An updated list of not yet released Nikon lenses based on product numbers

Nikon does release their lenses in sequence using four digit products numbers (as already discussed here and here). This is the updated list:

#2168 - PC-E NIKKOR 24mm f/3.5D ED
#2169 - ???
#2170 - AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II
#2171 - AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8G ED VR
#2172 - AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4G ED VR
#2173 - AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4G ED VR
#2174 - PC-E Micro NIKKOR 45mm f/2.8D ED
#2175 - PC-E Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/2.8D
#2176 - AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR (announced November, 2007)
#2177 - AF-S Micro-NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED (announced January, 2008)
#2178 - AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR (announced January, 2008)
#2179 - AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR (announced August, 2008)
#2180 - AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G (announced September, 2008)
#2181 - AF-S DX NIKKOR 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED (announced April, 2009)
#2182 - ???
#2183 - AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G (announced February, 2009)
#2184 - ???
#2185 - AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II (announced July, 2009)
#2186 - ???
#2187 - ???
#2188 - ???
#2189 - ???
#2190 - ???
#2191 - ???
#2192 - AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II (announced July, 2009)
#2193 - ???

A lot of skipped/missing model numbers - that's a lot of lenses folks! The question is when will they get filled? I went few years back and there are few missing number here and there (for example #2169).

You can check the lens model number by changing the 4 digits in this URL: (the last part of the URL doesn't really matter - it's used for the product name).

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

    Some lenses are planned but may take longer time to develop and test before release. Some may get canceled. Currently there are gaps at 2152, 2153, 2155, 2157, 2158, 2163, 2164, and 2165 as well.

  • Zoetmb

    2155 is the silver version of the 55-200 without VR, primarily sold in the UK.
    2158 is the now discontinued D50 kit lens 18-55 3.5-5.6 AF-S DX G ED
    2163 is the 14-24
    2164 is the 24-70

  • Rich_L

    Which one will be the new 200 micro?

  • Weston

    85 1.4 and full frame fisheye are due up soon.

  • Anonymous

    And the point of this post is? That there will be new lenses released by Nikon? That new lenses are being developed right now? You don’t need to look at product numbers to figure that out…

  • Numbering….

    Isn’t is possible this is a clerical error and that NIkon meant 2182, instead of 2192, for the 18-200VRII?

    If so, it fills one of the missing gaps, and closes all those others (except one)……..

  • heartyfisher

    More likely that the 18-200 II vr was inserted and fast tracked ( for marketing reasons) after a list of lenses that have already been planed for ..

  • Toby

    “I went few years back and there are few missing number here and there (for example #2169).”

    Also 2163-2167 are empty. Actually, 2100-2128 are empty too. The earliest I could find with the url editing method was 2129.

    “2155 is the silver version of the 55-200 without VR, primarily sold in the UK.
    2158 is the now discontinued D50 kit lens 18-55 3.5-5.6 AF-S DX G ED
    2163 is the 14-24
    2164 is the 24-70”
    All of those show up as blanks, so discontinued items are removed. Pity. Nikon does not seem to care much about its past history.

    2129 AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E I
    2130 AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E II
    2131 –
    2132 –
    2133 –
    2134 –
    2135 –
    2136 –
    2137 AF NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8D
    2138 –
    2139 AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED
    2140 –
    2141 –
    2142 –
    2143 –
    2144 AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED
    2145 AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
    2146 AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED
    2147 AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED
    2148 AF DX Fisheye-NIKKOR 10.5mm f/2.8G ED
    2149 AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
    2150 AF-S VR NIKKOR 200mm f/2G IF-ED
    2151 AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II
    2152 –
    2153 –
    2154 AF-S VR NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
    2155 –
    2156 AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED
    2157 –
    2158 –
    2159 AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
    2160 AF-S VR Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED
    2161 AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED
    2162 AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
    2163 –
    2164 –
    2165 –
    2166 –
    2167 –

    • PTG

      2163 shows up correctly as AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED.
      Similarly 2164 is AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED and
      2166 is AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED.

      • Zoetmb

        2131: 500 4.0 AF-S D ED-IF II
        2132: same in light grey
        2133: 600 4.0 AF-S D ED-IF II
        2134: same in light grey
        2136: 28-100 3.5-5.6 G
        2140: light grey version of 70-200 2.8
        2141: 24-85 3.5-4.5 AF-S G ED-IF
        2143: 28-200 3.5-5.6 G ED-IF
        2142: same in light grey
        Others are either mentioned in the two posts above or the number wasn’t used.

        On the USA site, Nikon doesn’t show discontinued items, although they’re slow to remove them. On the international and Japan sites, they do have areas for discontinued items, but they’re generally incomplete.

    • thanks for completing the list

  • It will be the HOLY PRIMITY!

    135mm f/2.0 AF-S VR Nano
    200mm f/2.8 AF-S VR Nano
    300mm f/4.0 AF-S VR Nano

    Trust me, I know, at some time in our lifetime we will see those lenses announced!

  • Zorro

    Where is the DX 24-135 f4 VR II?

    • Anon

      What on Earth would that be good for?

      • Zorro

        95% of my shots.

    • Anonymous

      Not there and very unlikely to appear…

      – Nikon has a lot of DX standard zooms
      – f/4 lenses are rare from Nikon, especially DX f/4 lenses (AFAIK, the only one is the 12-24/4)
      – All zooms starting at 24mm are FX

      So if it appears, it will not be DX for sure.

  • funny

    wow one can only hope they are the AF-S updates to the 24, 35, 85, 105 and 135 primes on full frame. Enough with the 18-xxx DX zoom crap.

  • Adam

    damn, I hope Nikon start making step up FX glasses (constant f/4 like Canon L) instead of getting people into buying expensive DX glasses.

    • PHB

      Nikon is run by people who understand photography, not fashion. Not so long ago Nikon believed that the DX sensor format was superior to full frame and had no intention of ever producing another full frame design. There were good engineering reasons behind that announcement, in optical systems bigger does not mean better.

      Then they got caught flat footed by Canon and the Nikon board conducted a purge. And Nikon came out with a DX and FX camera in the same launch. So Nikon now make FX cameras as well. But that does not mean that they are going to copy Canon in everything.

      Those Canon f/4 primes look remarkably similar to their F/2.8 primes and note that Canon still has VR and non VR versions in their catalogue. Count me as suspicious but I suspect that they have rather more to do with being able to say that Canon has more lens models out than Nikon.

      It is really hard to see why Nikon would make the FX lens line up a priority when they are less than 5% of the cameras sold. There are more D300s than all FX cameras put together. If you are buying FX then you are committing to buying big heavy lenses. If you want a lightweight set you are going to have to go for a DX sensor and a VA design.

      Fact is that constant aperture designs are not really all that constant. And they all have smaller ranges than the VA designs. So even if the lenses are lighter, you have to carry more of them. I can’t see lightweight FX lenses being a priority until the D700 equivalent has come down to current DX prices. Until then Nikon will assume that people who buy a $2500 camera have the money to buy a $2000 lens.

      DX is still king for long range photography. A DX sensor outperforms any FX sensor plus a 1.5x teleconverter.

      There are holes in the Nikon lineup, but they are no longer areas where Nikon needs to play catchup to Canon. They are where Nikon needs to play catchup to Nikon.

      The two biggest pro-quality priorities have to be the AFS versions of the 80-400 zoom and 85 f/1.4 prime. After that I would suggest that the next priority would be to complete the lineup of fast primes – 18DX, 28DX, 28FX 35FX. Given the success with the 35DX I would expect that to have higher priority.

      • Zoetmb

        >>>It is really hard to see why Nikon would make the FX lens line up a priority when they are less than 5% of the cameras sold.

        Because FX can be used on both DX and FX whereas DX can only be used on FX in crop mode. Furthermore, if you look at the physical size of the latest DX lenses, it doesn’t really look like there’s any size savings, especially if the lens contains a focus motor. The primary purpose of DX lenses was to restore the wide-end and that’s now well covered. And looking ahead at the next five years, as sensor prices fall, FX will become a larger part of the market. If Nikon was putting out $150 lenses for DX beginner photographers vs. $500-$1000 pro lenses for FX at the same equivalent lengths that would be one thing. But lately, everything is pretty expensive. Therefore, IMO, Nikon should now “focus” on filling FX gaps that everyone can use, aside from DX kit lenses, which they seem to now have enough of as well.

        • Adam

          yup I definitely agree with you, part of the reason why you don’t really see Nikon users talking about upgrading to D700 unlike Canon users talking about upgrading to 5D cause Nikon users will not have proper FX glasses unless they spend a huge amount for f/2.8 glasses and that is a huge amount of money when sum up a D700+some f/2.8 lens.

          Canon was smart by making f/4 glasses as step up glasses. It doesn’t matter if the user will or want to eventually upgrade to FF, but if they do, they know they don’t need to sell all their glasses like what Nikon is doing right now.

          Oh and a APS-C camera only gives you a smaller FoV which benefits long range but a FF will beat it in almost every area such as low light ability, low noise, much higher details.

        • funny

          agreed. DX glass just doesn’t make sense after what they have already made. the DX shooter also will be less likely to own a huge stock on lenses the way pros who already own an FX camera or enthusiasts who are considering one.

          Thus choice for the DX user besides the current offerings is simply not helping out nikon anymore. They have to aim at the market of enthusiasts and upgraders who will invest on higher end glass and bodies. This is where nikon is lacking severely. It is ridiculous to see people still defending the company when the low end market is already well served. The argument pro stuff moves less volume thus should take second place forever does not fly anymore for a high end company like nikon who depends on the pro market just as much.

          the time for nikon to address their shortcomings in the pro and semi pro market is today. the days of DX cheapo glass took place and it is time to move on, or move out nikon.

        • PHB

          As a point of fact, Nikon already has a 24-85mm FX zoom thats f/4. Now admittedly it is f/2.8 at the wide end, not f/4 throughout, but why on earth would anyone prefer a constant aperture f/4 to a f/2.8-4?

          Nikon already has a lower cost 80-200 pro lens. Instead of giving up an f-stop, you give up VR.

          I think that it is pretty obvious what the ‘missing’ lens numbers correspond to, they will simply be the corresponding AFS versions of the existing AF lenses in the catalog. The company has clearly decided to phase out the in-camera motor on the lower end bodies and that means they need to make all their existing range AFS.

          Excluding the wide angle primes which are effectively made obsolete by zooms, there are six AF lenses in the catalog that do not have an AFS replacement already. There are eight holes in the series.

      • Adam

        Oh and its zoom not primes. Primes are sharper then most zoom by the way.

        And the IS and non-IS well maybe got something to do with showing off they have more lenses but hey, it is cheaper right? Some ppl maybe just needs a f/4 glasses without IS and while some ppl willing to pay more for IS. There are options for people with different needs.

        Like how I don’t get it with why Nikon introduces a 35mm DX glass when they could have introduced it as at 35mm FX glass and when mount on the DX mount, the 35mm will still give a 52mm FoV, same as the 35mm DX. Now, thanks to Nikon “smartness”, we can’t use the 35mm DX on a FX body without changing to DX mode (lower resolution) or having a strong vignetting.

        • PHB

          Because a 35mm f/1.8 FX lens would cost three times as much. If you look at Nikon’s previous fast, wide angle lenses you can see that they required pretty exotic glass.

          The 35mm DX lens is the normal equivalent for the DX sensor. Nikon has sold a ton of them and will sell many more.

          Nikon has made it very clear that FX glass will continue to be pricey. They seem to think that people who buy a $2500 camera will pay for expensive glass. What a strange idea!

          FX shooters made it pretty clear that their priority was a 70-200 zoom that didn’t vignette.

  • James

    It’s not funny at all when you say enough of the 18-200 crap.

    This is one of the bread and butter of Nikon and will always be the one for not so serious photogs who cares only on bringing one lens.

    Remember, they need to make a profit also in order to invest on R&D for those nice lenses for the Pros.

    • Hey-nonny-mouse

      The complaint is that there have been many recent updates of the 18- category: 17-85, 18-55 (VR and non-VR), 18-105, 18-200 (VRI & VRII), 18-70, 18-135, but very few updates to fx (except for the holy trinity and exotic teles). If casual shooters only need one lens why do they need so much choice? Does this merely represent poor planning of the product range on Nikon’s part?

      General consensus around here (not that this necessarily represents the general population) is that we’re sick of bread and butter. We want caviar, at the very least some rib-eye steak 😉

      • Anonymous

        There was never a 18-200 VR1, it has always had VR-II the only real change with the updated 18-200 is a zoom lock, hardly a huge investment in R&D.

        Why do casual shooters need so much choice? So Nikon can keep them shooting Nikon and not Canon of course. The average consumer is where the money is at, if Nikon doesn’t keep them they go out of business.

        • Zorro

          Very well said. Absolutely right.

        • funny

          >>Why do casual shooters need so much choice? So Nikon can keep them shooting Nikon and not Canon of course.

          ridiculous. nikon is just being overly retarded with so many choices for consumers that only buy 1 lens. and the reason they will buy canon is because they know canon would have the better lens selection should they want to upgrade to F4 or even f2.8. With nikon you have two choices: 5 flavors of the same cheapo lens with no clear distinction other than a few irrelevant mm, nothing in the middle, a severly outdated pro-lineup lacking AF-S version of the most popular prime lenghts.

          so as a matter of fact, nikon’s glass lineup often hurts them against canon. Was it not for their outstanding sensors and cameras, there would simply be no reason to go nikon. canon outglasses them day in day out.

        • funny

          I would add that the one pro line nikon has updated outstandingly is the 2.8 zoom and telephoto. But these are 1.5K and beyond lenses. mid primes and f/4 line are constantly the #1 reason nikon loses out to canon, which is pretty well covered in the 2.8zoom and long tele segment. In other words, stop the nikon excuses. they are playing catchup in the full frame market and anybody who doesn’t see it simply hasn’t bother to compare lens choices.

        • Hey-nonny-mouse

          Point taken on the 18-200 already being VRII, also I messed up with the 16-85 (not 17-85). The point is there have been 8 consumer grade lenses covering wide angle to short/medium tele produced in recent years. For recent pro-grade gear nikon is only really offering lenses for $1.5k and up (as pointed out by somebody else).

          If you’re serious about photography but don’t have a spare $5k lying around for lenses, or you want to go relatively light/unobtrusive (i.e. primes or f4 zoom) but still want highest image quality, then it’s clear nikon is lagging in an important market segment.

          Last point regarding giving casual shooters lots of choice. For serious amateurs and pros this is fine – they know what they need/want and that tends to be different specialist lenses for different types of photography. Casual shooters don’t necessarily know what they want/need and giving them too much choice can be a bad thing:

  • hero

    This proves it. Nikon IS infact making more lenses

  • Chris

    What a load of old rubbish.

    Now, when is that 70-200 ii hitting the floor?

  • Astrophotographer

    My bet is 2182 and 2184 are the 24mm and 35mm f1.4. And Nikon is waiting for the release of a new FX camera to match. October?

    • PHB

      While Nikon often announces lenses at the launch of a camera, I don’t seem much evidence of delaying the launch of a lens to come out with a camera. They launched the 14-24 with the D3, but that was pretty much a one off.

      The D5000 came out with the 10-24, a lens that costs as much as the camera and is clearly aimed at the D90-D300 segment, not the D5000 crowd. The D300s came out with a lens where the chief change was that it was being optimized for FX frame!

      The 35mm f/1.8 DX came completely out of the blue.

      If Nikon has a lens ready, they will launch it.

  • grumps

    As far as holes in the floor as someone described it:
    For me, I’d love to grab a primes for weight saving reasons. Other than that Nikon has some excellent zooms with the new 70-200mm VRII coming in Nov.

    24mm, 35mm f/1.4
    85mm f/1.2 (or f/1.4)
    80-400mm is also a good replacement at this time! (a good aperture could make this lens a huge hit!)

    The 18-200mm DX showed me a good sign, that Nikon can and will in a heartbeat update something even if it wasn’t totally necessary! In those terms, I’d love to see a better built 24mm PC-E lens especially for the price!

    The only other thing would be 135mm upto 200mm macro lens. I guess I have seen a DC lens coming (rumor). Another good thing would be to bridge the gap of the SB900 and SB600 Flash.

  • Tim Catchall

    Wow, that is a lot of new lenses. Could it be that they are planning a ‘big bang’ on the lens front? ie an announcement of AF-S replacements for nearly *all* the remaining screw-drive lenses?

    • Bryan

      I’ve often wondered if after everything is replaced with AF-S they will stop putting the screwdrive motor in the prosumer bodies.

      • WoutK89

        maybe in the future, someday, or isnt that enough to know? 😛
        I dont see it happening anytime soon

      • PHB

        I can definitely see the motor going in the next full rev of the D90. But I would expect it to stay in the D300/D700 bodies for some time yet.

        Its not just a question of cost, that motor adds weight. Now on the magnesium bodies the extra weight is not so much of an issue, but on the plasticy bodies it is significant.

        Now whether you consider the D300/D700 prosumer or professional seems to depend on whether you have a D3 or not. But I have seen far more amateurs with D3s than professionals and I have seen more ful-time professionals with D300s than D3s. So I somewhat doubt Nikon would do something silly.

  • northy

    just watch…. an almighty 50mm /1.8G is coming!

  • Nigel

    Nikon Claims to have lost so much money this last time around, and it would be to there advantage that when they announce a new product , that it is available immediately..not sometime later, having to wait these long period for it to hit the shelves may have some to change there minds about buying them.

    • WoutK89

      Or they just give potential 70-200 buyers the time to save some more money 😉

  • Mikeg76

    They really need to do something with their pricing structure. Nearly ever lens that Nikon makes where Canon has an equivelant is more expensive than Canon’s version.

    • hero

      they aren’t direct competitors in the lens market. once you commit you can cross over. I don’t think that is a big deal

    • shivas

      and nikon lenses are better than canon offerings anyway. . .

      • mikeg76

        That is subjective.

      • Anonymous


  • Daf

    Had a look at doing something similar a while ago with the Nikon UK/Eu site.
    Their URL’s are easier to “hack” as the html file is always Overview.html

    BUT the numbers are different. Wonder if they have different No’s outside the US or if the numbers used in the UK/EU site are just something else unrelated.

    AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II (announced July, 2009)
    AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G (announced September, 2008)

    At the time of checking I went a couple of humdered No’s in advance / in the gaps but found nothing interesting.

    Note – these numbers also cover other nikon products also such as sports optics, coolpix, SLR bodies etc – not just lenses.

    • Daf

      Ah just spotted NR’s comment :
      “the last part of the URL doesn’t really matter – it’s used for the product name” re US no’s

    • Zoetmb

      In the US, the numbers for other product types use different ranges. For example, digital bodies use five digit numbers in the 25000 range, Flashes are all in the 4000 range.

  • Gary

    I will say that Nikon’s website is way better than Canon’s. Check out the dedicated pages for any DSLR model, and the Nikon web presentation is far superior.

    I do like the idea of making a product available the first day of its announcement, to capitalize on the rush of excitement. Apple generally has done that and it’s worked pretty well for them.

  • Back to top