Two new Nikon lenses to be announced soon: Nikkor PC 19mm f/4E ED and 70–200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR

Nikon Nikkor PC-E 19mm f:4 tilt shift lens patent  Nikon Nikkor PC-E 19mm f:4 full frame mirrorless tilt-shift lens patent
In the next few weeks Nikon will announce two new lenses:

I expect the official announcement to happen before the Photo Plus show in New York (October 20th- 22nd), but there is a small possibility for an even later announcement. I am not sure why Nikon did not introduce both lenses at Photokina (which I believe was the initial plan).

You can check how much instant cash you can get for your "soon to be old" Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II lens at KEH (they currently have a 10% cash bonus promotion), B&H, Adorama and Amazon.

Pictured above: various PC 19mm f/4 tilt shift lens patents filed by Nikon in the past.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • You’d think Nikon would want to one-up Canon with a 16mm tilt-shift or at least the same 17mm. But no, the best they could do is 19mm. Not even 18mm. Boring to say the least.

    • Agreed, the difference between 24mm & 19mm is unlikely to be worth the cost, if you already own the 24 that is :-/

      • ITN

        The 24 has major image quality and construction issues.

        • Brian Todd

          Major?! Why do people feel the need to exaggerate? BH has about a 4.5 avg. rating, with only 2 ratings out of 69 below 4 stars. Amazon has avg. rating of 4.8, with none of the 15 ratings below 4 stars. Main “issue” is inability to tilt and shift at same time straight from manufacturer. But people seem to really like the sharpness, and only found one “construction issue”. Couldn’t find on DxOMark.

          • FerpectShotz

            Its corners are pretty weak compared to Canon 24mm TS ii, I was about to buy the Nikon version but after renting and comparing notes with a friend who owned canon 24mm TS ii, I decided not to buy the Nikon and wait for a version 2. If this one can take normal 100mm filters (I dont see why not as canon 17mm TS can) and image quality is on par with canon 17mm, they’d have my money.

          • poppduder

            welcome to Nikon Rumors. Where if the comment isn’t a complaint, it is not welcome. I remember back when the 24mm PC lenses were announced people SCREAMING about wanting a 19mm version. Now the fact that they’re making a 19mm is the worst thing since hitler.

          • Jorge

            I bought that lens just 2-weeks ago for use on my D800e and after using it for a single day returned it. The center was beautiful, the colors and details were crisp. However the corners, and I’m not talking about just”deep” in the corners where potentially you can crop, were pure mush. And these images were stopped down between F8 to F11. I didn’t bother shooting wide open. So I did return it to Amazon for that reason. Mushy corners.

            • That is surprising. My copy doesn’t have bad corners. If anything, it has very consistent performance across the frame.

              Maybe try another copy?

      • The 18-20mm mark has always been my favourite wide angle focal length. The 24mm is never wide enough to my taste. And whenever I use my sigma around the 12-17mm I am somehow not a very big fan of the aesthetics. That 19mm can really do a nice job I reckon

      • David Peterson

        5mm on the UWA end is quite significant.

      • fanboy fagz

        19mm to 24mm makes a HUGE difference. it may not be worth it, but the difference in perspective is huge. going wider by 1mm on the short end makes a big difference in the look and perspective.

      • carl

        Just to chime in: there is a clearly noticeable and significant difference between 24mm and 19mm. If you’ve actually used the lenses the difference is impossible to miss.

    • ITN

      The 17mm is too extreme to yield much in terms of useful results, it’s similar to using a 10mm lens and making off-centered crops off that. There is no filter option and no hood, either. IMO making a new lens that is a bit wider than the 24mm but not as extreme as the Canon 17 ts-e is a good move.

      • Every time I shoot with my 17mm TS-E, I wish it were just a little bit wider.

        • Mike

          Turn the camera to portrait orientation and take 3 shots. Left shifted, centre and right shifted. Stitch in post. There’s your wider than 17mm.

          • Good point

          • Forgot to clarify that I already do that and still wish it were wider. I take 21 shots in all directions and stitch to get an 11mm FOV.

            • chrisgull

              So take 42 shots to get a wider FOV?

            • Can only shift in 21 directions.

            • 11mm FOV? Care to share one picture? I can’t imagine how that looks in real life, it must be heavily distorted, or…?

            • Bob Thane

              Canon has a 11mm lens anyway – and Voigtlander has a 10mm lens. It’s a unique look, and definitely usable for many situations.

            • Here’s the link:

              That’s before cropping, editing, and fixing. File size 366 MB.

            • chrisgull

              If subject is a plane – architecture comes to mind – then in theory any focal lengh of a rectilinear lens will be distortion-free.

            • Pat Mann

              Unfortunately Nikon’s wide PC lenses all have enough distortion that it’s significant in shooting architecture and in making shift panoramas. It would be nice if this has less. Pure rectilinear wide lenses (or something pretty close) may be available for view cameras, but not for DSLRs. 21mm super-angulon for Leica was close to zero distortion, but that wasn’t a retrofocus lens. Perhaps Nikon will release the mirrorless PC-E lens, zero distortion, with a full-frame mirrorless camera?

            • Nikon won’t. They are in fact going in exact opposite direction with every next iteration. More and more distortion. Supposed to be corrected in post.

            • fanboy fagz

              Nikon is distorted more and more. They lost their meaning and what they were about.

            • ITN

              Hmm? There is only one modern wide angle with movements that Nikon has made, the 24 PC-E. While there is some distortion it is hardly a lot of it. There is no “iteration” since Nikon only made one such lens. In other (non-PC) lenses, vignetting and distortion may be increasing in newly released lenses because users can correct these automatically using profiles in raw conversion and it allows for otherwise better characteristics in the lens. In PC lenses, when movements are used, there is no profile correction so vignetting and distortion needs to be better corrected in the optics, which they are. Extreme movements may show some softness and vignetting, of course; these are to be avoided. In general extreme shifts yield results that do not look natural in architectural shots. For documentary purposes of architecture, extreme wide angle lenses are not that commonly used because a natural appearance is preferred and weird effects are not. For panoramic stitching in practice the software can handle the small amount of distortion that the lenses have, in my experience this is not a big problem.

            • I was indeed talking about non PC lenses . And correcting distortion in post has it’s own problems mainly that it reduces the FOV of that wide angle lens after correction and reduction of IQ in corners. Those are the reasons why you advocate use of PC lenses. Right?

            • I posted a link to the sample photo but it’s pending approval.

            • Here’s the link:

              That’s before cropping, editing, and fixing. Resulting file size is 366 MB.

            • Here’s the link: [cl dot ly slash hekH]

              That’s before cropping, editing, and fixing. Resulting file size is 366 MB.

          • Pat Mann

            It’s even wider if shifted in landscape orientation.

        • Brian Todd

          What are you shooting that you want more than 17mm on a tilt-shift?

          • Architecture, landscapes, you know, the usual suspects.

            • Spy Black

              In this age of 36+ megapixel sensors, 11mm full frame ultrawide optics, and lens correction software (albeit with some detail loss), do PC lenses even matter anymore?

            • Gabriel Border

              Tilt shift lenses are indespencible for anyone who shoots architectural and interiors work.

            • Spy Black

              That doesn’t really answer the question though.

            • Gabriel Border

              Its hard to explain, and I was a skeptic until I used an bought one…now I can’t live with out it. For one there is the compression from focal length, just like with portraits, the wider you go the goofier peoples faces start to look. Scale is important to architects and interior designers. Compressing the scene with a longer focal length is key. You can get closer with a longer lens and shift up. Getting close with a wie angle and fixing in post still will not render the scale properly. The main reason shift movements are vital is with the one point perspective. Setting a point of focus with the verticals and horizontals perfectly straight…then shifting for composition. It is impossible without movements. -This actually does a good job of explaining-

            • akkual

              Newest straightening tools on photoshop and lightroom are amazing though. Definitely will get better results with high quality fixed wide angle lense + those algorithms than with a medicore tilt&shift.

            • Gabriel Border

              You are missing the point. It’s. It about correcting things(Lightroom’s new transform is just a simplified Version of the PS Skew tool). I’m speaking to the perspective change. No wide angle used and then corrected/cropped can change views or preserve scale in an image. Its not about going wide and trying to get an entire room in the image…that makes for poor composition.

            • Pat Mann

              Yes. For one thing, when unshifted, these lenses typically have much more uniform rendering across the frame, less vignetting, and significantly higher resolution at edges and corners than than a wide lens of the same focal length. In architectural photography, uniformity of detail and rendering across the entire image is important.

            • Spy Black

              I think once you’re stopped down (which you’re going to be anyway), I don’t think there’s going to be much, if any difference.

            • Pat Mann

              Probably true in most cases. I’ve noticed it particularly when shooting materials and finishes at distances of less than 12 or 15 feet. One project was shooting brick paving patterns in the field at about 8 feet, where I had to shade the subject area from sunlight and use flash at a low glancing angle to bring out the brick texture and from 20-25 feet to get uniform lighting within one stop across the frame on all samples. At ISO 100, f/4 was required for the exposure. Depth of field at the pixel level level for the 36 mp sensor for my 50mm lens was less than 4 inches, not enough to cover the curvature of field. At f/5.6, I got 6 inches depth of field and could do it, but had to use ISO 200 to get the exposure. Alignment requirement was very strict – I missed on a few and had to reshoot, and on some the brick paving was buckled by roots or uneven ground enough to challenge the depth available. Image at ISO 200 was acceptable for this purpose, but working with gradient exposure correction and also correcting to keep contrast uniform across the frame is easier at 100 than at 200. The 45 PC curvature is flatter in the central zone when unshifted and it doesn’t lose definition in the extreme corners as much as the 50 (trying to make use of as many of those pixels as possible). Using a 60mm macro lens might have addressed that issue, but would have put me at 10 feet and required a crane or a scaffold, at least doubling the effort for each shot (already 30 to 45 minutes per site). Investing another $2000 in lighting would have given me another stop or even 1 1/2, but it wasn’t possible at the time.

            • With remote viewing for framing, and just placing the camera correctly, that makes more sense to me too.

            • Mike

              From a work flow perspective, yes. Its easier to repeat a shot with a tilt/shift and edit for exposure etc only vs shooting with 11mm and having to edit for vertical lines and other corrections and exposure.

            • akkual

              In Lightroom, fixing vertical lines is setting two lines on top of the image that follow lines that should be straight. Then the algorithm figures it out. It works like magic, as long as you do not try to correct extra huge distortions.

            • jarmatic

              Have you shot with one?

            • yaley

              Did you try the fullframe Voigtlander 10mm lens?

      • FerpectShotz

        Canon 17mm TS has filter option, it took a while but lee came up with an adapter ring for their 100mm filter system.

    • Shutterbug

      The Canon T/S is not very good, especially when shifted. It’s possible that it’s very difficult to make a wide, sharp T/S lens when shifted. Maybe 19mm was the widest they could make it and maintain their standards. The Canon is also a very limiting lens.

      • Arthur Penelope

        I haven’t used the 17mm TS never really needed anything that wide. However I have been using medium format for a little while on occasions and the Canon 24mm TS-E lens is very comparable. Especially when you consider the massive colour cast issues with medium format technical cameras.

    • Bob Thane

      Not even 19mm – it’s closer to 20mm than 19mm judging by the patent, but marketing wise 19mm sounds better.

    • El Aura

      I didn’t know lenses were released for bragging rights only. You learn something everyday.

    • preston

      “the best they could do is 19mm”

      I’m sure they could have made it wider if they wanted to. Thankfully they decided to make a focal length that is much more useful for architecture than 17mm rather than much less useful.

    • C4talyst

      19mm makes all the difference for my work, with little worry over the added few mm I’d see with a Canon. This is a definite “buy” for me.

    • Carleton Foxx

      Maybe they asked a bunch of architectural photographers what focal length they wanted and that was the consensus?

  • Interesting. At least Nikon iterates in their old areas, even if slowly.

    • ITN

      Nikon has made more iterations of the f/2.8 telezoom (7) than any other company so if anything they’re iterating this lens quickly, compared to some of their other lenses which take longer than 25 years to update.

      • Sure – my point about slowly not this specific 2.8 lens, but rather, the slow replacement of lenses to get E aperture.

  • So what will be the difference between the new 70-200 vs the previous one?

    • ITN

      I would guess it to have fluorine coating, electromagnetic aperture control, and if Nikon wants to sell the new lens, it should retain its focal length at 200mm better when focused close than the Mk II.

      • HF

        Flare resistance is a problem we often face, too.

      • Davo

        If it does indeed gain the FL designation, that would be fluorite elements, not fluorine coating (although it could still have fluorine coatings anyways). Quite different things.

        • Yes agreed. At twice the weight of the f/4 I’m hoping for a significant weight reduction with the next f/2.8 iteration, though a lot of that is in the tank like properties of the metal casing. I think people are prepared to pay a premium for strong light weight products.

          • Davo

            That would certainly make it more attractive and one-up some of the competition’s 70-200mm offerings.

        • ITN

          Fluorine coating is now applied to all newly released high end Nikon lenses and it has particular value to lenses used in rough and dirty places which the 70-200/2.8 certainly qualifies for.

          • Davo

            No doubt. I just thought you may have been relating the fluorine coating to the FL lens designation.

    • manattan

      Would have been a great thing to highlight the new lenses at Photokina… but alas one cannot have anything distracting Nikon from their key mission there

      • Heh, good one 🙂

      • Wade Marks

        Good joke there.

        But really the shows don’t matter any longer. Any company can release any product at any time and get the same press coverage, thanks to the internet.

        Before the internet, these shows were where the action was because that was the best way to get your message out. Not so any longer.

        • ITN


        • Davo

          A little confusing since you’re saying something quite different in another response where you say Nikon can’t afford not to attend. I tend to agree with your other statement, not so much that the shows are very important as you quite rightly point out information can be disseminated very easily in the age of the internet. But by the same token, with the age of social media and internet media, a lack of show or a poor showing equates to no coverage at best but more likely negative coverage.

    • Bob Thane

      If the 24-70 is any indication, the AF should be outstanding.

  • Jeff Hunter

    I’ve been waiting for the 19mm tilt shift. Glad it’s finally here.

  • Gabriel Border

    Super stoked for the these lenses. The 19 in particular is really what I am excited for. Sure its a tad less wide than the canon…but if the kill it(hopefully) and make it with zero distortion and have independently rotating parts, then this will be a wonderfully useful lens. With DX this would make a killer 28mm for my work. Needs!

  • Bob Thane

    Fluorite in a 70-200? Gutsy move! Not sure if the weight savings vs cost are worth it, but it’ll be interesting to see how things pan out.

    • If they can get it under 1KG then this will be a massive win.

  • ZoetMB

    I’m probably wrong, but I don’t believe these will be announced for Photo Plus. I don’t remember Nikon ever releasing anything totally new for Photo Plus that wasn’t previously announced at Photokina, even in the years that Photokina wasn’t held.

    • br0xibear

      PhotoPlus is much more of a local show…
      “the largest photography and imaging show in North America.” according to their website.
      Just another show, Nikon seem to announce new products whenever they feel like it.

      • Thom Hogan

        Well, this gets back to a couple of my observations. First, such shows are incredibly expensive to attend the way Nikon does (big booth, major set of products available). It’s also disruptive to the local subsidiary, in this case NikonUSA, as it will suck most of the staff out of the office.

        So the question is this: why are you there? If it’s not to try to make a splash and get people swarming to your booth, you’re wasting money and time. The media is all at such shows, and in force. They’re going to report winners/losers. The media will amplify what is/isn’t announced at such shows.

        Either you have a trade show strategy that justifies the expense, or you don’t do shows is my belief.

        • br0xibear

          I suppose not being at a show, like Photokina or PhotoPlus, sends out an even more negative message than being there with nothing new to show.
          To be fair it wasn’t just Nikon, if it wasn’t for Fuji and the GFX, Photokina would have been saturated squib as opposed to the damp one it actually was.
          Nikon need to get the Df marketing team back, ok the camera itself could have been better…but the marketing and teaser ads were great.

          • Wade Marks

            That is so true…the Df marketing campaign was absolutely brilliant, the best I’ve seen for a camera in long time. Yes, get that team back on the job.

            I also agree with you: companies like Nikon cannot afford to not attend these major trade shows, because then everyone would interpret that as a huge negative. That’s just the way the game is today…it may not be fair or logical, but Nikon has to attend these shows.

            One more point: I haven’t been to one of these shows, so I can’t say from personal experience…but it seems to me that these shows are also good for people trying out all of the products by a vendor, not just the ones most recently released. So for instance, at the Nikon booth one could try out the D500, all of the exotic lenses, etc…we seem to assume that if a camera has been out longer than 48 hours, then everyone has already been able to try it out. Not so.

            So I think there’s this myth that a trade show is only good for showing off releases so brand new that they are announced at or just before the trade show.

        • Eric Calabros

          They fear if they abandon the shows, people say “Ok, its official, Nikon gave up” 🙂

          • Stuart Crowther

            Maybe, but what usually happens with trade shows is when one of the big players drop out, the others think we’ll if they didn’t come why should we. Then before you know it, no more trade show, the cost of attendance is huge and if it’s not seen as leading to additional sales, it maybe decided that the money is either saved or spent on other forms of marketing.

          • Thom Hogan

            Let’s see. They were doing 6 shows at more than a million a pop. Call it US$8m. Do you think they could put US$8m into some sort of message that says they’re not giving up? ;~) See my recent list of things I would do if I were Nikon and look at #10.

    • I do not have an exact announcement date, but after Photo Plus could be too late to get them ready for the holiday shopping season.

      • ZoetMB

        Agreed, but Nikon has consistently blown the holiday shopping season in the past. Decades ago, the holiday shopping season started Thanksgiving weekend. Now it really starts after Halloween.

        I’ve gone back and checked all the release dates for lenses that are still “current” (except for the MF AI-S lenses). For lenses released before 2006, the dates are based when they were available in Japanese retail. For 2006 through now, they’re based on when they were actually in-store in U.S. retail (not announce dates). What I’ve found is the following:
        Jan: 1
        Feb: 12
        March: 7

        • I agree, we should see – my guess is announcement in the next 60 days, unless they really push it for the CES show in early January 2017.

          • ZoetMB

            Personally, I think announcing at CES for Nikon is nuts. CES is so large and there are so many announcements and to the market at large, a new lens isn’t “sexy”, that any such announcement will be buried or ignored.

            But it won’t be surprising either since my previous post shows that February is a frequent month for Nikon to get lenses into retail. I suppose that’s good for President’s Day promotions in the U.S.. although one can also argue that after the holidays, many people have no more money to spend on luxuries.

            • Thom Hogan

              I would agree. But…almost no one else is dropping big camera announcements at CES so Nikon is getting “belle of the ball” type coverage that way.

            • But to be frank, these lenses are not exactly a luxury, if you get my meaning……

          • Thom Hogan

            Don’t think that will happen. My information says the 70-200mm will happen this year. Not so sure about the TC-E. Nikon seriously needs some revenue generators in their third fiscal quarter. They’re going into that without DL, without a DSLR update other than the lame D3400 one. KeyMission is a big question mark, especially going smack dab up against GoPro’s updates.

            I’ll bet that Nikon drops multiple new products in Oct-Dec.

            • Yes, my initial 70-200 report from few months ago was also for this year. Also: Nikon likes to announce new cameras at CES, not so much lenses.

      • Pat Mann

        These aren’t really holiday lenses, except for those photographers that gift themselves. More a tax refund sort of lens.

        • yes, that too – people in general spend more at the end of the year

    • Davo

      It does seem odd these were omitted from the Photokina show when Nikon didn’t really have any other headliners, assuming they are indeed close to announcement. It either means they weren’t ready or Nikon are betting on some strategic advantage to avoid announcing with a slew of other products from other manufacturers.

      • Thom Hogan

        I’ve said it before and say it again: Nikon is an organization that has a hard time launching multiple products/lines at once. This all derives from the way they’re organized globally.

        First, the product has to get done to the point where it is in manufacturing. Second, all the Japanese data/materials about that product have to be translated and disseminated, and the subsidiary structure gets involved in that. Third, the subsidiaries have to disseminate the material.

        Lately Nikon has been trying to do 2 immediately after 1 to keep the wraps on the items so they don’t get leaked (or because they’re just pushed to the brink on product execution, take your pick ;~). That makes doing multiple products/lines really tough.

        Look at the D5/D500 launch. The D5 materials were coming into the subsidiaries early, the material was pretty complete. The D500 stuff came late and incomplete. Thus, despite launching the two together, there were far more answers about the D5 available prior to ship than there were about D500.

        Good thing D500 demand was pent up to the point of being underestimated by Nikon ;~). Otherwise the D500 would have been a tough sell, as the marketing materials really didn’t catch up for awhile.

        • Davo

          So a new take. They have trouble handling multiple lens launches so they pushed the 105 out asap as it was the first ready. The 70-200 was slated to be Nikon’s headliner at Photokina but they missed that deadline and pulled the plug.

  • sickheadache

    That new Nikkor 70-200mm E FL ED VR AARP SD SEC NR FR SA …Will Cost a Pretty Penny…I am guessing…$2,800 or above. lol

    • Nick

      I bet it’s 3k and has better Bokeh too. Oh and a slimmer tripod foot that will be $200 to replace.

      • sickheadache

        Or Above…covers that 3 g’s. lol

      • ITN

        Nikon has actually produced nice tripod feet in some of the latest lenses. The RT-1 is good, and the FL supertele primes have reinforced tripod collars and feet.

    • ZoetMB

      Considering that the current one lists at $2400, you’re probably right, although I think it will be $2600 or $2700. IMO, one of the reasons Nikon releases updated models is to increase the price without increasing the price. I’m not saying the lens won’t be worth it, but it still prices many people out of the market (like me!).

      I paid $1450 for the old one in 2004. That’s $1849 in 2016 dollars. So IMO, the rebate price of $1897 was fair, but the current street price of $2097 is a bit high.

      So are Nikon’s prices fair? Hard to say without a complete analysis of price/elasticity curves and knowledge about their manufacturing cost. Nikon’s overall margins are pretty small, but a lot of that is due to the small margins on the Coolpix line. But it does make one wonder how many more they’d sell if they could price it at $1500-$1800.

      The problem is that as the market contracts, Nikon’s got to price higher because they’re selling fewer units. Nikon is estimating selling a million fewer lenses this fiscal than last and they sold 800,000 less last fiscal than the year before.

      Assuming the new model is improved and doesn’t have major faults, I’d love to buy it. But not at $2600. In fact, not even at the current $2100, although I suppose trading in my current one will soften the blow. But I’m not doing any paid pro work anymore. For a pro who does well, maybe price doesn’t matter so much.

      • fanboy fagz

        its why I dont buy nikon lenses anymore. the prices are ridiculous and I dont have to with tamron and sigma art lenses offering anything I need. the 70-200VR2 has a huge flaw with focus breathing. at $2400 it needs to perform with no flaws. I had the 80-200AFS. it sold for $1300-400. the VR1 sold for $1650 retail. the jump to $2400 for VR2 was a jump of huge greed. if there were no options then id suck it up. just like when the VR1 was released. there wasnt any alternative on the same level. I wouldnt hesitate for a second getting the tamron if I needed a 24-70/70-200VC today.

        I see it different. sell more for less money, get the product out to people who brag and show pics about the lens that create a buzz. all I see at weddings are photogs using sigma art primes. stills or video. 24/35/50..and now 85 as well. many dont have a single zoom in their bag. seems to be the trend. and that 24-70E is a dinosaur. what were they thinking.

        • Eric Calabros

          Wedding photogs tend to use primes, no matter how good and well priced are the zoom lenses in the market. 70-200 is actually most used by PJs and some sport shooters. Its also favorite zoom for some landscape shooters (they dont need f/1.4 or f/1.8 of primes if they are at f/8 or even f/11 most of the times).

          • fanboy fagz

            stfu. you dont shoot weddings.

            • Eric Calabros

              lol not yet, but I know many wedding shooters.

          • HF

            I don’t know the exact proportion of zoom vs. prime guys, but most we know, including us, prefer primes. I once read that it is a bout 50/50. We use the 70-200 sometimes for close-ups in the church and during the congratulation part, where too many people prevent you from getting close and change position. The main use is when photographing the bride & groom, but this we plan to do with the new 105/1.4 now.

        • ITN

          The camera and lens market are dwindling in number of products sold each year. The way Nikon is coping with this is to focus on high end products where there is less competition and price them so that they make a profit. Canon and Sony are doing the same thing. Nikon is also offering affordable items such as the f/1.8 primes and various older lenses are available for less money. For a professional who needs the best performance and the most reliable focusing, the price of the 70-200/2.8 won’t be a problem if it is the lens they use the most in their work. For someone who is not relying on this lens as much, an update may not be necessary. The focus breathing is not really an issue – just switch to a 300mm if you need more length. Which Sigma Art prime do you see wedding photographers use in the range from 70-200mm? I have to wonder how many 85mm Art’s you have seen in use since it’s not yet available in stores.

          • fanboy fagz

            I read this stupidity and had to answer.

            1-dont talk as if you know what pros dont speak for everyone. not every pro makes a lot of money. its a very competitive market. there are many pros I know who are very talented but arent making a lot of money. you think writing off means as a pro that I can go to bh/adorama and order d5’s all pro lenses, all elinchrom lighting and just right it off and it will cost me peanuts. how stupid are you? dont talk about wedding photographers as you are not one and cant speak for others.

            2-dont be primitive to think that everyone lives in the US. internet is intl. US wedding photogs make a lot more than many other markets. I know photographers who just roll with their money from month to month making almost 0 from month to month. not every pro is successful. there are different levels of successful pros. you know how “writing it off” works? it doesnt mean we dont have to pay for it or that it costs 50% it means that at the end of the year I can add these expenses and get some discount. but I have to pay out of pocket for it and maybe ill get a discount after seeing how much I made. if you calculate it, it comes to around 10%

            3-obviously their technique of high price is not working for them. high end? who says their gear is high end? tamron and sigma are on level, if not smoke nikons gear in every respect.

            4-the 70-200 VR2 is not any more reliable than tamrons 70-200VC or even an older 70-200VR1 just because it costs more or is newer. and 70/80-200 made by nikon was built well and made to last. my friend has tons of gear. just added a D5 and 105 1.4. he has 2-VR2 lenses at home defective AF and crap tracking with failed rubbers after a very short time. nikon doesnt not represent premium anymore. they are not who they once were.

            and so a pro cant use a VR1 or an 80-200 2.8 for work? he must upgrade to the newest gear? I know 2 photogs that still use an 80-200 AFD. they say it works well and they dont plan on upgrading till they fail. theyre not gear whores and use 4 lenses each. theyve perfected using their gear. theyre running after the newest things just because. and resold gear froma pro photog negates any discount.

            5-now I know youre not intelligent at all when you throw that dumb comment of switch to 300mm. I did shoot with a 300 f/4 AFS years back but for some specific shots, but today, I dont shoot with anything over 200mm. and I havent seen a single photog walk around with any 300mm lens. tc suck. focus breathing is a HUGE issue with that lens. I could buy a VR2 from my friend for peanuts and repair it for minimum money and I still opt not to because of that huge flaw. every 70/80-200 has been incremental in performance over its predecessor and even the push pull 80-200 can deliver beautiful pictures.

            I have to believe you are trolling and just trying to fire people up with your bonehead post.

            • ITN

              In my previous post I said “Nikon is also offering affordable items such as the f/1.8 primes and various older lenses are available for less money.” With older lenses I meant second hand 80-200/2.8’s and 70-200/2.8’s which you can use if the newest is too expensive. If you are making your primary income from photography and live in a first world country, and if you need an f/2.8 telezoom, purchasing a (70)80-200/2.8 (used if necessary) should not present an insurmountable challenge because it costs a fraction of what you need for food and shelter and lasts at least 5-10 years if properly maintained. If you have had bad experiences with Nikkors and good experiences with 3rd party lenses, fine, I have no reason to doubt you. Nikon have sold about one million 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses so far so someone must find them worth the price.

            • Thom Hogan

              Your comments deserve much further comment. So let’s take it point by point:

              1. Pros are getting to be a smaller and smaller group. But those that are truly pro and making money can and do replace their gear. They pretty much have to from time to time. At some point the repair bills on our gear get high enough that it’s just simpler to replace. When our gear isn’t in our bag, we’re not making money.

              As for not every pro makes money, well, I don’t know how they stay a pro if that’s the case (see my first sentence in this point).

              2. You seem stuck on wedding photography. That’s a market that seems to have two nodes to it: (1) photographers who’ve earned a reputation, have excellent marketing/sales skills, and charge a lot; and (2) people that think that all you need is a camera. Those in group 2 are going to be done in by smartphones. I recently saw a wedding where the bride simply had everyone use their smartphones and share. Frankly, crowd sourcing like that netted her enough winners to skip hiring a photographer.

              As for expensing things, yes, there are differences Internationally. Here in the US most of us can write 100% of the cost of working gear off against income in the year we make the purchase. Of course, if you don’t have income, you’re in trouble. But see what I said in 1, above.

              3. Obviously it IS working for the companies. Look at the financials and you’ll see that it is. But, it’s a short term solution only. Long term, further declines in market size can’t be met by pushing product costs further upward. You can generally only use that bullet once.

              4. “Reliable”? Well, that’s an interesting way to phrase things. Generally when I’m picking lenses, I don’t use “reliable” as the major factor. I use image quality. Further, there’s a reliability issue that many are now facing with some of those older 70/80-200mm. Parts for the 80-200mm are no longer available, which means the next fix you need is one past the last fix. (Aside: I’m not sure how NikonUSA gets away with selling products as new for which they won’t repair certain things.)

              You’re also arguing a strange case here. Upgrading happens. In any market, in any profession. The question here is how often would I update a 70-200mm? One factor here in the US is the 5-year warranty. Once that’s expired I’m more likely to upgrade. But I’m not going to upgrade if there aren’t perceived performance or image quality gains.

              This is one of the hidden liabilities of relying on legacy lenses as Canon/Nikon have. Lenses get updated by users far less than camera bodies in the digital age. Far less. To the point where some aren’t updating at all. Still, I’m happy that Nikon (and Canon) continue to upgrade their mainstay lenses.

              5. Yeah, I didn’t agree with that comment, either.

            • br0xibear

              “As for not every pro makes money, well, I don’t know how they stay a pro if that’s the case”
              I think what fanboy fagz means is that some of us make enough money to cover our bills and keep going, while others make more than that.
              Many “stay pro” by giving up a great deal in their lives for their photography, some can and are willing to do that, for others it’s simply not possible.
              Professional photographer’s incomes are as diverse as the photographs they take.

          • Thom Hogan

            I’m with you all the way to the last sentence ;~).

      • MB

        If Nikon follows the current pricing trend as with 24-70 this new 70-200 will cost arround 3300$.

        • I think this is what we can expect from all future releases:

          • Thom Hogan

            Probably. It’s far easier to put incentives later on lenses to sell them than it is to get caught in a currency shift.

            That said, there are price points that are difficult to cross, and US$3000 is one of them.

            • Alan

              I’m probably a rarity, but would pay Otus-money for state of the art PC-E lenses in 17-19, 24 & 35mm. (Near-APO, future-proof resolution, flexible movements, quality construction.)

    • TwoStrayCats

      Yeah, but think how good of a deal you’re going to be able to get on the current generation 70-200 when that happens.

  • saywhatuwill

    Just those two letters “FL” will boost that lens price up by hundreds of dollars. Sad, sad, sad.

    • Bob Thane

      Hey, the current lens is still great though. Soon we’ll have the choice of what should be the best of the best, or a more affordable workhorse. Plus we ave third party options. It’s a great time to be a photographer.

    • KnightPhoto

      Whoa – hadn’t noticed the “word” “FL” till you pointed it out. Ought to be a monster selling sharp and light new version then 😉

      I see Sigma is claiming “FL equivalent” on some of their new Art lens elements now too.

  • Adnan

    I wonder how you will crop 3 or 4 steps’ image, many crucial things will be chopped off.

    • Not really. You’re never supposed to show uncropped photos to your client anyway (esp. if they’re meant to be cropped). Otherwise they will say the same thing you said: “Many crucial things are chopped off.” Many crucial things are all over the pic. You can either crop to square or landscape. Both will retain many crucial things. The FOV is still approximately 11mm.

  • Carlo

    Let see what will be the price in Switzerland after the fine Nikon just got … Hopefully it won’t have the same focus breathing issue compared to VRII version. I guess it will be 82 mm on the front… Seems to be the new pro standard

  • Davo

    Lets consider perception, and the perception is that Nikon’s swimming against the tide from their Photokina poor showing.
    But let’s say the two lenses here are real and are indeed close to launch but was announced at Photokina instead but with a later shipping date.
    And lets say Nikon had postponed their 105 1.4E launch two months until Photokina for a simultaneous launch + shipment.
    You’d get three pro lenses announced, with one a world first and shipping immediately.
    How would people perceive Nikon then?
    Also with the number of pro lenses for DSLRs Nikon’s supposedly launching, it feels like a pretty firm commitment to DSLRs so that would also send another message that there won’t be a mirrorless FF.
    So… the larger sensor CX relaunch it is then.

    • ITN

      Photokina is irrelevant; announcements are scattered throughout the year and most people understand this.

      • Davo

        Well Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji and many other companies might beg to differ.
        It obviously is somewhat relevant. And enough that a lot of people (or just a few very vocal ppl) lost their $hits at Nikon’s apparent lack of interesting product announcements.
        I personally don’t really care about Photokina per say, except it does mean a lot of new products do pop up around then which is cool.

        • ITN

          Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji have a very small market share and so they must try everything. In the meanwhile, lots of Nikon users have bought and are using D500’s, 105/1.4’s etc. irrespective of trade shows. Nikon users are following announcements and know whose reviews they trust and the traditional camera press (magazines etc. who used to rely on trade conventions for information) come months behind, way after it no longer matters and the user community have long ago decided which products are the ones to have.

          • Davo

            The manufacturers I singled out are just some that made bigger splashes this year. Plenty of important announcements have been made at Photokinas in the past by the big two.
            And I’m not entirely sure what your point is? My post wasn’t about how important Photokina was but about people’a skewed perception of Nikon’s poor showing whereas they’ve already forgotten about an exciting lens announced just two months earlier and shipped a month ago.
            But had they postponed the announcement, it may have changed perceptions significantly but at the cost of having 1 month head start in actually selling the lens.

          • Thom Hogan

            Again, the issue is the one I’ve been writing about for several years now: leaking, sampling, last camera syndrome, etc.

            In a declining market, you don’t want to do things that encourage leaking and sampling. Why? Because you enable competitors to retain or gain market share when you need to gain market share yourself to stay even.

            Nikon Imaging’s unit volume is getting smaller and smaller because of Nikon’s own decisions and marketing. At what point will that change?

      • Thom Hogan

        Perception is driving enough of the sales in cameras as the market declines that it is imperative for Nikon to get the perception thing right.

        Nikon has always acted as if the Internet doesn’t sway some opinion towards sales. They need to get that out of their system, fast.

        Your point is a good one, though ironic. Nikon could have bundled the 105, 70-200, 19, and even the AF-P lenses into a “lenses are important, too” Photokina message. But they just suck at marketing. A great example of that is the 70-300mm AF-P: has Nikon managed to get across the message that it focuses faster than the 55-300mm (and 55-200), and is optically better? Nope. Of course, there’s a counter message that hurts them: the lens only works on a handful of recent cameras.

        • Davo

          Quick question, are the AF-P lenses focusing significantly faster in live view?
          I.e. Are they better optimized for both PDAF and CDAF or perhaps on-sensor PDAF with a final CDAF adjustment?
          Since Nikon don’t do roadmaps I’m trying to read between the lines and figure out if these AF-P lenses are useful on a theoretical DX mirrorless.

          • Thom Hogan

            Well, I’m trying to figure that out, too. I’ll have more to say in my D3400 and 70-300mm reviews coming up.

            But the one significant difference, I think, in using a stepper motor instead of the lower end old wave motors is that ability to “step” in fine increments at speed is better controlled, and I think faster. If I read all the literature correct, that is.

            I would gauge that the AF-P lenses are where we’ll find a larger Nikon mirrorless if and when we see it.

            But let’s put it a different way: the Live View autofocus on a D3400 with the AF-P lenses is faster than any other Live View with any autofocus lens that Nikon has done on previous DSLRs (DSLRs, not Nikon 1). Again, I’ll say more about that with my upcoming reviews.

            • Hmm, that (live view focusing speed) is good news. Surprising even, given how slow Nikon bodies are (those that I’ve used, at least). Looking forward to the review!

            • Davo

              Thanks for the insights. Looking forward to the reviews.
              I’m sure you’re onto it already but I’m sure many would also be interested in how the AF-P lenses perform via FT1 adapter with Nikon 1’s since they’re the only Nikon bodies with on-sensor PDAF as well as CDAF.

            • Ushanas Trivedi

              AF-P lenses for DX Mirrorless. Interesting theory & likely too. Interestingly enough, Nikon has also been simultaneously iterating non-VR version of each AF-P lense so far. If we try to read in between lines, are they for future cameras with “in body VR” (DSLR/Mirrorless). Otherwise it doesn’t make sense to make one more similar glass to save 50 bucks. Would this also mean, Nikon mirrorless will be with venerable Nikon F mount?

            • Thom Hogan

              Unfortunately, it might be a more stupid reason than that: the camera body needs a VR entry to control VR on the AF-P lenses. Even the recent D500 doesn’t have that. Only the D3400 and a couple of updated D3xxx/D5xxx bodies do.

            • Ushanas Trivedi

              Thanks for clarifying. I will keep my fingers crossed for DX mirrorless. As you rightly pointed out in your recent article that Nikon can’t afford to keep this space vacant for Sony, Fuji, Canon which it originally introduced (cropped sensors). Let’s hope, Nikon gets it right this time around.

            • I’m sorry, but even Nikon shouldn’t be so daft to run two parallel lens series when firmware updates are trivial and doable by end users. So no, I don’t think this is the reason.

  • mok

    They did not announce on Photokina because did not want that it steal the show from the go pro “copies” 🙂

  • David Peterson

    W00t! Great news for real estate photographers, to get an even wider tilt shift lens for Nikon.

  • Eric Calabros

    I see significant volume deformation in your sample. Why not using an Irix lens? It would make same result, with even lower CA.

  • Martin Kozák

    Will the new 70-200 be more expensive then the new Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS? 🙂

  • Melancholic Troll

    So, another Nikkor lenses, another obvious “Sir, you are not our customer anymore” statement for a large portion of (potentialy) profit-generating Nikon users. And they are waiting and hoping until the bitter end.
    How long can it go like this?

    • TheInconvenientRuth

      IKR, I totally gave up on Ford when they unexpectedly stopped supporting the Model T in 1954. Switched to Honda. That’ll teach ’em!

  • Tov_Daniele

    A real 70-200 or another 70-135?

    • Time will tell! My first thought as well.

    • Shutterbug

      The other one was 70-200mm, you should learn how focal lengths are measured and reported.

      • Tov_Daniele

        How clever… But probably you must learn what “retrofocus” means and how affect the image…

        • CERO

          you mean “focus breathing”?

          • Tov_Daniele

            My fault. The stupid Italian translation…

        • TwoStrayCats

          Its only a concern to me while focus stacking. Big deal. The phenomenon has been around since lenses.

        • Shutterbug

          I don’t think you understand what I meant. See here for more detail:

      • iamlucky13

        The ins-and-outs of why focus breathing occurs and how it can be compensated for don’t change the fact that the usefulness of the lens is affected at short focusing distances.

        The old 70-200VR compensated for it well. The new one doesn’t. That was way outside of many users’ expectations and affected the situations the lens was appropriate for. Why should they not be frustrated?

  • HKer

    Personally, if you need it and can afford it you will buy it. The only alternative to use the 17mm canon tilt which means buying a complete system, this is what I did for work. But I will buy this 19mm tilt to bring me back to the Nikon camp for architectural photog work. I do like the 5DSR for its resolution but I like the D810 for its wider dynamic range and hopefully soon to be replaced in 2017. It’s a specialist tool. Some say use an ultra wide lens (14mm), but when you leave an overseas shoot without first correcting for the image tilt you may end up losing your corners when rectified, especially for tight shots, this could be a major headache. Tilting on location you can see what you have before you move to the next location, thus efficient and you get the job done, and get paid! 🙂 Yes I would love 16, 17 or 18mm instead, but I take anything wider than 20mm at the moment. BTW that 17mm is damn good, still some flare but pretty good!

  • peter w

    really serious news.
    Totally nonsense below about a wider angle needed for the wide-angle TS. It is a huge step from 24 to 19.

    • peter w

      Not intended to suggest that people don’t need a wider TS lens, off course. People need what they need.

  • Kim

    Strange they don’t use their new AF-P steppingmotor which gave the 18-55mm instantaneous AF!

    • Eric Calabros

      a lens at this size have big and heavy elements. AF-P can’t handle it.

      • Kim

        I didn’t know steppingmotors could not be made bigger…

        • Maybe steppingmotor makes the lenses less durable? And 70-200 needs to be very tough being a trinity one.

        • CERO

          maybe the limit is the power draw required to move that many elements.

      • Maybe stepping motor makes the lens less durable?
        Sorry. That was for Kim.

  • Neopulse

    I’m curious to know if the new 70-200mm f/2.8 would be lighter than the previous gen along with actually being a 70-200mm unlike the reported 65-135mm range.

    But in all fairness, the Canon version is tough to beat in that aspect. They already have in their lineup WA zoom-wise:

    1) 24-70mm f/2.8 II (Nikon also updated theirs recently)
    2) 16-35mm f/4 (Not yet)
    3) 11-24mm f/4 (vs 14-24mm f/2.8)
    4) 16-35mm f/2.8 III (None)
    5) 17-40mm f/4 (None)
    6) 8-15mm f/4 (None)

    • Shutterbug

      The 70-200/2.8 II was 200mm. Focal lengths are reported at infinity. It was a non issues for 99% of users, and the magnification change was only at MFD. By 10 feet or so it was back to ‘normal’. Some people even liked the change as it worked in their favor and gave an extra 5mm on the wide end. The Canon version has a magnification change too just not as much.

      If they actually put FL elements in it, it will be lighter. Nikon has equal or better offerings to every lens you listed except the 8-15, they don’t make that. Also keep in mind how long it took Canon to respond to Nikon’s 2007 lens offerings, and even now they are barely matching them almost 10 years later.

      • Thom Hogan

        Sorry, but you might want to look at my review. At 3m (10 ft) the 70-200mm was by no means “back to normal.” Even at 5m it was still lagging enough to be clearly visible.

        Yes, the wide end was wider than the previous version. And that was a benefit for some.

        Personally, it didn’t change my use of the lens much, but it did make me pull out the 200mm f/2 more often.

        • Shutterbug

          I wrote 15-20 feet and put ‘normal’ in quotations for that reason – I don’t disagree with you.

      • Neopulse

        Good points Shutterbug.

    • EnPassant

      1) Canon’s 24-70/2.8 has no IS
      2) Canon since 2014 have a 16-35/4 IS and Nikon’s 16-35/4 VR is from 2010.
      3) I think the Canon lens is a more pure WA zoom lens while the Nikon lens with its 2.8 aperture also is a reportage lens and propably intended as a replacement for the 17-35/2.8.
      4) Nikon still sell the old 17-35/2.8 as many still think this lens has a better zoom range for reportage. It is strange it hasn’t been updated yet as there is a market for this type of lens and Canon continued develop their 16-35/2.8.
      5) I would think Nikon’s alternative in practise is the 18-35/3.5-4.5 G zoom.
      6) It is lame that Nikon who once was world famous for and the leading producer of circular fisheye lenses haven’t got one in their current lens program.

      • Neopulse

        Good points on the reportage mention, and Nikon having been known before for circular fisheye lenses. I really hope they make one. Although, they need to update those particular zooms and fisheyes to today’s standards.

  • While the weight of the news lens will be less as well as future bodies, is that just a reason those with deep pockets to delay the switch to mirrorless? If I had a smaller DSLR pack that weighted less I to may delay the eventual switch that comes with age.

  • Mike

    I wonder if Nikon’s t/s lens can cover a 44×33 image circle a la Fuji.

  • Kyle

    If it’s smaller, lighter, and has the major focus breathing fixed, along with a little closer close distance focus ability… plus no major technical issues out of the gate… I’m in!

  • Bryan Szucs

    Anyone care to speculate what this new 70-200 lens with bring? Meaning I can’t tell from the new lens design, is it different than the current version or the same? How much nicer will this one be than the current one you think? I own it and I think it’s a fantastic lens. I know they will probably fix the 200mm focal length issue (when shooting at its minimum range) any thoughts are just for fun, thanks!

  • akkual

    There’s only one problem on old 70-200/2.8 vr2 and that is the focus shift. Otherwise there is already very little room for improvement (ofc one can have always more resolution, but I have never felt that vr2 would have let me down in resolution wise).

  • preston

    The Canon was NOT designed to take filters. It took Lee – a third party company that specializes in filter systems – 4 years to release a retrofit filter holder for the Canon, so it isn’t fair to expect Nikon to release a lens that is compatible with Lee’s system from day 1.

    • FerpectShotz

      I am not saying canon have default ability to take filters. I am hoping Nikon being 2~3 mm less wider than canon could accommodate filters, even if it’s 82mm as that would open up a lot of landscape usage. I would definitely pick one up, if the price is sensible enough (under 2k).

  • bgbs

    I was hoping the 70-200 would have PF to make it lighter and shorter, but I guess we’ll have to wait until 2050 🙁

    • peter w

      That could be the F4 version, I guess.

  • TwoStrayCats

    The buzz-word everyone had to banter about last month was “bokeh.”

    Today, it is “focus-breathing.”

    Let’s make next month’s “bellows-factor” and see how much macro mish-mash we can gobbly-gook into inane arguments.

    • hje

      “bellows-factor” is a perfect idea 😀
      especially with the Nikkor Micro 105/2.8 vs the new 105/1.4 this opens great opportunities to buzz around 😉
      (and its more handy than “Bellows extension exposure compensation”)

  • dclivejazz

    I’m pretty happy with the current 70-200, even with focus breathing, and it will take some kind of dramatic improvement to prompt me to upgrade it. If they can make it substantially lighter, minimize the focus breathing and retain the current image quality, then I could be tempted.

    Hopefully they at least won’t make it bigger and bulkier like the did with the new 24-70, which completely squelched my interest in that.

  • whereisaki

    They couldn’t even get non-working prototypes in time for Photokina? Hopefully the 19mm will be good. The 19 vs. 17 discussion is only for fans, but in terms of quality, the 17 TS is terrific. I had two 24 PC-e and both were critically mediocre when shifted. And that was on a D700.

  • ill stick with my 14-24

    • I also wonder if there is a better option than 14-24.
      Especially 14 is really useful for me.

      • I find primes too limiting

        • In general I like primes but I cannot find a 14mm lens with good distortion.

          • you “want” good distortion or “distortion controlled 🙂

            • 14-24 try it

            • No Jeremy I have the 14-24 and is my favourite lens for my architecture. In 14mm is with almost zero distortion and controlled. I just wonder if they are is any better lens for that work and if these new lens will be good -wide enough.

            • Danzig

              Tilt Shift lenses have many functions that are either impossible or very difficult to replicate with normal lenses (panoramas, controlling DOF, selective focus, and most importantly for me is straightening converging lines). I have the 14-24 and Rokinon 24 PCE, they don’t overlap.

  • Very good news on both of these. Now if they’ll just get the 300/2.8 FL out.

  • John Mackay

    Fortunately I only need the 70-200 in the spring for birding. I think if I get it or switch to Sony will depend on if we get an a992 equivalent. The Sony a9 with 12fps 42mpix or so will be here soon and that is too good to ignore if Nikon can’t compete.

  • Back to top