I say those are samples from the new Nikkor 16-35mm f/4 VR lens

Update: Bob Krist clarified the lenses he used to take the pictures on his blog - 18-70mm kit lens from the old D70 and the 16-85mm. You can read his comments at the end of this thread. And make sure you visit his website tomorrow tomorrow for some interesting news 🙂 (not, the news is not Sony/Zeiss related).

Take a look at this photo from Bob Krist's blog. The EXIF data is 35mm @ f/6.7 and Maximum Lens Aperture of f/4.1.

What lens could have 35mm focal length and max aperture of f/4? I don't think such a lens exists (up till tonight that is). Please correct me if I am missing a mode (unless he is not shooting with a different brand name - Sigma, Tamron, etc).

Almost all other pictures on his blog from the past few weeks were taken with focal lengths between 16-35mm (there is only one picture shot @ 36mm). The weird thing was that they were all shot with DX bodies. My understanding is that the expected 16-35 f/4 VR is a FX lens.

I also would like to remind you about this post. Coincidence?

Bob, we know what you got there. Looking forward to seeing your pictures on Nikon's website tonight. Why didn't you use an FX body for those shots?

Full EXIF after the break:

File name: PhillySkyline01_10_0013.jpg
File size: 749637 bytes (995x661, 9.1bpp, 3x)
EXIF Summary: 1/8s f/6.7 ISO200 35mm (35mm eq:52mm)

Camera-Specific Properties:

Camera Model: NIKON D300S
Camera Software: Adobe Photoshop CS4 Macintosh
Photographer: Bob Krist for GPTMC
Maximum Lens Aperture: f/4.1
Sensing Method: One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern: 1110
Focal Length (35mm Equiv): 52 mm

Image-Specific Properties:

Image Orientation: Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution: 144 dpi
Vertical Resolution: 144 dpi
Image Created: 2010:01:21 15:47:11
White Point Chromaticity: 0.3
Exposure Time: 1/8 sec
F-Number: f/6.7
Exposure Program: Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating: 200
Exposure Bias: -1/2 EV
Metering Mode: Pattern
Light Source: Fine Weather
Flash: No Flash
Focal Length: 35.00 mm
Color Space Information: Uncalibrated
Image Width: 995
Image Height: 661
Rendering: Normal
Exposure Mode: Auto
White Balance: Manual
Scene Capture Type: Standard
Gain Control: None
Contrast: Normal
Saturation: High
Sharpness: Hard
Subject Distance Range: Unknown

Other Properties:

Resolution Unit: i
Chromaticities of Primary Colors: 0.6
Color Space Xform Matrix Coeff's: 0.3
Chrominance Comp Positioning: Co-Sited
Exif IFD Pointer: 492
Compression Scheme: JPEG Compression (Thumbnail)
Horizontal Resolution: 72 dpi
Vertical Resolution: 72 dpi
Resolution Unit: i
Offset to JPEG SOI: 1282
Bytes of JPEG Data: 6364
Exif Version: 2.21
Image Generated: 2010:01:21 08:00:50
Image Digitized: 2010:01:21 08:00:50
Meaning of Each Comp: Unknown
Image Compression Mode: 4
DateTime Second Fraction: 00
DateTimeOriginal Second Fraction: 00
DateTimeDigitized Second Fraction: 00
File Source: Other
Scene Type: Unknown
Digital Zoom Ratio: 1
GPS Info Version:

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4…

    • Anonymous

      Except the max ap isn’t F4 for that lens.

      • At f/4 it is. And I know my camera, a D200, records the max aperture for the focal length, not the over all lens.

  • Anonymous

    What’s the f/ of the 18-55 at 35mm ?

    • Chris

      From the pic I’ve got handy, at 34mm, F4.44. That’s from the non-VR version.

  • Jon

    There’s also the 16-85mm – not sure what that reports as max aperture at this focal length…

    • Louis

      just tried it – says 4.5

  • Anonymous

    Quite useless, because Adobe Photoshop messes with EXIF makernotes that contain the true lens information. No information about zoom, aperture and VR anymore.

    • Chris

      What is missing from the exif are these lines:-

      Lens Type = Nikon D series Lens
      Lens Min/Max Focal Length, Max Aperture = 180/10, 550/10, 35/10, 56/10

  • Either that or he fudged the Exif per Nikon’s request. Hey, wouldn’t be the first time that’s happened.

  • ok, so he talks about shooting with a secret equipment from a heli over Miami and then for the next few weeks all of his pics are in the 16-35mm range… hmmmmm….

    • It’s likely just edited, but I wonder if pre-production lenses can be programed without a lens model.

      Actually, the more I think about it, no, it has to be edited. Those chips are stamped out, not programmed.

  • scott

    24-85/2.8-4? the hood in the ‘copter photo kinda looks like that too.

  • Why he’s using the lens on the D300s? Because a AF-S 16-35mm f4 VR-lens is perfect for video. And so is a AF-S 24mm f1,4. I think Nikon is planning this as a video-lens launch.

    • So we’ll see a D700s 12mp FF mini-D3s? Doesn’t make sence, that would kill d3s sales…

      • Louis

        not to mention, it would soon seriously rival serious video cameras.

  • Click

    Quote from that site; “all with a D90 and a 16-85mm, 70-300mm VR, or sometimes, the 17-50mm f/2.8.”

    So it must be the 17-50mm f/2.8

    • First off, it’s 17-55/2.8. And even if there was some new 17-50/2.8VR –that’s not what this was shot with. Max aperture is the max aperture for the focal length, and this says it’s f/4. The 17-55/2.8 always reads a max aperture of 2.8 no matter how it’s set.

  • the 16-85mm can pretty much fits the bill …it does max at 4.1 at around 35mm, you know. chill now! 🙂

    • Louis

      wrong, i just tested it, reads 4.5, if it’s rounded, it would’ve rounded to 4.

  • disco

    man that’s sharp for something shot @1/8. highly doubt that was made in a moving chopper.

    • Anonymous


      But don’t pro photogs use some vibration reduction device for aerial shots?
      Just like VR, but for camera+lens?

      I can’t remember the name, though….. a gyro-stabilizer or something like that.

      • Louis

        bob krist just has god’s hands….. cheap trick hey? 😀

  • Mikael

    What max aperture does 24-120 got at 35mm?

    And I thought non-Nikkor lenses didn’t show “max aperture” in EXIF?

    • They certainly do for both Nikkor and non. Irfan view doesn’t know how to interpret them, but Bridge and PS seem to figure it out just fine and show it when it’s there and intact. And they leave them intact when they do include exif data–it’s all or nothing in PS.

      Other software or a hex editor would be required to take out lens model like this.


    Nice shot of the Philly skyline. Now about that Nikon D900…

  • Guys: I’m sorry about the mystery with that Miami post….as soon as I legally can, I’ll spill the beans on that gear.
    As for the Philly skyline shot that you’re analyzing, it’s a D300 (or D90, I had both bodies up on the roof that day) and it’s either the 18-70mm kit lens from the old D70 (I know, horror, horror, a kit lens, but mine is very sharp and what can I say, I like it) or the 16-85mm VR. I sure didn’t mean to get everybody excited, and I swear I’ll talk about the other gear the very second I can. I apologize for making everybody nuts! I didn’t mean to. Bob K.

    • Thanks for clarification Bob! Just one question: why is the lens info removed from the EXIF?

      • I have no freakin’ idea! When I went back to my blog and grabbed that frame and dragged it to my desktop, it had no EXIF info attached. I don’t know why that happens, but I assure you, I’m not lying about the Philly pix.

        Tomorrow, I guess, is when I can talk about using the other stuff. But there hasn’t been a picture shot with that stuff that’s been up on my blog….you guys are too sharp with the detective work for me to risk violating an NDA (Non Disclosure Agreement). It’s cool stuff, and you’re gonna like it.

        • Thanks again Bob, I am looking forward for your report tomorrow (you see people, this was not a Sony/Zeiss product – unless they also release something tonight).

          • I feel safe in telling you that it’s not a Sony/Zeiss product. Not that they don’t make great stuff, but I’m one of those guys who lives by the motto “I’m goin’ home from the dance with the person what brung me” and I’ve been dancing with Nikon for a long time! Bob

          • I will update the post

    • and pelase don’t be sorry – we just have fun here, those are rumors after all and all should be taken with a grain of salt 🙂

      • jon

        yeahh…we’re just bunch of zany gearheads that worries none other than gears wihout knowing how to use them anyway 🙂

    • Dave F.

      Forget about the new stuff, Bob’s made my day by endorsing the 18-70mm D70 kit lens! My D70 is long gone but I love that 18-70.

      • iamlucky13

        Bob need never be ashamed of using a “kit” lens if it gives good photos. Obviously it does.

        The 18-70 is a great step up from the 18-55 variants that come with the bottom end cameras…sharp all the way across the frame, a slightly better aperture combo, great flare control, and very good build quality. It’s only significant drawback, in my opinion, is moderately bad barrel distortion at 18mm. It’s a lot better by 35mm, although for that skyline shot, I suspect he used DxO or similar to straighten it.

    • NikoDoby

      Bob Krist for US President in 2012!!! You got my write-in vote Bob! 🙂

    • Mario

      It was ME drivin’ all the Nikon shooters nuts, not you, Bob. I have to apologize for that.

      I read out your exif data from the Philly pics and found that 35mm f 4.1 thing. I compared that to other pictures I took with a 2,8/17-35 and there, the exif was always f 2.8. So, I was sure, you shot that pictures with the new AF-S16-35/4. But I was wrong, so wrong!!!

      This exif data didn’t show the absolute f-stop of the lens at all, it just shows the max aperture AT THAT FOCAL LENGTH!!!!!

      So, please forgive me, father Bob. :-)))

      And I swear: I never again try to be James Bond using you exif data.


      • Mario

        And by the way, Bob: I LOVE to know you shot the Philly pics with the old 18-70. I really love thet lens and would never give it away.

        Who cares about AF-S 16-35/4 when we can use a very sharp 18-70 kit lens? :-))))

  • fxed

    One thing is for sure Bob, you take nice pictures!

    • Thanks, FXED, that’s what I strive to do. Even if it’s only with DX gear!
      cheers, Bob K.

  • shah5645

    ..am I the first onr this time??

  • nomad

    So there is only a 16-35/F4 VR and a 24/F1.4 lens to be announced tonight? A little disappointed but still not that bad. When will the D700 successor be out. I want it so much.

    • MikeyLPT

      Maybe at midnight tonight…….when I fall asleep and dream about it ;). FYI, it has 24.5 MP in my dreams…Maybe I can tape together a couple of Coolpixes

  • Gary

    How cool is is that Bob Krist actually responded on this blog? Bob is not only an amazing photographer, but apparently is also a great guy as well.

  • I second that, Bob Krist is a fine a person as you are likely to come across in this life, three cheers for Bob!!!

  • Jay A

    I think the anticipation sometimes is more fun than what transpires …. Feels like Christmas Eve. I’ve shot Nikon since 1975…they make great equipment for a great hobby I’ve enjoyed almost my entire life…tick …tick….tick 🙂 I’ll be pulling the trigger on the first site I see a 24mm For Sale

    • mnm

      Totally agree. Many of the comments actually make me laugh during the days and the anticipation makes me feel like im 5 years old again right before xmas.

      Great job Pete.

      +1 for Bob K in 2012.

  • Bob

    For Krist sake… Spill the beans…. (sorry, couldn’t resist)

  • Back to top