This kinda sounds familiar, Mmmmmm I'm sure I have heard a similar conversation like this somewhere in here before, . OH well, Pizza's here, anyone hungry????

If I was able to use a new 70-200 VRII, or any of Nikon's high-end zooms, the last thing I would do is complain about close focusing. I'll just be here with my beater 28-85 ƒ/3.5-4.5 I bought from salvation army for 60 bucks.

On topic, I think after this whole "tragedy" everyone will test effective mm at close focus.

Lenses Niko, Lenses

Pete

You want to check my mom out?! :^)

NikoDoby said:
Yes the warning labels on hot coffee, lawnmowers, and guns are very helpful.

How many other lens updates has this affected? Everyone and their mother will be checking newer versus older versions of lenses in their collections now.

*facepalm*

I try to keep my mother out that lens checking thing, but how did yours check out??

Pete

Yes the warning labels on hot coffee, lawnmowers, and guns are very helpful.

How many other lens updates has this affected? Everyone and their mother will be checking newer versus older versions of lenses in their collections now.

*facepalm*

NikoDoby said:
If none of you noticed this "problem" before why does it suddenly need to be addressed in specs and reviews now?! I don't need a warning label to tell me my coffee is hot or that I shouldn't stick my hand under a running lawnmower.

Actually you do have those warnings printed ...
I personally do not care about slight view angle shift, what will bother be more is a focus shift and nobody shows that in the specs as far as know

Yes maybe you are right, but darn it now I know and loosing sleep over this, almost afraid to use my 70-200 VR ;<(

Pete

It is nothing new, but more information is rarely (if ever) harmful.

We had a thread on these very forums recently about whether the new model 70-200 was worth the additional $500. So long as Nikon disguises (at best) differences between the models one is left to ASSUME the replacement behaves identically to the prior _in all unmentioned changes_. Few of us have the time to do our own comprehensive lens comparisons before purchase, and the number of possible variables to check out is hefty. Asking for professional lens reviewers to do such for us is what we do every day.

The fact there is such a large difference reported in this behavior between the latest two iterations of the 70-200 is valuable information that some might very well find tips the scales one way or the other.

This also gets to why I would be upset if I had purchased the new model based solely on Nikon love and reasonable expectations. Nikon's own failure to disclose a change in behavior, while gladly touting other changes, bites the very hand which feeds them - the early adopters who pre-order upon announcement. While one can not expect a full objective review from their manufacturer of choice, clearly expecting comprehensive and accurate specs is a reasonable expectation in my book.

But Pete if it never influenced your choice of lenses before why should it now? Like Johndbr points out this is nothing new.

NikoDoby said:
If none of you noticed this "problem" before why does it suddenly need to be addressed in specs and reviews now?! I don't need a warning label to tell me my coffee is hot or that I shouldn't stick my hand under a running lawnmower.

Yes you are right I newer noticed before, I do now and I think this should be reviewed actually. It is not always an important issue, but it could influence my lens choices

Pete

I noticed this problem with the first internal focus lens I bought, the 200mm Micro. That was 20 yrs. or so ago. This is a fact of life for internal focus lenses. Doesn't bother me a bit. I sure don't think about it when I'm shooting. To many other things to think about.

If none of you noticed this "problem" before why does it suddenly need to be addressed in specs and reviews now?! I don't need a warning label to tell me my coffee is hot or that I shouldn't stick my hand under a running lawnmower.

Jokes aside have any of tried to test some of your lenses to see how close focusing effect the angle of view at max mm

Pete

While Nikon does not publish as much data as I'd like, such as this, the info available from exif seems to "tell" everything. I wish they still listed lens weight in both grams and ounces like they used to also.

With this apparent new problem of smaller effective mm at closer focus distances, app down to less than 130mm on the New 70-200 , does this happen to other lenses, should lens reviews test this.
If they already test this, I most admit to have never paid attention to it

Actually just did a basic test on my 16-85 Zoom and at 85mm it does maybe 15-20% zooming out at min distance compared to max distance

Pete

Try this on your lens, point at something contrasty at max mm and manual change focus distance and see if the lens is zooming at the same time, note the image will move in and out of focus, but you can see if the shape changes in size