Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 180-400mm f/4E TC 1.4 FL ED VR lens pre-order links

The Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 180-400mm f/4E TC 1.4 FL ED VR lens is now available for pre-order:

The new HK-41 lens hood for the 180-400mm is priced at $579, while the LC-K103 lens cap is $64.95, so don't lose them.

More links will be added as they become available. Shipping will start in March 2018. Additional information on the new lens can be found here.

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

    Get yours today!…

  • Photobug

    Surprised, it’s a $12,396.95. Really expected it to be $10K or $11K.

    • spam

      I’m not surprised that Nikon launch the lens at a slightly higher price than Canon did with their 200-400. It’s been a general increase in price on during the last few years and this is a lens with no real competition.

      • Bob Thane

        Yeah, I’d have been amazed if it wasn’t more expensive than the Canon. We’ve seen this with all of Nikon’s new telephotos, they’re always leapfrogging in price (which is fair, given that they’re making improvements and there’s also inflation). A tiny bit pricier than I expected (I was guessing 12k), but not unprecedented.

      • outkasted

        Wow its priced more than a 400mm|2.8 FL E. Do you think the price will drop for a 400mm|2.8 FL E?

        • spam

          I don’t think a 400F2.8 is a direct competitor to the 180-400mm. Maybe for some, but not in general.

        • Nikkor300f4VR

          I see what you think here.. 😀
          The new 400/2.8 is on my list too, would be nice though.

      • TheName

        I believe that was the original price of Canon’s when it was announced.

  • James Carlburg

    B&H shipping = $6.52. LOL!!!

  • cbeking


    • Davo

      Time to break bad

  • Eric Calabros

    Some of you reacted to the price like if it was $10k you would immediately pre-order.. come on.. even 10k was out of reach for us.. so it doesn’t matter. We can always rent. I gladly pay $100 per night to share my bed with this b*tch.

    • You mean to say share your body….

      • Eric Calabros

        If she accepted

        • Hmmm. Which one do you have? D810, D750, D850 should be acceptable to her. D5 could be just made for her.

          • peter w

            any Nikon will do. But don’t forget D500 in your top-list.

            • I actually forgot to list that. That’s what happens when you have a D850 in your hands.

            • peter w

              :). I am happy to know what you mean. Very recent.

    • AnotherView

      Well I paid way more for my 600E but since I use it almost all the time I consider it a excellent purchase. I might have considered the 180-400 at 10K, but since I really wouldn’t use it all that much it’s currently beyond my personal justification point. On the other hand, I think this is one lens that will see some serious discounts down the road, so all is not lost.

    • fanboy fagz

      “I gladly pay $100 per night to share my bed with this b*tch.”

      you a desperate apache copter pilot

    • Spy Black

      That’s it. That’s what gear like this is. Photographic call girls…

  • KnightPhoto

    Hmm ultimate safari lens and sports too. Looks interesting…
    Outer cross sensor firmware update coming too…

  • animalsbybarry

    This lens really sounds great
    But for slightly lower quality the
    Tamron 150-260 G2
    And Nikon 200-500
    Will save you a lot of money size and wieght

    I am sur some people need this lens regardless, for them enjoy it

    Personally the lens I would like to see would be more economical and lighter 200-600 F4.6/5.7 or 4.0-4.8 (100mm F8 with 1.7x TC) with similar features to the 200-500 and an Arca Swiss tripod ring.

    • fanboy fagz

      with todays fantastic ff cameras, they can give you that stop of light, but the point of the f/4 is not completely because of exposure, but the blur

      • animalsbybarry

        With the 1.4x we ar talking about F9 (Tamron at 840mm) or F8 (Nikon at 700mm) Both will autofocus on the D850 or the D500
        Neither of these lenses will benefit in any way with a 2x teleconverter
        Diffraction will not become noticeable up to F9 and the extra depth of field is usefull to get an entire animal in focus

        Beyond F 11 sharpness does begin to decrease noticeably

    • outkasted

      coming to a Sigma near you 🙂

  • Diogo Correia

    Peter admin, there’s no D750 replacement rumor yet ? 🙁

    • Eric Calabros

      D750 is still better than Canon’s new 6Dmark2. Top priority this year is mirrorless, and updating D5/D500.

      • fanboy fagz

        yes it is better. but updating the d750 will be next.

      • raziel28


    • No

  • Artliner

    only $12,000 huh

    so basically the price of a small car for a platic lens

    guess I made the right choice witching to APS-C now that Nikon lost it

    • Plastic is on the outside. Inside is all glass. Very high quality glass. Even the plastic used is special. Imagine what the weight of this thing would be if metal is used instead of plastic.

      • Sebako

        Imagine no more, get the all-metal AF-I Nikkor 400mm f/2.8D at a juicy 6.3 kilograms. It comes with its own crate and is available on ebay for something between 3000 and 400 euros nowadays.

    • The Other Steve

      A few weeks ago I had a football ref plowed into me and knocked my flat on my back. Destroyed my carbon fiber monopod and broke the 70-200 lens hood still in my lens belt. However, my Nikon 200-400m f4 that I was shooting with was just fine, even though that’s what the ref ran into. My Nikon D4s also survived.
      I’m happy with the way it is built.

  • T.I.M

    I’ll pass, waiting for the 500mm f/4 PF ED VR to replace my AF-i 400mm f/2.8

    • outkasted

      whats wrong with i400/2.8?

      • T.I.M

        Nothing wrong with it, that’s why I was able to sale it for $8500, now, my back feel better…

      • T.I.M

        I was a little skeptical about PF lenses technology, but I now love it, my 300mm f/4 PF is light, small, and sharp !
        I hope Nikon will release soon the a 500mm f/4 PF

    • Nikkor300f4VR

      Same here.. Nikon should continue their PF / Fresnel lens line..

  • Jano Mno
    • Lol 🙂

    • Aldo

      awww.. beat me to it

    • Nikkor300f4VR


  • Zurichphoto

    I’m not familiar with typical run of show at CES … is this is it? No D5, D500 or D750 “upgrades or mirrorless system? It would seem they would make “major” announcements early in the week. No?

    • This is it. The next show is in early Match (CP+).

      • Zurichphoto

        Thanks, is this unusually light for a CES-type show. Or were folks expecting too much?

        • It’s not only Nikon. There were only one camera (Panasonic GH5s) and two lenses announced (one from Sony and one from Nikon). This is the worse CES for photo gear as long as I can remember. The industry is in distress, we will see far less and much more expensive products in the future.

  • raziel28

    this is one serious lens. i can only imagine how it works on cameras such as D3x, D4 and D5…

    • chasgroh

      …if it’s better than my 200-400 f4 (that I already OWN!) I won’t be able to tell the difference!

  • bgbs

    For $12K that gold ring and lettering on the lens better be made from pure 24 carat gold. Otherwise I have no idea where the value of this lens comes from.

    • Bob Thane

      It’s the same price as the 600mm f4, and loads more complex. Not a bad price, all things considered.

      Too expensive for most people of course (myself included), but if you’re a top-tier sports or wildlife photographer the versatility of this lens should make it a worthwhile investment. Missing shots because you were busy putting on a teleconverter is a huge issue for action photographers, and ensuring that you capture the perfect moment is key to profitability – half a second too late and you miss a shot that could have gone viral.

    • Sebako

      Not gold, but glass. Look at the freaking construction diagram, the thing is just stuffed with glass. And so many ED elements too. Know all those gold-ringed wide angle primes? They’ve only got two ED elements.

  • TwoStrayCats

    I am: Breaking Banks. Oh, never mind, I should’ve read down a few before I blew that out…

    I wonder how much it actually costs to make this lens?

  • CR

    This will fit nicely on my D50. No typo.

    • Nikkor300f4VR

      Yesss, why not? 🙂

  • whisky

    nice. this lens has a specific purpose. some will value that purpose more than others.

    weighing in at 2.6 lbs lighter, one stop less, and ~$11K in savings — i’m probably going to prefer my Nikon 200~500mm f5.6 E VR for most of my field outings. LensRentals will fill the occasional void. horses for courses. JMO. 🙂

    • Matthijs Bettman

      Until it starts to rain…

      • whisky

        for me, dust is an issue too. try a LensCoat®.

  • Mehdi R

    Hope to see review of this beast mounted on the D850 in Steve Perry’s YouTube channel 🙂

  • AYWY

    Out of curiosity, did some comparison.

    Canon was first with their 200-400mm TC f/4 in 2013 @11,999. So we can’t complain about Nikon adding 300 over the launch price tag. Today the Canon has dropped to 10,999.

    In a way this reminds me of how Canikon used to try to one-up each other. Nikon gives a little extension down to 180mm and an FL front element. Both have the same MFD but the Nikon gives 0.25x magnification over the Canon’s 0.15x.

    So yeah this is standard pricing. And this is positioned as a super-tele version of the f/2.8 zooms, a do-everything high-performance tool between 180-560 that aims to replicate what the f/2.8 zooms achieve in their respective focal lengths.

  • ZR

    Lens hood for $579 and lens cap for $64.95.
    I wonder what they are made out of! … I would like to know. I seriously do.

    • saywhatuwill

      Plastic. It’s the name that costs. Oh wait, this isn’t Leica

  • Matthijs Bettman

    (Non English speaker)
    Look at this way. The 200-500 F5.6 is the lens for the amateur, while this one is for the pro.
    There’re specs that are priceless for the pro like:
    – Weather sealing. As a sports/wildlife photographer your absolutely NEED this. You don’t want to put everything away because it’s starting the rain, snow or whatever. That way, you get that $$$ shot when other can’t. This way the lens is paying for it self.
    – 1.4x teleconverter. This is awesome that’s built in! You can stay at the same spot, when your composition changes you can change with it by the flip of a switch! When that animals gets away from you and gets in the perfect place, but just out of reach? Flip the switch! Try to get $$$ shot during the super bowl and the action is just to far away? Flip the switch!!
    – Image rendering. This lens is gonna be a LOT sharper than the 200-500, better micro contrast, better bokeh, better colour rendering. I have the 200-500, but I have to play with the colours at almost every shot.
    – AF speed. Another big one. The 200-500 is slow.! I mean really slow! This one is gonna be a lot lol lot faster, even at F5.6 with the converter on.
    – Build quality. The 200-500 is plastic 😉 This one is gonna be a lot better build. Just better al around

    Anyway, if I have to money I’ll update my 200-500 😉

    • whisky

      01. i view any difference between ‘pro’ and ‘amateur’ to be more likely technique than the gear.

      that’s not to say this lens won’t be top glass, top performance, or top construction. however it’s no more or less likely to be ‘pro’ than anyone who sells their images using less expensive tools.

      02. i agree the built-in teleconverter is a nice touch, and optimized for this lens. if one needs the extra reach, it’ll be a convenient feature. 🙂

      03. in most cases, micro-contrast and colors are dealt with quite effectively through software. there will be the occasional time where hardware provides some advantage, but of the 10’s of thousands of images i’ve processed, most anomalies could be corrected for in software.

      that said, if someone’s PP skills are weak, time-wise it might be more efficient to spend on hardware which cuts down on PP time. it’s not that there’s a right or wrong way — just different ways of accomplishing similar outcomes. 🙂

      04. the 200-500mm is slow to acquire focus, but once acquired i find it quite sufficient for BIF and wildlife. i don’t shoot sports so i can’t comment on that aspect.

      05. i shoot in the rain, the snow, and the dust. i also use a LensCoat® — something which can extend the life of any gear. it’s not necessary to put my equipment away, and it saves on cleaning costs. but to be fair, i’d use a coat on most any long lens in the field — top dollar or not.

      all of this is JMO. YMMV. 🙂

      • Bob Thane

        Absolutely, a great photographer with decent gear will almost always get better shots than a bad photographer with great gear.

        But if you’re a pro, you’re in a competitive market, and you don’t have time to waste. You can’t afford to head home because it starts raining unexpectedly, you need to cover the game to put food on the table and maintain your reputation. You can’t afford to waste 45 seconds swapping teleconverters, that’s time during which you might miss the peak moment, and another photographer will get the sales. You can’t afford to miss 20% of your shots because the AF can’t keep up.

        Of course, the 200-500 is amazing. I own it and love it, and have tons of great shots of both sports and wildlife from it. But I have missed shots because the AF didn’t latch on in time – it doesn’t matter since I can afford to miss some shots, but if I had an editor that needed that moment captured I’d be in trouble. I wouldn’t pass up on some extra sharpness either – I edit all my files individually to maximize their quality, but there’s no substitute for even better glass. Doesn’t matter most of the time, but if you’re doing high-end prints or cropping it definitely is nice to have the sharpest kit possible.

        With that said, I doubt I’ll buy the 180-400, since I don’t shoot sports or wildlife professionally and am very happy with the 200-500. But I can definitely see why professionals would benefit from it.

        • whisky

          “But if you’re a pro, you’re in a competitive market, and you don’t have time to waste. ”

          perhaps dependent on ones definition of “pro”, but in a competitive market, all things being equal, i agree that advanced gear can give a photographer an edge.

          yet whether they execute that edge, may be a matter of ‘luck’ — which is why i firmly believe mastering technique trumps gear when executing less than masterful technique.

          again, no right or wrong answers here —just different ways of achieving similar outcomes. 🙂

  • bgbs

    Today manufacturing is done by robots. robots don’t charge for overtime. And over here in Nikon land we do QC for Nikon.

    That should bring. The price down to $3k not 12k.

  • Mehdi R


  • hussey

    Someone ask if this lens hood will fit on the 200mm f2 (like the old 200-400 apparently did)?

  • jimh

    I’d just like to see a $579 lens hood. At that price there should be a hood for the hood.

    • 2blueherring3

      Hood is relatively cheap. Carbon fiber hood for my 400mm 2.8e will set you back a grand. And it does have a hood for the hood. A really nice one.

      • jimh


  • John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmid

    In a word? No.

  • saywhatuwill

    I’ll wait for the bargain priced f/2 model that will be announced this March. Lol

  • Back to top