< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Patent filed for the rumored new Nikon 16-85mm DX lens

New patented lens design

Design of the current Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR

I already mentioned that Nikon will release a new 16-85mm DX lens in 2012 with a fixed f/4 aperture. A new patent (201042547) filed in Japan just became available online and shows the details of a Nikkor 16-85mm f/4 DX VR lens. Here is one of the shown examples (patents usually have several different variations/calculations of the same lens):

  • Patent release date: March 1, 2012
  • Patent filling date: August 26, 2010
  • Related patents: 201042548, 201042549
  • Focal length: 16.4-86.4mm
  • Aperture: f/4.3 - 4.7 (another example was shown with aperture f/4.1-4.9)
  • Angel of view: 20.4 - 85.5°
  • Lens length: 140.9 - 110.0mm
  • Design: 17 elements in 13 groups (the current model has 17 elements in 11 groups)
  • Three aspherical elements (same as in the current model)
  • Vibration reduction (VR)
  • Internal focusing (IF)

Currently the Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR DX lens is back-ordered at both B&H and Adorama.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses, Nikon Patents and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • SoftOnDemand

    I’m getting this for my d800!!

    • karl

      ok, so which areas is this lens supposed to improve ? Is it just the faster aperture at the tele end ?
      VRII? Nano coating? internal zoom ? ..or at least the golden ring ? :P

      • Global

        I know at least 2 architects who use the old lens on their D7000/D90. An update would be valuable for sharper images + constant aperture, so that if zooming, the lighting doesn’t change pic to pic.

        • kevin

          i still use my dad’s 15 years old manual lens. a honda gets you the same destination as a bmw, cameras are not different. there is nothing wrong using a cheaper lens. however, it feels good own some expensive lens. hehe

          • Fool

            Why are you reading this site, when your phone has a camera. No need to buy stupid DSLR that doesn’t even come with a lens!

            • Sahaja

              How do you know? His “dad’s 15 years old manual lens” may be a very good Nikkor ais prime. I’d much rather one of those than a crap consumer zoom.

              Why do you think Nikon still sell some of them new?

        • Sahaja

          If it is f/4.3 – 4.7 (or f/4.1-4.9) it is not quite “constant aperture” – and not quite f/4.0

      • vertigo

        The constant f4 will be useful for video, albeit dark and DX.

    • BFL

      Srsly? Why are you planning to use this DX lens on your FX camera?

      • baked bananas

        A full framed d800 cropped is one of the best dx cameras on the planet…. so this makes perfect sense … don’t be an idiot. You can take off your olde school Jim Thorpe plastic helmet off now. Go in a corner, enjoy your juice box with fruit rollups…….RETARD

        YOU’RE WELCOME

        say thank you

        • Brian

          Except you’ll be framing your images with the small dx crop from a full frame viewfinder. I’d much rather frame looking through a big bright dx viewfinder like on a d7000.

          • MJr

            FX viewfinders are 1,5x as big, because the mirror is 1.5x as big, so dx mode will basically appear as big as the d7000′s. Plus extra room around the frame to anticipate the shot.

            • WoutK89

              magnification on the D800 is lower, so not true that it is as big as the D7000

        • M!

          baked banana boy, before you start calling people here idiots and retard, go look at yourself in the mirror every morning.
          Brian is correct. a DX lens cropped in a FX viewfinder is horrible. your D800 100% viewfinder just shrunk 2/3. good luck shooting.

          • The Other Steve

            @ bannanaupyearse,
            “Baked bananas” isn’t a f***head, he’s just ignorant.
            I kind of feel sort for him.

          • justintime

            I got my hands on a D800 for a minute or so at Focus on Imaging.
            The Viewfinder in DX crop mode was very good. I was expecting it to be very small but was pleasantly surprised.

        • BackFromLeave

          Thanks for your eloquent feedback, bananas. Juice box was great, btw.

          • Baked bananas

            OH ..btw…..i apologize for calling someone a retard… Im kind of special my damn self…..Cant you tell???

            • Good bye

              From your post above, it’s obvious how mature of a MAN you are!

        • Baba Ganoush

          But isn’t a DX-cropped D800 = a very expensive D7000?

          • http://haroldellis4444@gmail.com Harold Ellis

            no, because D7000 is VERY bad at FX should you need it :-).
            besides the D7000 is not as D300 in build quality and many other things.

        • uh

          you silly rabbit. in DX crop the D800 has the same resolution as the D7000. however the D7000 is way way cheaper. don’t be a dumbass

          • iamlucky13

            Is he still a dumbass if he takes good photos with it?

            Is there no other benefit to a D800?

            A lightweight, wide angle zoom could certainly be handy from time-to-time, especially if he’s puts what he saves on the zoom into buying primes.

            Additionally, I was recently reading a comment by David Hobby (who might not be a high impact artist, but certainly someone who knows what he is doing) about how much he liked using his 12-24 DX lens on his D3. In DX mode, it’s a great wide-angle. In FX mode, it’s still a great wide angle, even if you have to crop away and/or selectively brighten some vignetting in most situations.

            In the future, don’t call people you don’t know “dumbass” in public.

    • Dimitrii1130

      –>DX not FX…
      so d400^^ :)

    • Jivee

      A DX lens on FX body? I think the 24 – 120 f4 is the FX “equivalent”. I reckon this would be a great “kit” lens for a DX D400. Also strengthens the case that there is a better DX camera coming out, even if it is a D7100. I’ve got 17 – 55 f2.8 and wish it had VR for video. Actually….all my lenses aside from 70 – 200 don’t have VR!

    • SoftonDemand

      My front element of my 16-35mm cracked and im on a budget constraint..! So whats wrong with getting this lens especially when i want to use the DX crop to the advantage especially with the high MP D800?

      • Studor13

        D800 and budget constraint?

        • Softondemand

          Because I preordered my d800 + bg thts why I’m on a budget constraint

          • Studor13

            Try the 18-55 then.

            You’ll save a lot more.

            The whole point of using a wide-angle lens is to get wide. 16mm on DX is not that wide.

        • Paul

          If the budged he is willing to invers is $3.000, then he is budget constraint, regardless of what he wants to purchase…

          Why do people always assume that if somebody wants to purchase something more expensive, then the budget is unlimited ?

          • Paul

            Invest, not invers…

            • SoftonDemand

              +1111 THANK YOU

          • Studor13

            No one in their right mind is going to buy the most advanced camera on the planet and have no budget to buy a lens suitable to use it with.

            It’s like buying a Fearri and then say that you no budget to get insurance, so you leave it parked in the garage.

            BTW, how exactly is he constraint? How much do you suppose the new 16-85 is going to be? Since the previous version is $500 or so and the 16-35mm f4 is around $1000, the new lens is going to cost about $700!

            Isn’t better to get the 16-35mm f4 fixed?

            • Softondemand

              Excuse me, I do have a 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200. First of all the 14-24 is a specialty lens, second of all basically if ur front element is gone u cannot fix it. Imagine if u dropped ur 14-24 head on and brought it to Nikon to fix. What’s wrong with being on a budget constraint?? I dun hv Tht much anymore after placing the preorder my brothaAa

      • Zupa

        If you you really want something to use instead of your 16-35 (FX) lens, and do not mind the crop mode, then you will need the 10-24 DX.
        The 16mm DX is not as wide as the 16mm FX.
        Using the 16-85 DX lens in crop mode will give you about the same angle of view as a 24-120 FX, but you will loose about half of your pixels.

        So if you really having budget issues, but want to go as wide as your old 16-35, then Nikon 10-24 or Tokina 11-16 can be a solution.

    • Grobert

      it is dx lens for crop right so you cant use it with fx

      • WoutK89

        you can use it in DX crop.

        • vertigo

          Usually I thought you can use it in FX with vignetting which goes away when you zoom in a little.

          • WoutK89

            There are indeed some lenses out there that can be used with minimum vignetting, try and see :) for instance the 35/1.8G DX can be used in 5:4 crop without disturbing vignetting

  • AM

    Why f/4? The 17-55mm f/2.8 has been due for a replacement with VR since long time ago.

    • Kevin

      f2.8 may require more glass (heavier) and is also more expensive.

      i think this lens is for the d3xxx, d5xxx budget/smaller dslrs…

      this will enable f4 at 85mm for portrait shots

      • Global

        Small businesses do not require the best glass. f/4 is sufficient for most uses.

    • http://micahmedia.com Micah

      …just bought another one. Nothing wrong with it. In fact, a lot quite right. Why is it due for a replacement? What obstacles to usage does it have for you? WFM…

    • http://micahmedia.com Micah

      OHH, sorry, I missed that you want VR.

      You’re alone there. I just bought/tried the Tamron and Sigma versions with stabilization and neither is as sharp, focuses as well. or has comparable bokeh.

      In my opinion the 17-55 is as good as it gets and I’m not sure where up would be from there. Maybe a bump in resolution so it retains more detail past f11? Really, that’d have to be an inhumanly sharp lens to accomplish that though.

  • Jon Porter

    Great news! But more likely the aperture will be constant, not fixed.

    • Jivee

      I think admin implied “constant” when he said “fixed”. Don’t think any lenses these days have fixed apertures….aside from Lens Babies aperture discs and reflex lenses.

      • MJr

        I think Jon Porter implied smart-ass humor :)

  • JC

    I will gladly sell my 24-120mm f4 for this for my D7000. I am hoping the price will be less than $800, and it will include Nano coating and VRII.

  • MarkR

    If the IQ of this lens is really good, it will be the perfect complement to the inevitable D400.

  • Myl3s
    • Myl3s

      Or a cleaner link, that also states its a production model

      http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/03/03/nikond4studiosamples

    • http://micahmedia.com Micah

      …you’re going to need to qualify “better” ’cause I’m not seein it. They look the same to me. In fact, looking at the samples over at imaging-resource, I’d say the D4 looks a touch cleaner in the reds.

      Since noise is almost indistinguishable, I’d say the higher res one wins on IQ.

      • John Richardson

        You need a bigger clearer screen then. The D3s is cleaner, not by much mind you. But enough to make pixel peepers notice. But in reality and everyday use no one will be able to tell. The other advantages the D4 has over the D3s make a huge difference for PJ’s and Sports Photographers, which it is clearly aimed at.

    • Michael

      I’ll wait for DxOMark’s score. I don’t trust those samples, there are lots of variable to control, DxOMark is much more professional.

    • rhlpetrus

      It’s about an overall tie in high ISO re noise, with more detail and better color control for the D4 (at same print sizes). This is expected, given that the D3s and D4 already share the sensors with highest QE available, close to the theoretical limit (less than a stop). I doubt either the 5D3 or the 1DX will better the D4. Here is the D4xD3s comparisons, ISO800-25K, shown using DPR’s own files converted with ACR:

      http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=40792170

      At base ISO, the D4 beats the D3s in DR and shadows, as this test shows:

      http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=40792708

  • alvix

    IR is out with usual samples…it seems to me that D4 has a veru nice tone on tone sharpness ..with respect to 16mp D7000 …

    • alvix

      ehm ..”very” ..

  • kevin

    if nothing wrong with their testing method. the D4 ISO looks in between d3s and d700. Can i believe this? i mean…. WHAT is going on? I cant believe D3s has better iso than D4.

    • rhlpetrus

      What are you looking at? If at full 16MP x D3s at 12MP, that’s expected. Both at same res, they are very close, I see slightly more detail and colors from D4.

  • Anonymous Maximus

    11cm long! Too big of a lens for DX :(

    No, thanks, the older one was a compact quality allrounder. What is the need for constant aperture at the expense of size & weight?

    Are the new designer team of Nikkor optics all come from gym? They simply seem to ignore the factor of portability with the new series of lenses.

    Hey Nikon, hear me, make some compact zooms as in the good old days !!!

    • Steve

      I agree they should make some real compact lenses ( a pancake around 24mm and f/2 would be very welcome ) and they should also update the 17-55 f/2.8, to get a wider end and maybe VR…. but instead they do this; replace an excellent lens with er, a similar one…. Eh ? Logical ?

      Constant f/4 is nice but not hugely different from f/5.6 in terms of dof and high iso is less important these days too. No doubt it’ll weigh close to 650 grams and be relatively bulky for travel/walkaround. If people can tolerate this, I’m sure they’d prefer the 17-55. Are they planning to delete the current 16-85 ? That’d be madness – it’s a great compact lens – 485 grams and 85mm long, 72mm wide and gives very decent images. Logical ?

      I can’t see many people selling their current 16-85 for this unless it’s absolutely stellar, but then it would then be very expensive… logical ?

      Sorry, but I just don’t get it. The only way this makes sense is to see it as a dx version of the FX lens. But why have similar product lines when FX and DX are clearly aimed differently ? Logical ?

      Someone please explain the logic behind Nikon’s plans to me. Are they simply playing safe ?

    • BornOptimist

      11 cm is the length from the focal plane, not the length of the lens.

  • http://jaysonknight.com Jayson Knight

    Looks like a great lens, but why are all of Nikon’s DX zooms so slow? f/4 is good enough, but I’d love to see a faster zoom for DX.

    • PHB

      Get the FX zoom instead.

      No seriously, an f/2.8 zoom is going to be pricey for DX or FX. The problem is that at the wide end, the retrofocus design required in all SLR cameras for wide lenses has a double penalty, first that 1.5x multiplier is now a handicap, second the rear element has to clear the same mirror sweep as an FX lens.

      Bottom line is that wide DX lenses are not as good as FX and that is not going to change.

      You are far more likely to see fast CX glass come out than DX. In fact that is the whole point of EVIL cameras, they don’t need a retrofocus design and can use much simpler, lower cost short focus designs that provide better performance.

      • WoutK89

        the advantage of DX is small and light, not heavy and huge. Nikon thinks if you want great quality, you might as well carry around the FX lens.

  • Big G

    Does it mean that something big is coming? Maybe D400? :)

  • ken

    if you look at the watch face why are the 9 and 10 hands different in both pictures?

  • http://www.omgsquirrel.com/ OMGSquirrel

    So Admin does this release and with Canon announcing the 5DMKIII do you think it’s now time for a D400 announcement at the end of the month or early April or will Nikon wait for Canon to announce the new rebel first?

    Also this lens doesn’t interest me but what does interest me is if they are willing to make a constant aperture DX lens they might start to fill in the DX gaps they have and maybe an update to the 17-55, 10-24 or 12-24.

    • burgerman

      I dont get all this D400 stuff. Whats the point of ANY crop sensor cameras now? It would just be a D800 with some of the sensor blanked off!

      D800 is already a 15mp DX camera, with the best focus system, build quality, etc available? I mean It does FX as well IF YOU WANT, or just DX if not. I dont see any point in any DX only cameras after this. With a D800 if I want to travel light I can take a DX lens prob f4/5.6 as this one is and have a very portable package. Or use my real 2.8 or bigger FX lenses and go FX when weight doesent matter or job demands…

      • http://www.omgsquirrel.com OMGSquirrel

        So all the sports/wild life people who need 8FPS and the extra reach are just SOL is what you’re trying to say?

        • EnPassant

          Most photographers don’t need 8FPS. And how much difference would it really make to have 8 instead of 6FPS with the grip for D800 using the D4-battery?
          I think the market for a DX-camera offering only 2FPS more than D800 is just too small. Besides we don’t know yet how the expected D7000 replacement, D7100 will look yet. Maybe it will have even more professional build with more FPS and better buffer?

          • WoutK89

            hit the nail in the head there. For 6fps in DX you need the extra grip AND the heavier battery of the D4… DX is cheaper and smaller (less heavy) thus for most people a far better solution, and the D300s was already at 7fps without the grip and without special battery (a lot cheaper and less gear to carry)
            Just because you can afford having the more expensive and slower D800 doesnt mean that just everybody should buy this to get a D300s camera with newer specs and D7000 resolution.

            • http://www.petertexiera.com Pete

              thank you WoutK89 i was getting tired of reading that post from burger man. Not everyone here can afford $3000 + FX lenses. I am waiting to hear about a new D400. But hardly think that buying an 800 is the way to go and use it in crop DX mode. thats just a waste.

      • http://www.robertash.com Robert Ash

        The answer is price point.
        -D800 is $3,000 price point and
        -D7000 is $1200 price point.
        -D400 will be around $1800 price point if it follow the D200/D300 series pricing.
        -Less flexible DX models will be even less expensive, especially if they have more of a consumer-grade build.

        • http://www.robertash.com Robert Ash

          An additional answer is size and weight. I can pack 2 of my DX bodies + 2 DX lenses along with my clothing, etc. into one carry-on luggage piece for a short trip. I could not do that with an FX camera.

          • http://www.robertash.com Robert Ash

            Correction – I meant to say I could not do that with 2 FX bodies + 2 FX lenses, certainly not nearly as easily and probably not at all.

        • enesunkie

          Your right, but it’s not just the price of the bodies, it’s the price of the glass. The price of a D7000 and 16-85 is about $2000. The price of a D800 and a 24-70 will be about $5000. One poster above won’t even be able to afford a decent lens for his D800! $3000 is enough of a barrier that will keep DX around for a while.

          • Calibrator

            This is true – not everyone has equipment that pays for itself when using it.
            As an amateur myself I started with DX + lens because FX +lens(es) would be too expensive for a first DSLR. I needed to be sure that photography will stay with me to justify more money.
            But even if I upgrade later the DX body will stay with me as a smaller alternative.

          • MJr

            Yes, tho it should be compared with the equivalent 24-120mm F4 which is much cheaper than the 24-70.

  • CRB

    Nikon, where are the DX primes? specially the 36mm EQ….the patented 24mm? pleaseeeeee…….

  • http://iphoto.blog.163.com/ Bob

    I am still wondering whats the difference between this one and previous one?
    only F4?

    maybe it’s very like the SB910 and SB900?

    • SoftonDemand

      Probably its VR III and extra long design

  • Gordon

    Wish Nikon would announce a 16mm PC-E and 20mm PC-E lens.

  • ginsbu

    Calling f/4.3 – 4.7 or f/4.1 – 4.9 a constant f/4 aperture strikes me as a bit optimistic. (f/4.8 being a half stop slower than f/4.) Most lens designs that I’m familiar with keep within a third of a stop from their stated aperture (either way). Call it f/4.5 if you like, but not f/4.

  • Nikonnut

    Cant wait for d800 vs 5dm3 samples.

    The D4 samples on imaging resource is more accurate than those on Dpreview:

    http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d4/nikon-d4A7.HTM

    The ones on Dpreview use different lenses and settings. Look at the small sprocket icon. Aperatures are different as well. some at 7.1, 9 and 11.

    Cant wait for 1dx, D800 and 5Dm3

    I have a feeling the d800 will surprise.

    Apples to apples of course.

    ISO 25k with no noise reduction, downsampled to 5dm3 22-23mpx.

    Who uses anything more than 25k anyway?

    Lenses? I want a FX 24-70 f2.8 AF-G VR2 or 3!

  • http://www.flickr.com/rodstaffordphotography Rod Stafford

    Has anyone ever toured the Nikon Sendai plant? Do they even have tours? If so, do they have to be arranged well in advance or can you just show up at various times during the day for guided tours. I am headed that direction for some meetings later this month.

    • EnPassant

      Do any production plant nearby where you live have regular tours??

      Still doing a quick search about Nikon assembly plant tour I found this answer from half a year before the earthquake:

      “I searched in Japanese official website and google.
      Nikon has not open plant to the public.
      Only for local schools.”

      Smaller groups from photomagazines and test-sites have been on tour and published impressions together with Nikons official photographs. Reports and links about that can be found here on Nikonrumors!

      • http://www.flickr.com/rodstaffordphotography Rod Stafford

        Yes, as a matter of fact, there are a lot of businesses that have tours of their plants and factories. They obviously don’t let people walk around the floor where products are being built or assembled but they have areas where they display products and allow the process to be observed to some extent. The ones I have toured or just know about include auto assembly plants where they have a raised catwalk area to observe a portion of the assembly line, vine companies and beer companies generally have tours (and even samples), furniture factories, etc. Even a candy factory where you can watch candy being made from behind a glass walkway enclosure (they had samples too).

        I actually would be a little surprised if Nikon didn’t have tours of at least one or two of their factories. It is a great public relations and advertising tool. The people that are members of the NPS (I am not one of them) would be prime candidates for taking such tours I would think.

        • http://www.flickr.com/rodstaffordphotography Rod Stafford

          Oops, that should have read “wine” companies, not “vine.”

  • getanalogue

    Why a replacement for a good lens? Must be stellar. An update of 17-55mm would make much more sense, like 16-60mm 2.8 incl. VR. Big and heavy yes, but would match well my D7000 + battery grip though

    • EnPassant

      Most pro’s have since the D3 came out migrated to FX-format. Therefore the market for a big, heavy and expensive DX mid-range pro-zoom is not that big. An improved replacement of the old 16-85 make more sense as it for sure will sell well and be just the perfect size for the expected D7100.
      Mid-range- and short tele-zoom DX kit-lenses are Nikon’s bestselling lenses. Thats’s why Nikon have made more than 10 different already, about one new every year since digital dslr cameras became mainstream.

    • MJr

      True, if you own one it doesn’t need replacing. But if you don’t (like me) i think a constant aperture has great great value, especially if you’re mainly a prime lens fan (like me).

      I have a quality standard zoom planned, but not one to replace all others. I actually prefer the ‘slow’ F4, because that is as fast (as heavy, expensive, and big) as it needs to be. I’ll use the 35/1.8 indoors, and then a portrait lens for background separation on the longer end. Most such situations can be easily anticipated, the quality much better, and imo, more fun, which i guess would be the deciding factor.

  • Billy Bob

    Whether you’re going to release a D400 or a D7100, I don’t care, just DO NOT ABANDONED THE PRO DX BODY. Oh yeah, all that buzz about really fast burst rate, great low light performance and any other improvements over the D300s, bring it on Nikon cause that’s what we want. Anyone who’s with me and agrees on$1799.99 (body only) $2099.99 (kit with new 16-85) please respond with feedback

    • burgerman

      You can abandon it for me. No point now a d800 is 15mp DX anyway… E

      ventually the DX only cams will all just be smaller plastic, and use the smaller dx lensws only and be a different consumer lighter system…

      Because better built pro fx cams will be like the d800 (same size as your d300) but can do high res DX anyway…

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/jan_f_rasmussen/sets/ Jan F. Rasmussen

        But all of us who would use DX most of the time anyway (because we almost never can get as close as we would like to our subject (shy critters), will prefer a dedicated DX camera if for nothing else for the full viewfinder (not a big part blackened out as in a FX camera in DX-mode).

        So please do not abandon (can’t imaging that happening any time soon, so no worries).

        • burgerman

          The veiwfinder isnt smaller on FX with blacked out bit for DX its the same SMALL veiwfinder all DX cams have…

          • WoutK89

            burgerman, I am getting tired of your style of commenting. You are not alone on this world, and you are wrong! The D800 features a lower maginification viewfinder than the D7000. So you are 100% wrong that the D800 has a D7000/D300s viewfinder in an FX body with just the FX parts blacked out.

    • EnPassant

      You think you will get a DX 16-85/4 VR premium ($700?) kit-lens for only an extra $300?

  • R!

    This is for the D8000 or D400 ,for the D800/E ,the 16 35 f 4 VR is a must !!!!!!!!!!

  • http://haroldellis4444@gmail.com Harold Ellis

    there would be no need for DX if nikon would release cheap FX camera.
    DX lenses are not much smaller then FX anyway and all the promise of small and fast glass is gone with the wind

    • MJr

      Right okay, have you seen the 24-120/4 next to the current 16-85 ? Or the D700 next to the D7000 ?

    • Calibrator

      Nikon needs to combat the cheap Canons with cropped sensor if they want to stay in the business like they are now.
      Open your eyes: A company can only survive with fullframe products at much higher prices.

    • Sahaja

      “….if nikon would release cheap FX camera”

      What do you mean by “cheap”? $2,000, $1,500, ….

      That will only ever happen when someone figures out how to manufacture FX sensors cheaply.

  • kev

    Some people do write some crap on here, do any of them actually use a camera???

  • SiliconVoid

    According to Nikon the D800 does 6fps when in DX mode, with or without grip, but in DX mode it would be the equivalent to using any of the DX bodies and at 6fps.
    I would just spend more time watching and learning how your subject moves, then you don’t need the high fps at all – if you still do, shoot video. :)

    • WoutK89

      Good luck catching a millisecond moment if you can not do more than 3 fps. You know people have a slower response time than the camera itself, when something happens and you click, your moment’s already passed. Has nothing to do with knowing your subject. However there are people that shoot 100′s of JPEG continuously…. then yes, you have to study your subject more (or make a movie…) but for 1 or 2 second bursts it might mean catching the moment or missing out on it.

  • T.I.M

    an other slow DX lens, that mean no D400.

    • WoutK89

      Lenses dont mean a certain camera will or will not come. I would expect with a D400 launch however to see a telephoto (80-400 VRII?).

  • Ben

    I’ll gladly invest in one of these if its blindingly sharp (at least as sharp as 24-70 or 80-200 VRII) for my D7000! :)

    • Dr Motmot

      @Ben
      You mean 70-200mm VRII

  • rhlpetrus

    Good update of this lens, which was a bit too slow for everiday use in the long end, as well as for DoF control. But I wished for an update of the 17-55, nanocoated and possibly wider range (16-60mm), at f/2.8, a much more useful lens.

  • R!

    I think something with 24 mpxl is on the way before summer!!!!!!

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/arree/ Art v.Klaveren

    Just hope the new 16-85VRII has better bokeh then the old vrII, compared with my 70-200mmVRI.
    Then i will buy it, for shure…

  • lolly

    Did anyone notice the AF-S 70-300 VR is getting harder and harder to find ? This is one of Nikon’s best selling lenses and already back-ordered at B&H and many other places too !

    It can’t be due to the flood in Thailand because during that period the price remained well below MSRP.

    Is a 70-300 VR update/replacement coming soon in the form of an f/4.0 ?

    • ughh

      I can not think of a much crappier lens than the 70-300mm VR. Everything about it is terrible.

      • PeterO

        ughh, I respectfully disagree. I borrowed a friends 70-300VR for a vacation in Switzerland because I wasn’t going to lug my 70-200VR and 300 around the Swiss countryside. I was very pleasantly surprised by the results.

        • WoutK89

          My only complaint is the 5.6 aperture, but that is what makes it affordable and a good walk-around tele lens.

  • elph

    I could use a new 24 f1.8, the 1.4 is out of budget range.

    • D400 Please

      +1 A DX wide angle prime is surely most overdue lens in Nikon line up by some margin. 24mm and also a 16mm would be perfect.

      D400 is still wanted by lots of people – will prob be Sony’s 24Mp sensor and D300 standard of build quality… I hope

      • PeterO

        “D400 is still wanted by lots of people”

        Indeed and the speculation about whether the D400/D8000 (or whatever they call it) will be DX or FX could be laid to rest by the simple question of “where would they produce another FX camera?” Obviously Sendai is at capacity, so not there. The Thailand plant used to produce the D300 and stocks for those are dwindling so they’re not producing those anymore. We know that the Thai plant should be back up to capacity sometime this month, so that’s where they would make the successor. Is there a new plant that we don’t know about? As well, Nikon said that they’ll continue producing the D700 (that’s the cheap FX for now).

  • amadeo

    any idea when the 16- 35 f4 will be available again?

  • http://ronscubadiver.wordpress.com Ron Scubadiver

    Never assume a patent application relates to a real product. The patent covers an invention that could be implemented in the design submitted with the patent application. It could also be implemented with something else.

    • WoutK89

      However, there were rumors about this lens coming out this year before the patent was known to the outside world ;)

  • MegaMo

    16-85mm ? Excellent !

    f/4 ? Less..

  • SteveC

    Been waiting a year to complement my D7000 and 35mm 1.8G lens.

    Where is the new 16-85mm F4 lens coming out??

    • SteveC

      *sorry, when is the new 16085mm coming out.

  • http://www.itsrich.info Richard hart

    anyone notice that the current lens is out of stock at b&h and adorama?

    I think new version will be at least $1000 like 24-120 f4

    I am holding out for it, it should make a good multi purpose lens and good for travel too! I doubt the optics will be as good as 24-70mm but under flash lighting f8/f11 who can tell the difference?

    question! what are more people interested in this or 24-120mm?

  • http://www.itsrich.info Richard hart

    any word on how many aperture blades there are? current lens has 7.

  • Back to top