< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikkor 70-200mm f/4 and 18.5mm f/1.8 lenses to start shipping next week

According to Nikon Japan and Amazon.com the new AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR lens ($1,399) will start shipping next week, on November 29, 2012. Sample images taken with the new lens can be seen here, here and here.

The Nikkor 18.5mm f/1.8 lens for Nikon 1 is expected to start shipping on November 30th.

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

    I think I may have to spring for that 70-200.

    • DX owner

      Me too. I hope the image quality would be good with my 2x Nikon teleconverter on DX. The new 140-400mm VR3 lens!!, watch out birdies that’s 210-600mm VR3 on DX….

  • brock

    I got a used 70-200mm f/2.8 vr for less than that, and I can’t say I’ll be trading it anytime soon.

    • delayedflight

      It’s not aimed at people like you. It’s aimed at people who want something lighter, are happy to sacrifice a stop and compensate with VR.
      People who keep saying this need to get a clue as to how the market works not everyone wants or needs an f/2.8 tele lens.

  • Mark

    Almost had a heart attack when I saw 18.5/1.8. Thought it was the aforementioned mystical 18/1.8 Full-frame lens and I had just missed it. :(

  • luigithesqueegie

    If the MTF charts provided by Nikon are accurate I’ll take the 5 stop VR in the new f/4.0 70-200mm over the original version of the 70-200mm f/2.8 any day. Getting the latest version of the 70-200mm f/2.8 for $1400 would require using a weapon of some sort. PLUS it weighs half as much

    • MyrddinWilt

      Those are f/4 charts. Comparing against f/2.8 is probably not a good idea. The f/16 charts on the kit lens likely blow both out of the water fully open…

      I can see the point of this lens on a DX body or even more so on a CX. Great for birding. Can’t quite see the point of going full frame and then getting f/4 lenses.

      • preston

        “Can’t quite see the point of going full frame and then getting f/4 lenses.”

        Huh???? Please enlighten me.

        • Jan F. Rasmussen

          I for one can not see the point of MyrddinWilts comment, what is wrong with f/4 on FF?

          • desmo

            nothing this should be an excellent lens for d600 thru d800
            and even d3 thru d4 users

          • MyrddinWilt

            The only difference between FX and DX is that the FX sensor captures a wider angle of view. That means that FX wide lenses involve less bending of light than their DX counterparts and tend to be better overall.

            For a telephoto lens an f/4 lens on an FX camera will give you the exact same results as an f/2.8 lens of the same field of view on DX. It is the size of the aperture that determines the DoF in the equations.

            I can see that some people put a priority on size and weight and a D600 plus an f/4 lens certainly has an advantage over a D800 plus an f/2.8. If people are not already bought in to DX gear it is probably the way to go.

            Moving from a good DX setup to an FX setup with f/4 lenses is a large investment that doesn’t actually change where you are very much.

            • Nick O.

              Your logic is slightly flawed mister…not everyone is keen on f/4 for DoF reasons alone.

      • desmo

        in theory your right ,
        but in application your not
        Nikon and Canon f2.8 and pro grade f4 glass consists of much higher quality glass than kit lenses
        in a pinhole camera smaller aperature would mean more resolution
        but in lenses confusing pro glass with kit lenses is mixing apples and oranges
        any lens will clean up when stopped down but not enough to over come its inferior optics

        • MyrddinWilt

          Oh, they should be better than the kit lenses. I was only objecting to the comparison between the f/2.8 and the f/4 based on the charts wide open. I would want to see the f/4 chart for both to make the comparison.

          Some of the kit lenses have better charts than the f/2.8 lenses for the same reason. Though there is also the question of volume there. Making a one off run of glass for a professional lens is very expensive. Making a one off run of glass for a kit lens does not add to the cost very much because they use so much.

          Many of the kit lenses are astonishingly good and always have been. Back in the day Nikon used to sell the same 50mm as a Nikor design and an e series lens.

          • desmo

            back in the day nikon didn’t make e series lenses

            • MyrddinWilt

              I hadn’t heard the manufacture was outsourced. It was just the Nikor AI design without the multicoat and with a plastic set of cams instead of metal.

              I have the f/1.8 Series E and still use it. But reversed on a bellows for closeup work. It is actually much better than any of the modern lenses for that as it has the aperture ring.

              When I went to look up the lens again at the Ren Kockwill site, I found this at the bottom of the page:

              “As this page is copyrighted and formally registered, it is unlawful to make copies, especially in the form of printouts for personal use. If you wish to make a printout for personal use, you are granted one-time permission only if you PayPal me $5.00 per printout or part thereof. Thank you!”

            • desmo

              oops, I wasn’t referring to where E series were made(i don’t really know)
              I keyed on “back in the day” Nikkors were non AI ,
              only the didn’t call them that as AI was yet to be conceived or perceived

  • Remedy

    Retarded comment system is retarded.

  • oldskoolarcade

    The store I work at (which shall remain unnamed) has a Nikon 1 18.5mm f1.8 on the back stockroom shelf… which is really odd, because we don’t have ANY of the Nikon 1 cameras. We do at the other locations out west, but not in Winnipeg. Plus, that lens isn’t even mentioned on the stores web page. So, it lists at $200 in our sales entry system. And I’m pretty sure the cardboard box it comes in is heavier than the lens itself. I gotta say, I’m underwhelmed by the Nikon 1 system so far. I think the Samsun/Sony sensor size is closer to the mark, and also the Canon M is more useful.

  • studio460

    I bought a refurb AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G VR I in mint condition for only $1,300 USD (also note that the VR I version has higher magnification at close focus than the VR II version). I would recommend shopping around for a used/refurb 70-200mm f/2.8G VR I, before committing to the pricey f/4.0 version.

    • Not Surprised

      Its not “pricey” — its VRIII + LIGHT WEIGHT. The VRIII will add another stop of light. And it is HALF the weight of the 2.8.

      These are invaluable to some people. That being said, if you mostly need /2.8, then your advise should be well-taken, the VR I was a good lens.

  • Neopulse

    Bit of a dilemma because of this lens. Either get the f/2.8 VRII for $2400 or the f/4 and a Sigma 85mm f/1.4 for the same price.

    • Not Surprised

      How is that a dilemma? The second option should be obvious. If you need portraits, the 85/, if you need distance, the f/4 will be nearly as good as the f/2.8, due its VRIII. If you are on a budget, go for the second option.

    • Pat

      or 70-200 VR2 plus 85/1.8G?

      • Neopulse

        Would pass the $2400 budget even if the 70-200 was refurbished. I like having warranty with stuff I buy. I personally already have a D800 and a VR2, but the reason why I’m searching is for my buddy overseas who wants to get something at that price range. Kind of presenting him options and plus your idea isn’t that bad either.

  • Pat

    Already have the 70-200VR2, but still tempted by this f/4. Even tho I know very well I need/want either of the 55-300 f/2.8-4 or AF-S 80-400 ….

  • dnguyen

    I thought it was a 18.5mm DX lens, and was I disappointed…

  • Jc

    Another lens update for another useless system.

    • Jan F. Rasmussen

      Which one of them?

  • alfredo

    So why consider this f/4 lens if the Tamron 70-200 VC f/2.8 is coming in a month or two? Seriously, honest question.

    • nobody

      Hint: Look at the weight of both lenses :)

    • desmo

      because its a high quality lens
      the Tamron isn’t
      it would hold its resale value
      theTamron won’t

  • FrenchGuy

    I’ve tried the 70-200 f/4 at “Salon de la photo” in Paris last week and I can tell you it is very sharp and nicely built.

    In fact I’ve got a 80-200 f/2.8 with a D90 and the 70-200 f/4 looks very light compared to this bulky lens but the AF is so fast and the VR works very well so that you can really compensate the loss of aperture and the seems to be less sturdy aspect of the 70-200 f/4. IMO it is a very good choice for the ones who want a more compact and lightweight 70-200 than the f/2.8.

  • Katze Grelly

    It would have made much more sense, if Nikon had released a 1,8/18,5 DX instead of the 18,5-lens for the crappy 1-system. DX-iusers are waiting since years for a fast wide lens.

  • photographer

    I received my V2 + 18mm f1.8 today in Tokyo.

    • KnightPhoto

      I’ll be getting the 1 Nikkor 50mm equivalent. Let us know how the form factor is compared to the 10-30mm? Also interested in what you think of the V2. I have the V1 and likely will stick with that for now.

      The other thing that is on my radar is the 55-300 f/2.8-4 rumour. Would be a perfect lens for me for video, theatre, and as a 2nd wildlife lens with TCs.

  • PABLO RICASS0

    Just received a call from my local photo shop, placed a pre-order last month, the lens is finally here.

    Will go down tomorrow to pick it up.

    Nikon 70-200 f/4 here I come! :)

  • Back to top