Which lens is that?

The new August 2011 issue of Men's Journal magazine has a Revo sunglasses ad, featuring photographer Jimmy Chin holding a Nikon DSLR camera with an unusual/unknown lens attached. The lens looks like a short version of the existing 70-200 f/2.8 VR II. Could this be the new 80-400mm lens? Or maybe this is an existing lens from Sigma, Tamron or Tokina? What do you guys think? A list of all current Nikon lenses can be found here.

Here is the full ad:

Update (thanks broxibear) - Jimmy Chin was kind enough to contact me about this and here's a direct quote:
"It's the old 80 - 400 Nikkor. I don't actually use it much, just happened to be the prop they wanted for that shoot."

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


    But I dunno what it is ?

    • Ian


      • Rob

        Leave him alone. Being the first poster in an insignificant thread on a low-traffic website was the high point of his life!

        • TheInconvenientRuth

          Only losing your virginity or reaching level 80 in WoW will possibly ever come close to eclipsing this life-defining moment…

  • Brian

    70-200 without the shield

    • Nikon-Addict-&-Rumor

      I second that. I hope its the 70-200 f/4 vrii priced between 1100 to 1300 usd at less 2lbs in wt. Good performer in smaller package at reasonable price.

  • dudemanppl

    Old 80-400 VR.

  • MRPhotoau

    If the lens is the new 80-400.
    Is the camera the new D800?????????????????????

  • PM

    Could it be a new 24-70mm F2.8?

    • The invisible man.

      What for ? It’s already perfect, I hope Nikon will not put a VR in it.
      A zoom is already complicated, adding VR does not improve reliability.

      • Josh Douglass


  • sade

    I don’t think it is a telephoto. It looks more like a fat midrange zoom. Maybe a 24-85mm f/2.8-4 VR?!

    • sade

      Or even 24-70mm f/2.8 VRII.

      • Jim

        There is no I version as it does not have VR. If it gers VR, which is stupid, it will be called 24-70mm f2.8 VR.

        I still dont see why you want VR on such a lens.

        • sade

          II referes to VR not to the lens. VRII means the second generation of the VR technology, not the second version of the lens.
          If you think using VR in midrange lens is stupid then you stick on 24-70 and boost the iso to 6400 to get ugly noisy photos.

          • UA

            VR is quite useless on 24-70mm. Such lens is typically used for photographing people and people move, which means that 1/30 is the longest exposure you can go (if not seeking for some motion blur effects).

            At 70mm it’s no brainer to keep picture sharp without VR even at 1/30. Though VR would help, but nevertheless it would just add cost and more moving parts and increase chance of malfunction.

            The game changes when 70-200mm is used, then VR becomes necessity. At 200mm 1/30 is almost impossible without VR and you should go around 1/200 to be on safe area.

            This yields for FX bodies. DX bodies obey the same rule, but with that 1.5 crop factor in mind. When I started, I had 18-55mm no-VR kit lens and I never really needed a VR on that either.

            • sade

              First of all, even for what you mentioned (motion blur effect), VR is useful. So VR is not “quit useless”.
              In fact VR is a very cool feature to have in wide0normal range lenses. I love it on my 16-35mm

              Secondly, only brainless people spend thousands of dollars to get a high res camera and then they take a photo at 70mm 1/30s. The next generation of nikon cameras won’t be 12mp anymore. This is really funny that people always ask for larger megapixel count and on the other hand they shoot at 70mm 1/30 of a second. It is totally waste of resolution of the sensor.

              The other think is that video guys love VR. Even for this single reason it is quite possible to see a 24-70 VR in not so far future.
              I strongly believe that we will see a VRII version of 24-70 before 2013.

        • ’cause not everybody has surgeon-steady hands, and in a “romantically” lit venue, you can only crank the ISO so far;)

          There are people whose shooting habits do not require VR on a mid-range zoom. But it’s a complete failure of imagination to pre-suppose _nobody_ could _possibly_ use VR on a mid-range…

          Tamron’s 17-50 [on DX] has VC, and it’s certainly the better for it 🙂

          • Mike

            And VR on my 16-35 is amazing. 1/8 second and everything is sharp. It adds to the aresenal of creativity to have it. If I don’t want it, I turn it off.

            • A nice fast f/2.8 aperture would be a more useful addition to my particular arsenal ….that’s where they goofed that lens I feel.

      • Remedy

        Yeah sure, they decided to ditch the internal focusing and zooming design. They gonna make the whole lens extendable now to collect more dust and just to have more retarded design. Epic thinking, not to even mention the size of this lens. Facepalm.

    • Andreas Ott

      the 24-85 is smaller

    • the visible man

      the new 40 dx macro?

      • Remedy

        Please tell me You’re joking. Why da f..ck would You need 2 operational rings on a fixed focal lens for f…cks sake?!!! Have You EVER seen ANY lens before?

  • CamaJan

    Seeing how I am just looking into a 80-400mm this bloody well could be a replacement!
    If so then I say finally! Anybody dares to guess its new price?

    Btw do you guys think 10yr old 80-400 is worth 1/2 of its todays purchase price?

  • mk

    looks like old 80-400

  • iceQ

    I dont think a new 80-400 would have this M-A ring between zoom and focus ring

    • exactly! That`s the point. After noticing this it is sure that is a old nikon lens design.

      • sade

        I am also convinced that it is 80-400 (old lens) for the same reason.

  • BaasG

    like I said on Twitter last week, looks like the 80-400. It has the same rubber rings, and the same front lens. Only missing is the tripod collar.

  • Steve

    I hope it is a new high-end DX lens!

  • David Duncan

    AF-S VR Nikkor 70-200mm F4 IF ED N

    • chris

      yea right. that lens will not extend when zoomed, this one clearly does.

    • Remedy


  • Mike

    Its either the new 80-400 or the forthcoming 70-300 f/2.8-4. those are the only current options for it. No third party lens looks that much like a Nikon.

  • Just checked on my 80-400 and it looks exactly the same: under the lens of the as, we can hardly see the white writing “Nikon VR ED 0 77 Made in Japan”. On the barrel where the tripod collar should be, we can see the dot for its positioning. The proportions are exactly the same when I hold my copy like the guy does on the picture.
    Thus, I’m 100% sure it’s the old 80-400mm F/4.5-5.6

  • PM

    This dude uses a rope as a camera strap?

    • Troll Handler

      The question is, what’s he use for rope?! O_o

    • Craig

      He’s a rock climber – that why the rope.

      • B.O.

        makes perfect sense! (?)

    • Its actually just a sling. And its probably rated to a lot more than your camera straps if it would be dropped. I do the same thing with the same sling. Have it on a long sling on one side, strap on the other, so if it gets dropped, its attached to the harness by a carabiner and it’s caught. Ta-da!

  • SYH
    • glastoria

      The link you sent shows the old 80-400 with the red VR symbol. The lens posted on this apge should be the same (80-400 without tripod collar).

  • This is old 80-400!!

  • chris

    old 80-400. it looks weird because all of the markings have been blacked out.

  • Troll Handler

    I dunno.

    All I know is I have a sudden urge to buy some sunglasses… o_O

  • grcav

    Comparing with my old 80-400mm it looks pretty much the same. It would be quite strange if Nikon was to make a new lens that still used the old style mf/af switch, as does the lens in the picture: of the three rubber rings in the barrel, the middle and narrower one looks a lot like such switch. Any new lens should be afs.

  • Rye

    1) We can’t see the tripod collar footing

    2) It’s a high zoom range. no 24-70 or anything in that range.

    3) 80-400 looks to be more realistic.

    4) Are we sure it’s a nikon? i THOUGHT Tokina had something similar, but NR Admin made a good point, it looks like the old 80-400…..
    Eitherway…. it’s an older lens. if it were new they wouldnt run the print…..unless its FROM nikon.

  • grcav

    Now, if it was a 2.8 or brighter lens, it would make sense for him to use the sunglasses while taking the photos on account of such a bright viewfinder :-). With a 5.6 lens, the add is lost on me.

  • maybe take a few shots from an old 80-400 or 70-200 or whatever and hold them at the same angle as in the picture. Then start comparing rings, specific characteristics..

  • Camaman

    Yep, looks like an old 80-400 to me. Just had a quick comparisson.
    That 70-300 2.8-4 idea sounds very interesting… 🙂 Any truth or hope to it?

    How many believe we might see 120-300mm f4 to complement 24-120 f4 and 16-35mm f4?

  • the visible man


    Is that the new nikon strap?!

    • Al Dente


  • joe

    135mm f/2.0 DC AF-S

  • Martin.K

    And the winner is… old 80-400 http://www.flickr.com/groups/feedbackloop/discuss/72157624402780644/ (3rd photo).

    Please notice the white mark for tripod collar on advert photo…

  • LY

    Guys! This is silly! There is no reason to show experimental lens in sunglasses commercial 😉

    • doh

      Indeed.. where did common sense go?

    • Jesus_sti

      agree with you … They have simply hide all logo from another campagny. Nikon is invisible and maybe it’s a fake lens.

  • pw

    My guess is an 70-200/4

  • fiatlux

    If this is a new lens, it is a new lens looking EXACTLY like the old 80-400 VR.

    See Martin.K’s link above.

    • The old lens does not have a gold band.

      • JorPet

        My old 80-400 has a gold band.

        And taking off the tripod collar ring and hood and holding it at the same angle it has exactly the same profile.

        It is, in fact, the old 80-400. There are other images on the Revo site that show all the markings and switches.

        • As does mine. My memory is getting… Wait, what were we talking about? Oh, yes the lens. It would have been mighty sloppy for someone to have slipped NDA equipment into an ad for something else. Given the lead time for such things they’ed have had to have had it in hand some time ago as well.

  • J.D.Hunter

    It looks like nikon 80-400mm,his fingers tells the tale,about the same length.

  • HDZ

    It’s 28-600 f/3.5-8G VR ED Aspherical.

  • Landscape Photo

    Hopefully 70-200mm f/4 VR. Canon has got one, why should not Nikon offer something similar?

  • AnoNemo

    This lens looks a bit too plastic. I am not sure this would be Nikon.

  • GC

    It’s clearly the current Nikon 80-400 without the tripod collar. Just compare photos, what’s the doubt? Can’t be anything else current. Perfectly matches the current 80-400. A new 80-400 wouldn’t have the AF-MF ring as stated in a previous comment…

    • Sebastian

      I happened to have the 80-400 mounted on a D90, and it looks exactly like that.
      Like other folks have noted, the new version won’t have the narrow A/M ring.
      Of course a new lens wouldn’t show up in a random add, but it IS a fun little discussion.

  • It’s the old 80-400… I’m 100% on this

  • Anonymous

    He’s holding a 24mp D800 cw 70-200mm f/4

  • AnoNemo

    This is what I was afraid of … looking at ghost lenses … halucinating too much due to the zero number of nikon news. 🙂

    In less 4 weeks (I would say 3 weeks) we supposed to see new cameras and we heard/know not much. I am afraid there will be plenty of angry people.

  • Manolito

    What’s so special about that lens? It’s just the current 80-400mm. Nothing to see here. Move.

  • maybe its a new lens. maybe 80-400 f2.8

    • chris

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Do you know how large a 400 2.8? a zoom with that range and aperture would be enormous.

  • lupedelupe

    Old 80-400. 99% sure of that.

  • Gordon

    Just checked my old Nikkor lens catalogues, definetly looks like the old 80-400mm lens.

  • That’s clearly the OLD, yet CURRENT 80-400mm. I own one and love it. Not the best lens in the world, but for what it is, it’s great and very sharp stopped down.

  • Stéphane

    It’s an advert for glasses. So in advertising you can’t use signes of brand like nikon in your own advert, you need an agreement of the brand or rights to pay. So the cheaper way is to photoshoped an existing product. You have to hide brand and identity of the camera & the lense. That’s the reason why you can’t guess wich brand/model is use in this ad. In my opinion it’s not a new product.

  • D

    100% the good old 80-400 VR.


  • Yhannoby

    it looks like the 80-400mm.

  • Dweeb

    It’s either soap on a rope or one of those Nikon coffee mugs.

  • Derek

    Looks like a new Sigma lens to me.

  • Mac Rockwell

    I think its new 70-300 VR F4.

  • no filter, no good

  • Back to top