< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Tokina officially announces their AT-X 70-200mm f/4 PRO FX VCM-S lens

Tokina-70-200mm-f4-FX-lens
Update: the lens is now available for pre-order at B&H | Adorama | Amazon.

Today Tokina Japan official launched their full frame AT-X 70-200mm f/4 PRO FX VCM-S lens that was announced earlier this year for the CP+ show. Here are the details (there is still no press release form Tokina USA):

Tokina-AT-X-70-200mm-f4-PRO-FX-VCM-S-lens-collar-TM-705

  • The above pictured tripod collar TM-705 will be sold separately for ¥24,000 (around $230) and will start shipping on June 30th
  • The lens offers 3 stops of image stabilization
  • Available in Nikon mount only for now
  • Shipping will start on May 30th
  • Price in Japan: ¥150,000 (around $1,478 the US price will probably be lower, for comparison the Nikon version costs $1,400)

Lens design:

Tokina AT-X 70-200mm f:4 PRO FX VCM-S lens design
MTF charts:

Tokina AT-X 70-200mm f:4 PRO FX VCM-S lens MTF chart 2Tokina AT-X 70-200mm f:4 PRO FX VCM-S lens MTF chart
For comparison, here is the MTF chart of the Nikon 70-200mm f/4 lens (comparing MTF charts from different brands doesn't really mean much because they have different ways of measuring the data used to create the charts):

Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-70-200mm-f4G-ED-VR-MTF-chart
Lens specifications:

Focal length 70-200 mm
Angle of view 34.45 ° ~ 12.42 ° (35mm full format)
Aperture F4
Lens design 19 pieces of 14 group
Minimum focusing distance 1.0 m
Maximum magnification macro 1:3.57
Filter Size 67mm
Size 82mm (maximum diameter) X167.5 mm (total length)
Weight 980 g
Supported Formats 24x36mm (35mm full format)
Corresponding mount Nikon DSLR (full-size solid-state image sensor)
JAN Code: 4961607 216 569

Sample images taken with the Tokina AT-X 70-200mm f/4 PRO FX VCM-S lens can be found here.

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

    It wont make any sense to buy this if u just take a look at the results of the CaNikon 70-200 f4´s. The new Nikon one, perfect in price an quality. The Canon, even the non IS, so sharp. Dont know how the companies think sometimes.

    • Adrian Gopal

      I concur.. if the asking price is around 1.4k.. I will stick with the Nikon version..

    • Mike M

      They probably started developing this when it seemed like Nikon had no plans to fill the 70-200 f4 hole in their lineup. Unless the MSRP is really inflated on this one (which Tokina does tend to price high) I don’t see it winning in the marketplace.

      • Thor

        Yes, They showed a mockup of this lens a few months before Nikon released their f4 VRIII. I was looking for an update for my old 70-210mm, and waited almost a year for this one, but eventually just bought the new Nikon, which is absolutely stunning by the way. Hope Tokina won’t break their back on this one!

        • Mike M

          Yeah I owned the Nikon too (I’ve owned all the 70-200s, I would have stuck with the f4 had there not been a definite advantage to the 2.8 for some of my shooting) it was a stellar lens, about the only way to beat it would be an awesome lens at a much lower price I would think, there’s not really any short comings to it you could sell against.

    • iamlucky13

      Tokina seriously inflates their announced MSRP price, but they release it to the US at a much lower price, at least in the US.

      For example, the current version of the 11-16 was announced at 90,000 Yen, which was over $1100 at the time, and even at today’s exchange rate would be close to $900.

      But the same day it was available for pre-order at $669.

      Their price also tends to drop over time. It’s currently around $550.

      So I’d expect an initial price around $1100 for the 70-200 F/4.

      Too bad they didn’t go for a 300mm F/4 instead, however, to address a lens Nikon doesn’t seem very eager to update.

    • stoooopid

      Well, the have been developing this lens since before Nikon announced there 70-200 f/4 – I am pretty sure they were going after the pent up demand from Nikon users for this lens. So there is that.
      Also, as many have pointed out, in a year, this lens will be selling for $800. If the optics are good, and they probably will be, I think that is a pretty dang good value proposition.

  • Bill M.

    Got excited… until I saw the price. :(

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      The US price should be lower (cheaper than the Nikon version).

      • MB

        With current competition from Nikon and Canon the price must be way lower to even consider … street price should be say half of what is announced …

      • Antonio

        It’s slightly heavier than the Nikon (+130gr) and offers a lower VR gain, so it has to show some other(s) advantage(s) to justify the purchase.

        • Global

          This may be a case of “starting something — and having to finish it just to recover costs.” At least from a Nikon-adapter perspective.

          ON THE OTHER HAND.. what do the other brands offer? Is Tokina actually targeting Canon or Sony on price? Although that would contradict the choice of releasing the Nikon mount first….. hm.

    • anti-core-ed

      i hope it will be around 1000 usd. which is already far better than nikon price. cos i know that in that zoom range; quality is inevitable. so good news..

      • neversink

        And how do you know that? There have been some mediocre lenses in that range also.

        • anti-core-ed

          u also have a point. but in that price range with new generation technology; i dont think it will disappoint us. at least i hope so .. :)

        • Global

          If Tamron can have 150-600 VR under $1000 with an original design; Tokina can do it with 70-200 VR not very original design!

          • neversink

            Ah. Are any of these lenses really any good? I have my doubts.

  • Mansgame

    LOL, noooo.

  • Z

    Higher price than Nikon’s excellent 70-200 f/4? ….
    Even the optional tripod collar is more expensive than Nikon’s f/4 version, $230 vs. $170 … nuts …

    • YS

      Tokina has a history of pricing the initial Japanese prices at some insane level. The first 11-16/2.8 was going to be US$800, if you believed it. Actual sale price was a lot lower.

  • Global

    I can’t read MTF graphs — is this supposed to be significantly sharper than either of the major brands?

    • doge

      Here’s Nikons f/4 charts:

      WIDE:
      TELE:

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

        I added them to my post for comparison purposes (comparing MTF charts from different brands doesn’t really mean much because they have different ways of measuring the data used to create the chart).

        • Spy Black

          Which brings up the $64,000 question, why the hell has the photographic industry not developed a measurement standard that applies equally to all manufacturers?

          • neversink

            That’s why you read DxO’s comparisons, even if some of their rating categories are controversial and seem rather subjective rather than objective when testing these objectives!!!!!
            And that’s why I test lenses like crazy when I purchase them so I can return them if necessary, which I have had to on occasion.

            • Spy Black

              Yeah, but there still needs to be an MTF standard. When you buy a car, you know what it’s net horsepower and torque are at the wheel, right? There’s a reason for that. There’s a universal standard of measurement for it. There’s no reason why there shouldn’t be a universal MTF standard.

            • neversink

              Again, Spy – that’s why I test all my lenses after purchase. Just to make sure they meet high standards. And there can always be a lemon in a batch anyway. I don’t think enough people test. They take for granted that the lens will be as advertised.

            • Spy Black

              I understand that. You would do the same for a car, right? But at least you know when a car has a rated power level, you can directly compare it to another car, or any number of cars. You have a global measurement standard to go by.

              Similarly, motorcycle weights used to be given in “dry weight”, which meant without oil, coolant, or gas. This could make a bike appear to be very light. Today bikes are listed in “curb weight” which include oil, coolant and a full tank of gas. This gives you a real-world idea of what they weigh in the real world.

              We need a global MTF standard. Period. You will still need to test a lens out to be sure it measures up to your expectations, but at least you can realistically compare it to any other number of comparable optics.

            • neversink

              Agree.

          • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

            They did for batteries use (CIPA), they should do it for MTF charts too.

            • neversink

              There is no way the industry will do this willingly. They are hiding behind the marketing executives who are afraid of real comparison charts. That’s why Dx0 testing, although the scoring is partially subjective, can be helpful.

          • NoMeJodas

            The answer to this question is more than obvious: they don’t want the customer to discover that a $200 lens is performing better than a $1200 one.

            Most companies, and Nikon is one of them, do not even publish MTF charts for their lenses stopped-down, so you don’t get the chance to compare the 85/1.4 to the 85/1.8 or the 70-200/4 to the 70-200/2.8 for example.

            The most detailed and useful MTF charts I’ve ever seen are those from Leica. They publish it for the lens wide open, at f4 and f5.6 (and f8 if the maximum aperture is around f4) and they include 5, 10, 20 and 40 lp/mm in their charts. Second best are those from Zeiss. Just like Leica they also publish extra charts for distortion and vignetting a.o. Canon at least publishes the data for 10 and 30 lp/mm with the lens wide open and at f8 (although f5.6 would have been more useful). The worst are the above from Tokina. The vertical scale is vaguely numbered and they don’t even bother to include the most basic information, the f-number (is this the lens performance wide-open or at f8?). Marketing devisions are ruling the world these days :-(

            • Spy Black

              Yes, but if you put pressure on the industry it will have to respond. That’s how modern horsepower figures came to be.

            • NoMeJodas

              Fully agree. We have that what all those companies want: money! :-) And money is the most effective pressure medium!

          • Global

            Its a good question — same issue with ISO & f/stop.. these are outdated concepts for Digital photography (manufacturers understood this originally when they classified digital vs. film — but now its a bunch of confused B.S.).

            Its just like the 35mm “equivolency” issue. Made 10 times worse by “sensor generations” and aspects of measurement, which were never even considered in film days.

    • E

      I don’t think one can reliably compare MTF charts between brands.

    • NoMeJodas

      You might want to read this great article about MTF chars:

      http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2009/06/have-you-seen-my-acutance

      The above charts from Tokina don’t really tell me much because I don’t see at what aperture they were measured.

  • UnknownTransit

    The Nikon version is selling at $1300 CAD in Canada. Unless it’s significantly cheaper, it’s not worth it.

  • Ca

    What a bust…
    And when Sigma releases their version… LOL!

    To bad for tokina, they are really struggling it seems.
    They should have made something simpler, like a 8mm, non fisheye prime for m43

  • Anton PupkIn

    130g heavier than Nikon =(

    • Neopulse

      Start working out then a bit more :)

      • Anton PupkIn

        nope. Heavier is heavier when you have the camera all day long.

        • Neopulse

          Use straps then to alleviate the weight, train a bit more, use both hands instead of one, etc. There are options that help.

          • Anton PupkIn

            OK. Tell me what are the options when you go hiking for 2 weeks with a 30-35kg backpack?

            • Neopulse

              Have another person to go with you and help you with it, and then again there’s always training. If soldiers are training to carry 50+kg rucksacks in any condition a normal PT then I think it’s possible to do it unless you have some kind of handicap that impedes it. Why not stick to a mirrorless system then?

            • Anton PupkIn

              Are you american? =))

            • Neopulse

              Never meant to imply that you should be a soldier, I apologize if I did make it sound like that. What I meant was that it’s possible to carry rucksacks over long distances with training. But also that is one heavy bag that you carry full of stuff i might add. If you had to choose one body and 2 lenses to take, which would they be?

            • Anton PupkIn

              Of course it is possible to carry heavy rucksack. But when the rest is equal, I will obviously get a lighter lens. For 98% photographers Tokina is not a first choice anyway. IQ-wise it can not be better than CaNikon versions, simply because they are almost perfect. Now it’s only advantage can be only the price. And a weight is playing against Tokina. Which is bad (for Tokina).
              Back to my “weakness” :-)
              I have Nikon D600 and Oly Pen-1. And often I take Pen instead of D600 because of its weight&size. My Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 weights almost 850g alone.
              It is not only a matter of 1 lens, but it all sums up. +100g here, +200g there, and finally you just take Oly Pen or P&S instead of FF.
              Apart from this certain lens, I don’t like the tendency that all new lenses become bigger and heavier (e.g. look on 24-105 Canon vs. Sigma).
              1 body with 2 lenses it depends on the problem.
              General photography: Nikon D600 + 14-24 + 24-70
              Mountains Landscape: D600 + 16-35 + 70-200 or 70-300
              Portraits/party D600 + 35 + 85
              and so on.

            • Neopulse

              Gotcha :)

            • Neopulse

              Never meant to imply that you should be a soldier, I apologize if I did make it sound like that. What I meant was that it’s possible to carry rucksacks over long distances with training. But also that is one heavy bag that you carry full of stuff i might add. If you had to choose one body and 2 lenses to take, which would they be?

            • Neopulse

              Also, 30-35 kgs? What are you carrying? besides a 10 year old child on your back. O_O

  • Mike

    Tokina has made glass for Nikon before. This looks a lot like the Nikon 70-200 f/4 rebadged. It’s probably not a coincidence that this comes as a Nikon mount only at first as well (and the tripod collar is extra). 3rd party street prices usually come down a lot once it hits shelves. I used to have the 11-16 2.8 DX lens, and their lenses are very well made.

    • Right Said Fred

      This lens has a different optical design so it isn’t rebadged.

    • neversink

      What are you saying? Are you saying that Tokina has independently made their own lenses with Nikon mounts. Or are you saying that Tokina actually contractually collaborated with Nikon to make lenses. I think you must have meant they independently make third-party lenses. Tokina, if I am not mistaken, is a partner with Pentax-Ricoh.

      • neversink

        Oops – oops edit edit edit.

  • anti-core-al

    i ve been waiting for this lens for a loooong tme.. thanx god its released.. i feel like it will change a lot! great news..

    • neversink

      Excuse me. You sound like an employee of Tokina,with your “great news” statement. What do you mean this lens is going to change things a lot. This lens is not new. There is no new technology in it. It is another third-party 70-200 lens. How in the world will it change things? It won’t change a thing. And you know it.
      And further…. Why in the world would you thank God for this lens. Or any lens for that matter. Please thank God for peace, for your health, for the return of the kidnapped Nigerian girls. Honestly, you need to go back to your boring marketing assistant desk job.

      • Thor

        Why so angry? It’s just another choice for us out there, and for those who waited more than two years, this is obviously great news! You sound like you have a very boring desk job censoring prayers for God.

        • Dpablo unfiltered

          You’ve been waiting for two years for a 70-200 f4? Really?

          • Thor

            Nope, I got Nikons 70-200/f4, but I waited a long time for this before finally upgrading. Wanted to compare them. I own two Tokinas, and they served me very well.

        • neversink

          Thor, Not angry at all. Ahhhh. The power of words.
          This guy is just an obvious troll. Come on. This is the same type of verbiage you see on stock sites. “Great news, product will change your life, you will thank God when you purchase this.” This guy seems to me to be a shill for Tokina. I’m having a little fun with him.
          By the way, did I mention God in any post here ever. This is the first time, and only because this stooge is acting like an excited customer only to entice others to buy. He thanks God for this lens.
          Give me a break!!!!!
          By the way, I am in between assignments in Africa. Will be heading out in the bush in a week. The only time I sit at a desk is to edit photos and peruse these sites. Enjoy.

          • Thor

            I don’t know. Tokina has a few fanboys, and their excitement for this way too long awaited glass is just fine by me. I do agree that the price has to come down significantly to make it competitive, but I find the total slendering here unfair as no one even tryed it out yet. Let’s wait for the reviews/tests! This wouldn’t be my choice for a pro-job in African bush for sure, but then there are a few Nikons I wouldn’t bring either. Have a great trip!And beware of those nasty hippos!

  • Thor

    Timing is extremely important in this business. This lens would have sold like hot cakes three years ago. Now it’s too late with Nikon’s f4 and Tamron’s f2.8 alternatives out there in the same price range. On my wish list from Tokina: an ultra-wide 14-16′ish prime for full frame with AF and filter thread. Please!

    • Jon Ingram

      Yup, that would be fantastic! I would kill for a reasonably light and sharp 14, 15, or 16mm 2.8 prime from Tokina. They tend to do pretty well with their wide angle designs.

      • NoMeJodas

        That’s true. Their 12-24/4 DX lens was one of my favorites on the D7000.

        • Thor

          Not to mention the adorable 11-16/2.8 DX! Used to be a flat out lovestory with my D90 :)

          • NoMeJodas

            OMG I forgot the legendary 11-16/2.8. I borrowed it once from a friend for a weekend and it easily topped the 12-24/4 performance, and I liked the 12-24/4 performance even better than the Nikon 16-35/4 on a D600 (16mm on that lens was practically unusable for my taste anyway because of the nasty distortions).

  • Spy Black

    Tokina is going to have to re-think it’s pricing strategy if it plans to sell this thing.

  • http://www.naturalvolo.it/ michele perillo

    Apparently Nikon is not the one company taking bizzarre decisions

    • xtt

      let’s wait for sigma 70-200 F2.8 Art priced at 999USD :)

      • neversink

        Once you buy that third-party Sigma or Tokina, you won’t wait to long for it to fail. That’s the price you pay by going third party. Calling the lens “Art” is just a marketing ploy!

        • Sports

          What’s “long”?
          My Sigma 70-200/F2.8 hasn’t failed.
          It’s their 2nd generation, and they’re at the fourth generation now, so my copy is getting old.
          The next generation will be a “Sport” for sure, not an “Art”.

          • neversink

            Good luck to you.

          • MacManX

            My Sigma 70-200/2.8 “died” the other day, after two years of use. It just gave up out of nowhere. No more Sigma here, that’s for sure.

        • http://kyleclements.com/ Kyle Clements

          All of my Tokina lenses (28-80 2.8, 11-16 2.8 DX, 70-210 mm f/ 4) are in fine working shape after years of abuse, and all of them were bought used.

          I trust the build quality of old Tokina.

          • neversink

            Enjoy your Tokina. I won’t touch it.

          • rt-photography

            you have the 28-80 2.8!? wow, I had that lens. loved it so much. with what cameras are u using it? fringing?

            • http://kyleclements.com/ Kyle Clements

              I use it on my D600.
              It’s crap at f/2.8, decent at f/4, but at f/5.6 and up, it’s every bit as sharp as the Nikon 24-70mm 2.8.

              Bought it used for $375

            • rt-photography

              thats what I remember. I shot from f/4-5

              excellent range. shame no one can do a nice range like that. got for that price more or less as well. now im using a 28-70 AFS. the tokina has better build from what I remembered. cheers

        • Will Chao

          you are a marketing ploy

          • neversink

            No way – I speak from experience. I had a so-called top-of-the-line third-party lens break down on me during the middle of an assignment in Africa. I had tested the lens and it was only one month old when it broke down. I was able to complete the assignment, but it was a hassle. And a lot of others had the same problem with this lens. Third-party lenses are a crap shoot unless you are buying quality like Zeiss.
            I am not a marketing ploy and don’t have any financial interest in Nikon or any other company. i just have a photo business I run. Don’t be fooled by the marketing hype of a name called “Art,” or any other such cute name. Good luck.

  • Kynikos

    Won’t sell many above $999.

  • Neopulse

    I think the pricing is fair. If Tokina is gonna try to come out on top, they have to bump up their prices in order to show that they have quality also and to prove that Nikon isn’t the only premium lens company that it thinks it is.

    Bold move Tokina. Never shot with Tokina ever, but their 11-16mm makes me wanna try it out.

    • Alex

      Not sure, Sigma is managing pretty well in that matter.

      • Neopulse

        Yes you are right. I think Tokina is following suit

      • Kynikos

        Sigma is still undercutting Nikon/Canon pricing by 33% or more. I don’t claim this new Tokina is no good. I’m just claiming if they want it to sell, it’s got to come in at $999 or less.

        • Ian Dangerzone

          They have to have something to justify that price or the consumer will tell them to pound sand (with their pocketbooks)

          Sigma, for example, went out saying they were trying to surpass the Otis with their Art lens. I don’t know if they pulled it off, but at least they put something out there that was a step up trying to show they were a contender. Personally I think the bokeh on all Sigma’s touted Art lenses looks a little grainy and busy.

          Frankly from what I’ve seen of Tokina they make excellent lenses–especially the 11-16 2.8. If I didn’t have the focal range covered off already, I’d give serious thought to this lens.

          • neversink

            You are correct about the bokeh on Sigma. I find it to be extremely hard and ugly.

        • Alex

          You will probably be right. Nonetheless, I believe it is better to wait and see how good it is, to have all the real parameters, then give all our statements ;)

  • Alex

    Bad timing, expensive … lets see if it shows real top quality results. Otherwise this lens does not make much sense vs the current offering from Tamron, Nikon etc.

    I am rather hoping Sigma will release a new OS version of their amazing old 100-300mm f4, THAT would be a hit for sure!

  • rt-photography

    overpriced and to me looks like a dud but well see. wtf happened along the way? did u forget a 2.8 first?

    $230 for a tripod collar? suck it tokina!

    I like your gear since I had the 28-80 2.8 but if youre asking $230 for a fucking tripod collar, the now 16-28 I was getting this summer is a deal breaker and im not buying anything from your company.

    Id rather get the tamron 70-200 VC 2.8 for $1400 including tripod collar than an f4 for $1700.

    I believed in you. fuck off tokina. assholes.
    im not even looking at your upcoming 24-70 2.8

  • xtt

    when I saw the number $230, I agree that this is a reasonable price for a 3rd party 70-200 F4. Then I realized that this is for the tripod collar, LOL

  • fjfjjj

    This lens will look great on my F90.

  • rt-photography

    Nikons 70-200 F/4 is $1600 with tripod collar how the fuck does tokina have balls to ask $1700? resale value on the nikon will be way better as well.

    • neversink

      Read the thread before commenting and you would have seen a post from Admin saying the US price will probably start much lower once it arrives in shops. And thank you for lovely language. Do you know another words besides “fuck” to describe things when commenting on a discussion after the pricing of this lens has already been discussed?? ;–}

      • rt-photography

        I know many nother words. fuck is how I express myself when im pissed at ripoff artists. he said “probably”. well see what probably much lower means. if it sells for anothing more than $1100 with collar, its not worth it. I can also say shit as well. fuck was the correct word though.

        • neversink

          I’m not impressed by this lens…. Nor am I impressed by your use of language. “Fuck” and “shit” are overused words that lose their power and sense of shock and meaning and actually make you look immature and unworthy of being taken seriously. You should really try to take your time and find some substitutes. But if you want to curse, go ahead. You are not offending me. it just lowers your credibility.

          • rt-photography

            Im sorry mommy, I wont curse again. credibility? what are we in court? move along NS

            • neversink

              You can curse in court. You can curse in the street. You can curse anywhere you please. But after awhile you just end up sounding like the gutter. That’s my point. You don’t offend me, and I doubt you offend anyone else. There is nothing wrong in keeping some standards. Curse when its appropriate, or curse when its inappropriate. I don’t care. And obviously you don’t care what you sound like. So curse me out.

            • rt-photography

              Leave it be. Dont be an internet police i didnt curse u. Showing my disgust for mfr ridiculous price tags. Theyre trying to pull a fast one on people. If it sells for more than 1100 bucks with collar its not worth it.

            • neversink

              I don’t disagree with you on Tokina. It’s probably crap, but user and buyer beware.
              (And I am not policing you or the internet. I have been know to curse, but personally, I will use it on the internet or in public judiciously. Just letting you know that since the internet is filled with so much detritus and shit floating around, that I try to stay above the internet sewers of the lowest common denominator of thought.) Peace brother!

  • Johnny Dough

    What’s with the pictures, why are they different? One is prototype and one is final product?

    • rt-photography

      no theyre the same. the 2nd one is showing the side switches so its turned to the right. and it also has the tripod collar attached.

    • Adrian Gopal

      The second one shows the optional tripod foot..

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

        Yes, the second shows the tripod foot mentioned in the post.

        • Johnny Dough

          I must be blind, but to me that middle ring, I assume it’s the zoom ring, is clearly more narrow in the 2nd photo

        • Johnny Dough

          And in the 2nd shot it has a gold ring around the front

        • Matty B

          Yep, does look different. The lower looks more like your classic built-like-a-tank Tokina. The upper one is more refined.

          • Johnny Dough

            The photos of the lens on dpreview are right

        • AlphaTed
  • Mike Michel

    F.4 good for what exactly? ;) maybe portrait but forget about the bokeh, and if u tried it with sports you will have to increase ISO. it’s a very very limited lens and for sure not worth the 1400$, tamron 70-200 with VC 2.8 is way better in terms of quality and use! Anyway good luck Tokina ;)

    • youo

      Ah ah ah … “way better” comparing to a product that nobody has tested yet!!!
      Thanks for your help!

      • Mike Michel

        Buy it, test it, and then come and tell us how it served your business/personal needs!

  • Alex

    Is it only me or are all iOS users having trouble to use the commentary section???

    • AlphaTed

      No problem here, using iphone right now.

      • alex

        Thanks for your answer, maybe i need to update my stuff

  • rt-photography

    this seems to have a very simple VR system. no active mode. and since its the first for them in a lens, who knows if it will do 3 stops.

  • STEVEN SPIELBRICK

    does the words…cheap looking

  • Helios Yuen

    Hey God, Please tell them the Angenieux design 28-70 are very impressive

  • Back to top