of detailed shot data. For example, I do not see ISO, Picture Control settings (in particular, sharpness), or camera model.
If the published MTF-graphs are true, then it is a superb lens for some professionals, who have to earn their money with taking pictures, a hard live. I would prefer a new 80-400 (AFS, N-coating, APO-correction…) although mine shows pretty nice photos.
I’ll buy two if I can get free shipping.
I will pay for the shipping if I can buy it for free!
I’ll pay for the lens and shipping if they throw in a D3s!
I have the old 200-400 and find it a very good lens if a bit heavy.
I know a couple of professional Wildlife Photographers who will be looking at this lens very seriously.
But will they also buy, I can look at all lenses seriously, I can even look funny, but Nikon wants them to buy, not only look
Can anybody take a stab at production figures? How many of these $7,000 lenses does Nikon really sell?
According this this http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#SuperZoom site: roughly 11,700 produced from 2003 to now. Contrast with over 170000 80-400s sold from 2000 to now. Now, I read Thom’s article about this, but I still can’t believe that there isn’t enough demand for a new Af-S 80-400 (or 100-500 or whatever focal range Nikon decides on)
I think there is demand for the 80-400.
I have a feeling that maybe this new 200-400 is based on some kind of large order from some news agencies. It’s like contract manufacturing. We are talking about peanuts here. max 10k lenses which they produce in less than a month and they are done.
I doubt that is the case.
Why not, if they did not have enough to fill couple of larger orders then it makes sense running one more batch especially when most likely this lens share parts with other Nikon lenses.
Hey thanks for the link. It is real interesting! Nikon made 1200mm-1700mm lenses! (but there are only 15 in the world, just slightly outnumbering saber-toothed tigers and woolly mammoths!)
I will have 30k left after I buy RED EPic so I might buy 4 of those. Just in case
Notice the serial number? Number 23 off the line? That’s almost a prototype!
The first 22 had sparkles.
Top picture makes me think of a certain reviewer, who says 200-400 is soft at longer distances.
+1
I’ve read all of the posts in this and the previous NR article below and I can’t find any reference to the one question which really needs an answer. As Thom Hogan points out in his excellent review, the previous version was opitically excellent at distances closer than 100 metres (300 ft), but no more than average at best at distances more than this. So, is the new version equally excellent at all distances? if not then it isn’t worth $600, let alone $6,000, to me as the performance at or near infinity is what interests me in any telephoto zoom lens.
Thats the kind of question that can only be answered when reviewers get the lens to actually use. Thus far all we have are specs and MTF charts. Just wait a few weeks and you’ll get your answer
Actually, I tried both 500mm VR I and VR II and VR II is a great improvement. So I understand Nikon when they decided to add the new VR system when a new batch of lenses had to be manufactured.
There has never been a VR-I 500mm
Every 300mm+ lens sucks at large distances, mid day, hot air – is is just physics. Air+heat+light makes photo look good or bad.
Large lenses are therefore good for shooting smaller subject and not from large distances, especially not on hot mid day close to ground.
Yes.. we will see a lot of them in upcoming World Cup.
Of course… that’s IF South Africa somehow manages to keep all criminals, terrorists and etc away from the stadiums…
Hey…I’m from South Africa. Our criminals are in government. And if you know our cabinet, you will know they spend more time in China, Zimbabwe, UK, etc, so I think the stadiums should be safe.
HAHAHA i like your style
The sad truth is I’m not even joking. I want a holiday, and 2 eat out at fancy restaurants. Just once. My taxes are paying for these incompetent fools to do, well, not much. The BMWs and 6 wives would just be a bonus. Well, not those particular wives. And I’d probably kill the car at the firt corner in a pothole while swerving to avoid a minibus taxi. So, whose coming through for this ‘fantastic’ experience?
So my taxes are used in pretty much close style as yours and I’m not even from Africa. Yes, very sad.
Is this pre or post apartheid?
Thanks admin for this anouncement my wife and i just played bonney and clyde and ordered 2 one for her and one for me kidding only one for me and she want´s to be my Caddy in a few months and we still wait for the 100-500 mm vr 3 for myy wife less heavy i sorry we think
If Moose Peterson and ken Rockwell put a test of this lens very soon than i am confinced to buy it and i wait a little longer for the new camera thanks again admin i am going to be realy happy with in some months.
Yeh, but Ken will tell you to buy a D40, 55mm-200mmVR, walk closer to your subject and use the rest of the money to buy a Leica!
Buwahwahahahaha
Ok, this is hilarious! Nikon Japan has the bird sample image with this in the caption: “The effect of faithful color reproduction is compounded when combined with stunning sharpness and…”
So whoever made the ad layout for Amazon took those images and bumped up saturation to the max! Haha! Faithful color reproduction = overuled!
It is awesome that nikon lenses can be used on canon cameras. lol.
It´s on nikon usa side to
Hmm why not just invest 2000more for the 400mm 2.8? I guess some people might want the zoom capability, but to be honest I think they should have priced this lens to sell, even a few hundred less than the original, that way more people would buy one and therefore they would get more money. Silly Nikon!
Thats not how economics work… Back to high school for you.
Any information on whether this new 200-400 lens will permit autofocusing when in use with the TC 20E III 2x teleconverter.
Nikon’s site seems to indicate that the old 200-400 did NOT support auto-focus with the teleconverter:
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/teleconverters/af-s_tc-20e_3/
Even if it works, Nikon won’t say it does. Beyond an effective F5.6, the AF can get unpredictable, depending on the conditions.
That makes sense, thank you.
AF won’t work with TC-20E.
I coulda shot those with my 70-300 VR and saved a bunch of cash
you cannot because on D3x is 70-300 not sharp enough and there is no other nikon body with more then 12Mpix so you cannot crop either.
If you need to deliver 8Mpix 4:3 photo for magazine, you dont have many choices
must be a pretty big leak huh
I envy Canon users with their light 400/4 and 300/4 stabilized lenses.
Nikon instead only provides heavy 200-400/4 do-nothing-great&heavy-lens.
have you used this lens before? To call it a “do nothing great” lens is hardly reality.
I’m with you on this one. would really like Nikon to match these lenses (at the Canon price)
Think I’ll wait to see if the insides are a bunch of crap like the 70-200 VRII.
If it improves my jpeg shooting style, I’m in.
[quote]Posted April 28, 2010 at 3:21 am | Permalink
you cannot because on D3x is 70-300 not sharp enough and there is no other nikon body with more then 12Mpix so you cannot crop either.
If you need to deliver 8Mpix 4:3 photo for magazine, you dont have many choices[/quote] Wrongarooney……..even Tommy Hogan likes the 70-300 on D3x. Mine is sharp as a butchers knife as long as there is enough light. It needs 7.1 at the long end.
Anything over a thousand a pound is way beyond my pain threshold.