Weekly Nikon news flash #444

→ New Zhongyi Mitakon Nikon F AI lens to Sony E NEX camera Turbo II focal reducer booster adapter now available at B&H and Amazon (more information available here).

→ New price drop: the old Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD lens for Nikon F-mount is now $270 off.

→ New price drop: the new Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2 lens for Nikon F-mount is now $100 off.

→ One more price drop: the Rokinon 10mm f/2.8 ED AS NCS CS lens for Nikon F-mount is now $70 off.

→ Rare Nikon NIKKOR 300mm F/2 ED IF lens (cinematography modified) listed for sale on eBay for $18,888.88.

ON1 Photo RAW 2018 is now officially released (Lightroom alternative), you can download a free 30-day trial on this page.

Fstoppers analog review: Nikonos V.

→ The current Nikon UK cashback has an option of donating part or all the savings to Nikon UK's nominated charity. Check the current offers at Park CamerasWEX and Jessops.

→ "Misleading Lines" Nikkor architectural photography videos.

This entry was posted in Weekly Nikon News Flash. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Robert Isha

    Do these adaptors changes focal length. For instant. Does a 135mm f2 becomes something else ?

    • TheInfinityPoint

      Yup. They’re basically teleconverters that work in the opposite direction, ie reducing the focal length and increasing your aperture (lower f numbers).

      • RC Jenkins

        Generally agree that this is how they work; but it’s important to note that the aperture stays the same in these and in teleconverters. The f-number changes because the aperture stayed the same while the effective focal length changed.

        A good way to think about the way these things work:

        Imagine you had a movie projector (=lens), projecting onto a screen (=sensor). The strength of the projector’s bulb is like the aperture, and the brightness of the image on the screen is like the f-number.

        A teleconverter is like moving the projector further away. When you do this, the picture gets bigger. Even though the bulb (aperture) didn’t change, the picture also gets dimmer (f-number). And some of the picture gets cut off since your screen didn’t change. Any imperfections in the projected image are also enlarged.

        A reducer is like moving the projector closer. When you do this, the picture gets smaller & brighter. Imperfections are also made smaller. And you can change to a smaller screen (sensor) to make the image fill the whole screen.

        This has interesting effects–for example, in theory, just like you can take a focal reducer have an FX lens “fit” a DX sensor, you can use a teleconverter to have a DX lens “fit” an FX sensor.

        • Luca Motz

          You should become a teacher. That was honestly amazing!

        • Nikkor300f4VR

          Well explained.

        • RC Jenkins

          One other note I’d like to make for anyone interested, with reference to the projector analogy above.

          Even though the focal length reducer projects a brighter image on the smaller screen, the total amount of light is the same as the original scenario (before moving the projector closer and changing screens).

          In this sense, all else equal, the DX performance should theoretically match (not exceed) the FX performance, in terms of things like low light. So if you have a 24MP DX (w/focal reducer) vs. 24MP FX (without), the resultant images should look almost identical. In practice, you’re adding optical elements to a higher pixel-density sensor without altering the physics of diffraction and refraction, so the DX results may be *slightly* less sharp.

          The opposite is conceptually similar: Using a teleconverter vs. cropping a higher MP camera (to make sure you have the same resultant megapixels). Like using a teleconverter on a D5 vs. cropping down a D850 to produce a 20MP image. I’d expect the D850 crop to result in a slightly sharper image than the D5 + teleconverter.

          I hope this is helpful to anyone reading or thinking about adapting different lenses to different formats.

  • Spy Black

    I was tempted to get a 150-600 G2 Tamron, but then the new 100-400 Tamron came out. I find the new 100-400 to be very attractive, and generally more practical, so I’m gonna wait it all out.

    • Amir

      Nikkor 200-500 has an advantage of fixed f/5.6, if you don’t mind that much razor sharpness on 500mm. Tamron uses reversed engineering on lens making process that results in slower auto focus and less acuity.Not to mention that their copies hold not the same quality.In that regard Tamron copy variant difference > (or =)Sigma Art> Tokina.

      • Spy Black

        No doubt there’s variance in lenses, but Nikon is no exception. The Tamron 100-400 is more compact than the Nikkor 200-500, and is half the price. Overall more practical. I tried it out at Photo Plus Expo and sharpness, auto focus and stabilization were great. Tamron, Sigma and, to a lesser extant, Tokina have all upped their game. Nikkors are no longer the unique lenses they once were.

  • T.I.M

    The 300mm f/2 is nice but I think the AF-i 400mm f/2.8 is a much better deal.
    The AFi-400mm f/2.8 autofocus is ultra fast (even faster than the newer AF-s versions!).
    Don’t get any AF-D Nikon telephotos, they are sloooooooooooooow.
    But it is a very hard to find an AF-i 400mm f/2.8 in mint condition.

  • Delmar Mineard Jr

    Nice price drop on the older Tamron 150-600. The G2 is better choice. With Black Friday and Cyber Monday coming, this must be their prices for the holidays. Still prefer my Nikon 200-500 fixed aperture over the G2.

  • Sebako

    That’s not an AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G. Bizarre.

    • RC Jenkins

      It is. That’s the special edition, styled to match the Df.

      • Sebako

        Oh, indeed. I stand corrected.

  • Back to top