where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
PB PM said:
It can be, in the winter months you really have to use a tripod. That being said, at the shutter speeds you need when shooting most birds (1/500s or more is best), then VR isn't much help anyway.
I saw some tech info on VR and at what shutter speeds it provides help, and it was pretty clear that at high shutter speed, VR didn't have much impact.
However, I still want it.
DX lens will work with all Nikon D-SLR cameras.
Please Nikon,
400mm f/3.5 VR DX in 300 f/2.8 size but lower price and auto focus still work nicely with TC-17E III.
or 400 f/4 VR DX in 300 f/4 size, 77mm filter thread and same price.
HotDuckZ said:
or 400 f/4 VR DX in 300 f/4 size, 77mm filter thread and same price.
That doesn't really make much sense considering that the existing 300mm F4 on a DX camera is giving you a 450mm equivalent. Why would you want to pay the same money for a lens that isn't as long?
HotDuckZ said:
However, I still want it.or 400 f/4 VR DX in 300 f/4 size, 77mm filter thread and same price.
This is physically impossible: 400mm f/4 means that a light beam of 400mm/4 =100mm diameter has to enter the front element. A 77mm filter cannot fit on a front lens that is at least 100mm in diameter. Even a 300mm f/4 is at the edge with 77mm filters, as the front element is at least 75mm in diameter.
Ok, finally Nikon will release 400mm f/3.5G VR DX.
Full specification;
Nick Name - 400 f/4 DO Killer
Focal length - 400mm
Maximum Aperture - 3.5
Minimum Aperture - 22
Maximum Angle of View (DX-format) - 4°
Maximum Reproduction Ratio - 0.25x (MF)
Minimum Focus Distance - 3.9m AF/ 1.5mMF
Focus Mode - Auto, Manual, Auto/Manual (Not M/A)
Diaphragm Blades - 7 (But round @f/4-5.6)
Distance Information - NO
Size - 126 x 250cm
Weight - 2,200g.
Filter - 52mm holder (Nikon current standard.)
Hood - HK-36 Slip-on (16cm total length, build quality as HK-30.)
Performance;
VR II - 4 Stops
Focus with out TC - Excellent as 200-400VR
Focus with TC-14E III - Fast
Focus with TC-17E III - Still Fast
Focus with TC-20E III - Moderate
It's curse some vignette when stop down in FX. (Far distance.)
Feature;
No AF-Lock
Included protective glass
Polycarbonate body with some Magnesium construction.
Price : 3,599 USD. (Or as low as possible, please!! lol.)
Available : Late 2010 (With TC-17E III)
Another (real) alternative is the Tamron 200-500 AF, its $900.
photozone seems pretty positive about it.
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/296-tamron-af-200-500mm-f5-63-di-ld-if-sp-lab-test-report--review
HotDuckZ said:
Ok, finally Nikon will release 400mm f/3.5G VR DX.
... ...
It's curse some vignette when stop down in FX. (Far distance.)
I still don't understand what kind of savings you expect from making this DX versus FX (at 400mm!!!)? At that focal length, you are not limited by the mount (F-mount), you do not have the challenges of retrofocus, and you do not have the challenges of large apertures. Can you spell out what savings the optical designer can achieve in an F-mount lens of 400mm focal length by limiting the angle to 4° (instead of 6°)?
I believe you meant telefocus, retrofocus is used on wide lens.
And yes you are right, the only way to save on DX lenses is by using smaller optical glass elements, but on long lenses you are more limited by the aperture and not so much by angle of view so front and all other glass elements must be pretty large F-mount or not.
Recent Convert and mb have got the heart of the argument. It doesn't make sense to design telephoto DX lenses.
mb said:
I believe you meant telefocus, retrofocus is used on wide lens.
I did mean "retrofocus", and I do know what it is. What I wanted to say: when the focal length is much shorter than the free space behind the last lens, the optical designer has to fight for every additional degree of un-distorted imaging. For this reason, wide angle(zoom) Nikkors are available that only fill the DX circle, even though the distance between the rear element and the focal plane is the same for FX and DX. The Canon designers have it easier (at the price of restricted compatibility): The EF-S lenses intrude further into the body. If an EF-S lens were to be mounted on a 5D-II, it would lead to a mirror crash. That does not happen with Nikkors, even those that are exclusively DX. This is one reason that convinced me to settle for Nikon over Canon (not the only reason, mind you!).
Sorry I missed "you are not" part ...
You must log in to post.
