Nikon announcement tonight, US pricing and availability for the two new Nikkor lenses

I can now confirm that tonight, around midnight EST Nikon will announce the previously rumored two lenses. Here are the expected US prices:

  • PC NIKKOR 19mm f/4E ED tilt shift lens: $4,000
  • AF-S NIKKOR 70–200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR lens: $3,200

Yes, I also hope that there is a mistake in prices I received, but I am afraid this is the new normal - get used to it.

I can also confirm that the new 70-200mm lens eliminates focus breathing.

Both lenses are rumored to be available by the first week in November.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • I really hope that the US price I received are wrong…

    • Melkor

      Any chances that you received price for another currency ($CAN for example) ?

      • No, it was US, but maybe the tip I received was referencing the Japanese pricing I posted earlier today?

        • Spy Black

          If it’s true, than Nikon is handing the 70-200 f/2.8 market over to third parties.

      • C_QQ_C

        Just for the Netherlands (Europe) : €3179,- for the 70-200, and €3949,- for the tilt&shift

    • MB

      It was expected though …
      I really wonder how Nikon expects to compete with Canon with latest prices …

    • Pat Mann

      The price sounds right for the PC if they have made it possible to separately align tilt and shift and if the lens is significantly better than the 24mm. I really hope it is worth the price, though if it’s the correct price, it may be some time before I get one.

      • A different mechanism would be nice, but let’s be clear–19/20mm is a different lens than a 24mm. I expect they’ll update the 24mm, but this doesn’t in any way replace it.

      • C_QQ_C

        Separte tilt , shift and rotation are possible

    • Shutterbug

      I guess they got jealous over the price tag they saw on the G-Master lens.

    • Randolf Sack

      PC 19 is $5400 in Australia, shame I really wanted to buy it, not worth that much to me.

  • Henning

    4 is twice as much as I was prepared for. It seems that I am out now. Anyone in Linz/Austria want to share?

  • Luis Bonetti

    $3200 is Ridiculous

  • I’m pumped! We’ve been asking for this lens…

    • Conrad

      …and thanks to your vids nerdsters from forums are gonna dump VR II lenses at ridiculous prices!

      YESSSSS! Thank you Tony!

    • Fly Moon

      I thought you shoot Canon!?

      • ShaulB

        He said in one of his videos he’d move to Nikon if the 70-200 would be a true 200mm at close range.

        • Gerard Roulssen

          He said a lot of silly/funny/stupid things … so don’t hold your breath …

    • John Mackay

      do you still want it as I thought you prefered the 5DSr over the d810?

    • superdan_x

      Look everyone!! Tony is here!! YAY!

      • Eric Calabros

        Its not first time. You new here?

        • superdan_x

          meant to be a joke. I’m guessing you are from Canada

      • Gerard Roulssen

        Not exactly a good news …

    • eXalos

      When I first read about the new 70-200 I thought about your in depth analysis regarding focus breathing and portrait shooting. Tony, with NR reporting they’ve solved the issue in the new lens does this mean you’ll likely be moving away from Canon now? I jumped ship last year and couldn’t be happier. Can’t wait to see you guys review this lens. PS would love to see more night photography videos from you guys. Perhaps an updated star trails tutorial.

  • BVS

    $4,000 for the 19mm TS seems like a tough sell when the price of the Canon 17mm is only $2,149.

  • Randolf Sack

    $US4000 is about $6000+10% tax + the extra Nikon like to add to Australian buyers. That’s ridiculously expensive. I own the 24 and 45 but I’m not getting the 19 at that price. I was really looking forward to Nikon finally releasing a wide PC lens, I’ve always envied Canon users for the 17mm. I’ll wait for a secondhand one.

    • Your point is valid however you will see the 70-200 come in at around AU$3600 to 3800.

      The 19mm seems way overpriced. I wouldn’t expect more that AU$4200 for this lens otherwise it just will not sell.

  • The 24-70 increased from $1,800 to $2,400 or 33%. If this price is true, the 70-200 increased from $2,100 to $3,200 or 52%. Gulp!

    At that price I’m highly unlikely to upgrade from my existing Mark II 70-200, which works great for me. What kind of changes are they making that would justify this kind of price increase?

    • fanboy fagz

      80-200 AFS sold for $1300 new.
      70-200 VR1 sold for $1600 new
      70-200 vr2 sold for $2500 new.
      70-200 E for $3200 new (a new greedy high)

      I cant wait till nikons quarterly report.

    • Manuel Ferreira

      I’ll buy Coolpix B700 instead !

  • Abhinav

    Pricing seems more like new abnormal .All the new lenses are out of reach now a days

  • Randolf Sack

    I just researched the Canon 17mm TS and I can get that plus a new 5D Mk IV camera for $AUD7150, that’s about the same as Nikon $US4000 with our taxes, currency conversion and the extra Nikon like to add for Australia. It’s a bit inconvenient to have two systems but worth consideration, I’ve never used a Canon.

  • Andrew

    Been waiting for quite a while for this lens. Borrowing my sister-in-law’s “VR” and occasionally renting the “VR II” for concert coverage. Less expensive would always be nice, but no one ever said this was a cheap endeavor. With 6-7 years between refreshes, I’m sure (*hope*) it will not disappoint, and with 6 years to amortize the expense…

  • delta snowan

    Tamron better ratchet up production on their 70-200

  • Neogene

    This is madness…

  • Chris

    A Leica m3 cla’d is $650… my rz67 body plus 110/2.8 is $400. Crazy price tag for these new gadgets.

  • ShaulB

    It’s like Nikon are trying to not sell lenses…

    • fanboy fagz

      yep. cant wait to see their quarterly report to laugh.

      • ShaulB

        Sigma and Tamaron execs are probably having a laugh already…

        • Muhammed

          Yup, the Tamron is already a fine lens, and based on their recent releases I don’t see Sigma releasing something mediocre either. Bad news for Nikon. I’d go with the Sigma just because they can change the mounts if needed in case Nikon goes nuts on their new body prices. Easy to switch with Sigma glass.

        • Manuel Ferreira

          I’ll buy only Samyang/Rokinon lenses !

    • Chris

      With tamron and sigma sitting around $1.3k to $1.5k. Whoever still needs a Nikkor will bite it.

      • fanboy fagz

        tamron 70-200 vc is $1200 after rebate. looking real good with $2000 less than the 70-200E

        • Chris

          Nikon/Canon’s sales number are declining anyway. They have to push up price to maintain production line…

          • fanboy fagz

            maybe its declining because there are other great alternatives and prices have gotten ridiculous.

            the 80-200 AFS sold for $1300 new

            the 70-200VR1 sold for $1600 new.

            the 70-200VR2 sold for $2500 new.
            this new one is selling for $3200 (supposedly but not confirmed)

            ridiculous price jumps

            • Chris

              Before these alternatives came out, it has been declining.

              Many young parents these days only need a smartphone to document the growth of their children.

            • fanboy fagz

              maybe. the 2007 recession hit many people.

            • Chris

              Partially. But what I noticed is that many people seriously consider smartphones the only camera they need.

            • Chris

              I acquired a rz67 and 110/2.8 lens for $400 shipped. A friend of mine born in early 1980s saw the focusing screen and screams “how come it’s 3D?!”. Another from 1990s said she never had a single photo captured by film.

              Time changed. 135 cameras killed medium format folding. Then digital kills film. Now smartphones kill a camera style camera.

    • What new Sigma 70-200 Art?

  • Downzy

    Was looking to upgrade from my current Tamron 70-200 F2.8 and Nikon 70-200 F4, but at $3200 US, I think I’ll hold off for awhile. Sad that camera companies are gouging their most dedicated/loyal customers to offset losses and shrinking revenues in the consumer-based product lineup.

    • Shutterbug

      You’ve come to quite the conclusion having not yet seen or confirmed the actual price. I too hope it is cheaper though.

      • Downzy

        True, but NR has been fairly reliable about pre-announced prices. Likely going to buy either the Nikon 105 1.4 or the new Sigma Art 85 1.4 and was hoping to get the new Nikon 70-200, but not if the price is north of $3000 US. Don’t want to think about what that’s going to cost in Canadian dollars.

  • Aldo

    Big league prices.

  • mark meerdam

    50 to 100 megapixel ready prices. I am very interrested if they boast about this, could be glimpse into the coming d8xx/d900.

  • Glen

    $4000 for the 19 is insane! I was prepared to spend 3K and even pre-order before I saw the test results but now I will wait until we get some rebates .

    • Maybe $4k will be the price with the tax? Don’t know. I also have hard time believing those prices.

      • Fly Moon

        Tax for which State?

      • Glen

        Fingers crossed it ends more like $3k in the US. At $4k jumping to Canon or Sony are much more attractive

        • Sony doesn’t have any TS lenses.

          • Glen

            but in some ways it is even better because you can adapt both Canon and Nikon to Sony

  • Lukasz

    Do not f… breathe when you focus and buy VRII instead guys:)

  • VCL van der Drift

    If the quality of the new Nikon comes close to the new zeiss lenses as a zoom lens it would justify the price for me. So maybe if the pricing is correct the lens could be just that good?

    When you earn your money with photography you can place the extra cost against the photoshop time needed to get the same result or against the missed shots of a more inferior lens?

    The pc-e lenses are almost always on a tripod so buy a 24/45 and a panorama head for almost the same cost for the same results?

  • Muhammed

    Nikon spelled this out as their strategy a while back I believe … Where they would increase revenue via lens prices. I suspect it might backfire, with Canon being about equal in many regards, and Sony offering an interesting lineup, paying $3000+ for a 70-200mm doesn’t seem very compelling. I hope Nikon can find creative ways to drive their business but gouging their customers won’t have the long-term effect they’re looking for.

    • Glen

      Exactly, if $4k is the price of the new 19 PC-E I can almost get a 17 T-S and 5D III for that amount. I am really perplexed at how Nikon sees this ending well for them.

      • I love Apples

        Then go move to Canon or Sony numb nuts.

  • NikMan

    but what if i want to give them $4500.00US?

  • wonderdude

    Pricey, yeah…but how’s the bokeh? 😉

  • John Mackay

    if those prices are right it might just push me to sony. The a992 is my dream camera, so when that tech comes to e mount sony will have a way better camera for me and i will have about 1.5 grand to put towards the new body with the money saved from those 2 lenses. Pretty sad.

      • John Mackay

        I thought that was an earthquake related production issue? That they were charging more because they can sell more than they can produce? I don’t want to switch/split, I need to keep a nikon body for my 800mm lens, but this more than a 10% price bump which i could have accepted.

        • I would say wait till February to see what Nikon will do.

          • John Mackay

            I will, I don’t want to buy anything until the birding
            season starts again proper in April/May, but if they don’t match a99ii staying will be hard to justify and these prices are a big push.

            • I think by May will we know what is coming/going on.

  • Bob Thane

    If the 70-200 is as good as we expect the price seems almost reasonable. But the 19mm is freaking insane. That had better be the best wide angle lens in existence.

    • Shutterbug

      I would agree that if they can (Somehow) make it even sharper, VR as good as the unbelievable 200-500, lighter with the FL elements, and the AF speed increases from the 24-70VR, it will be worth $3K because it will have no real competition.

      If it’s about the same as the old one, but with no focus breathing, it should be $2XXX. Just my opinion of course.

  • catinhat

    With pricing like this — more business for KEH, less for Nikon.
    Seriously, the old mint 70-200/2.8 could be had for half the price of the new, and the VR1 version for one third. I think this is a little on the insane side, unless they plan a buy one get one 50% off deal.

  • csmith

    as it becomes harder and harder to make a living with photography the gear gets more and more expensive. go figure.

  • Matt

    $3200 US Dollars! Yikes! I’ll keep my vr2, thanks.

  • catinhat

    The irony of this is the higher the price the fewer they sell, the fewer they sell the less the revenue, the less the revenue the more temptation to raise the price, the higher the price the fewer they sell, the fewer….

    They won’t price themselves out of the pickle they are in, but maybe out of the market completely.

  • br0xibear

    What do you reckon Peter (Admin)…70-200mm made in Japan or made in China ?

    • Eric Calabros

      Price says its made in Eden 🙂

      • lordbaldric

        Traveling to Eden…..
        Yea, brother….

    • No idea… the previous versions were all made in Japan, right?

      • br0xibear

        Yeah, but the new 105mm is made in China…I wonder if Nikon have decided to move their lens production. If this new 70-200mm is made in China, I think it’ll be the end of Nikon lenses from Japan.

        • It’s possible, but I doubt it.

          • Nyarlathotep

            I think you are right. Nikon probably will keep the 70-200 in Japan. They are generally a much more complicated lens assembly then a fast prime like the 105. The Pro zooms are just more exacting to get optically within parameters.

            But I guess it is possible, with all the focus on cost cutting and all by Nikon.

  • Zinchuk

    Admin or Thom, any word on a D810 replacement? Any chance it will come out with this announcement?

    The reason I ask is I just got my renewal notification for my NPS membership. Since the D5 is currently out of my fiscal reach, I’ve been waiting for the D810 replacement to displace my old D700. Turns out the D700 no longer counts toward your two cameras needed to remain in NPS. I don’t want to buy four year old tech in a D800/810, and simply can’t swing the nearly $9500-$10,000 CDN I’d be paying for a new D5+ batteries, new XQD cards and L Bracket.

    • Spy Black

      “I don’t want to buy four year old tech in a D800/810…”

      Considering you’re shooting with D700, you’d be entering this decade’s technology. You’ll be amazed at what the camera’s can do nowadays…

      • Zinchuk

        That’s not the point. My primary is a D4. I want the newest, best I can currently afford. I had thought that was going to be a D5, but commercial photography in the oilpatch has gone poof since oil crashed two years ago.

      • dclivejazz

        True, and I mostly love my D810, but it is imminently due for replacement. When that’s the case, I would hold out for the new camera if I were him.

        If being a NPS member is that important, temporary ownership of a D800e might work out.

    • RC Jenkins

      If you don’t hear back, get a D300. Looks like that counts and you should be able to pick one up for cheap. Then sell it back afterwards. 🙂

      Not ideal, but not too bad to stay in NPS while you sort out the next body.

      • Zinchuk

        Nope. D300 is now off the list, too, at least for NPS in Canada. D500, D600, D610, Df, D800 D810, D3S D4, D4S D5, F6. That’s it.

        • Sawyerspadre

          No D750, which slots in above the D610?

        • nzswedespeed

          Grab a d600! They must be dirty cheap!

          • Zinchuk

            I shoot things like oilwell drilling rigs, with my cameras hanging on my sides and often getting banged around. I don’t know if a D600 could hold up to that. I tell my clients “I buy industrial grade”

    • Not a chance tonight, if I hear smelting worth posting, I can ensure you I will share it online like I have been for the past 9 years 🙂

  • saywhatuwill

    “I can also confirm that the new 70-200mm lens eliminates focus breathing.”
    I know I don’t need to say it, but I will, the second 70-200 with the focus breathing shouldn’t have had it to begin with.

  • koenshaku

    Holy smokes, at a price like that for the 70-200 2.8 the VR II can stick around at the same price.. I hope that is wrong.

  • Clubber Lang

    Photo equipment is starting to remind me of a fancy guitar only a few select people buy and leave locked up in a safe room with a humidifier and an alarm system attached to it.

    • catinhat

      On the flip side, as these select people can never stop upgrading, there is a great deal of excellent used gear at attractive price points.

  • TwoStrayCats

    Outside the pro market, $3K is a line of demarcation that a lot of people will not and cannot cross. I hope this will be carefully considered by Nikon before they actually do it.

    • catinhat

      I guess the demarcation line depends both on how deep your pockets are and how much GAS you have. For 70-200/2.8 even $2500 sounds pretty high to me. It is hard for me to imagine that even the “old” 70-200 VRII won’t take the picture you need. This price is particularly odd given how many various 70-200/2.8 lenses, both used and new, are around. This kind of reminds me of upgrading a two year old car to the current incarnation of the same, but at a huge premium. Sure, some like it that way, matter of priorities.

  • nek4life

    My guess is Nikon leaked these insane prices so $2800 sounds like a deal.

  • DieMusik

    $4,000 for the PC-E? 🙁 … Guess I will have to go with the 24mm…

  • The price on the Nikon 70–200mm is great news for Tamron and Tokina.

    • catinhat

      Yes, now Tamron and Tokina have room to raise their prices too.

    • Nakayamahanzaemon

      Tokina has the 70-200mm f4 which is fairly priced, but not f2.8. Tokina isn’t going to be affected by Nikon’s new 70-200mm f2.8.

    • AYWY

      Bear in mind Tokina lenses are weak against flare and ghosts. Just stuff that DxO does not test that can ruin a picture more than microscopic pixel sharpness differences.

  • MonkeySpanner

    Zzzzzzz. Wake me up when Nikon starts making interesting lenses for non-millionaires
    Fuji makes interesting crop lenses that don’t force you to sell your liver. Why does Nikon treat DX like only noobs use it?

  • dclivejazz

    Totally crazy prices. Reminds me of businesses like newspapers that stick it to their most loyal customers who don’t give up their print subscriptions. If so, this is unfortunately a further sign of NIkon’s downward financial spiral. Wish it wasn’t so, but I don’t see how this pricing will work for them in the long run.

  • AYWY

    Maybe the new-gen prices will make DX more relevant and attractive. :p

  • jvm156

    yeah.. i’ll stick with my under $1000 2.8 zooms from the late 90’s that i bought a few years ago…

  • With APS mirrorless cameras closing gap on CanNik APS+FX shooters, nikon is crazy with this kind of aggressive pricing lately. I am full time Nikon photographer who makes living with photography and I use Nikon because it allows me to have the job done, no regrets. But for amateurs these are hard pills to swallow and I would not blame them to simply walk slowly away to Fuji-Olympus-Sony crowd… And by looking at XT-2 I would not be shocked since many of my fellows full time shooters has already done it ! I am Canadian so our prices are going to be roughly 30% higher then those in US so good luck local guys even more :)… btw, there is nothing wrong with 70-200 VRII, unless you start to cry about focus breathing in close distances… for which you can use other lenses such 85, or 105 if thats bothering you 🙂 just my 50 cents… happy shooting, and Nikon marketing group, wakeup sooner then later since you are a bit cocky right now IMO!

    • C_QQ_C

      Agree, Bought myself a D500, nice camera , but probably the last Nikon Camera I will buy, after shooting Nikon for over 35 years now. The glass gets so crazy expensive that it is not worth the money anymore if you do not earn money with the gear..

  • Aldo

    Imagine a d900 or d760 surprise…. It’d be awesome!

  • Mr_Miyagi

    I’m curious what Nikon’s underlying pricing strategy is these days. Do they require each product line to be profitable, or is their goal to maximize the overall profit of their imaging business? Given the pricing of these new lenses, it looks like it might be the former. I’m not sure that’s a wise strategy in the long run. If we find these price levels hold for Nikon’s new lenses and cameras in 2017, then many Nikon users could find themselves having to choose between upgrading their lenses OR their cameras, but not being able to afford to do both. That’s when Nikon could begin to see a lot of their customer base looking elsewhere for their gear.

  • Mike

    I just bought an old 55 f/2.8 Ai-S macro off a guy for $60. For the amount that I use a macro I didn’t want to pay $400, $500. But I ‘need’ macro on every shoot I do. And you know what? Its fking sharp even at 2.8. Proof that even old lenses stay stellar. $60! My extention tube, new, was more.

    • catinhat

      I have the 55 f/3.5 AI-S macro and it is stellar. Macro though, when used as a macro, hardly ever needs AF, so an old AI-S lens shouldn’t give anyone a pause. The same unfortunately can’t be said about typical uses of the 70-200/2.8.

  • d810_shooter

    at this pricing level, one should consider going Sony…..

    A7R Mk II and f/4 lenses are good enough and light/small enough… esp for those who have kids to haul around.

    • Mike

      Apples and oranges. The D810 is cheaper than an a7R mkII. Nikon’s 70-200 f/4 VR is an amazing lens. It’s only knock is that it’s not f/2.8. But with it’s lack of focus breathing it actually has shallower DOF at 200mm minimum focus. (200mm f/4 is shallower than 135 2.8). And no one can touch Nikon’s 1.8 prime lens line up. 20, 24, 28, 35, 50, 85….. all amazing values considering the image quality that goes along with it. Nikon bodies might be heavier than Sony, but Nikon bodies are far easier to hold and shoot one handed (while hauling kids around), than Sony.

  • Alan
  • Juha Poskiparta

    The new 70-200mm lens must be really much better than the older version. Otherwise, it will remain on the shelves of the stores and storage.

  • ThomasH

    Apparently the prices are right. I simply unsubscribed Nikon’s ad email. Go find yourself someone else purchasing these products. I will take rather 70-200 f2.8 Canon, and a body, at the price near the new Nikkor. No wonder Nikon is vanishing.

  • Back to top