Is not from Nikon but is from Tokina: 70-200mm f/4

<p>A huge surprise: Tokina is launching a new zoom that we were expecting from Nikon: 70-200 f4 IS with stabilization. Kudos Tokina! I'll buy it in a minute!</p>

<p>Here is the <a href="http://www.nikonplanet.com/3rd-party-lenses/lens-upcoming-tokina-70-200-f4/">link</a>.</p>

<p>I just read the announcement myself, it's a good buy if it is cheap enough but will it be cheaper than the older Nikon 80-200/2.8...mine is brilliant I don't have a need to update from that. Still good to see other brands bringing different glass out though, greed kudos to Tokina!</p>

<p>Glad to hear Tokina is coming out with a 70-200 IS but not if it's f/4. The point of IS is to let you handhold in lower light or lower shutter speeds than you could without it. But by going one stop slower than their 70-200 2.8 (which I have), you're throwing away one stop of the advantage that IS would bring. If they added IS to the 2.8 and I could handhold it at 1/125 rather than 1/250 without worrying about camera shake, that would be an improvement. But if I'm still going to have to be at 1/125 because I've lost a stop, what's the point? Even if the IS gives me a two or three stop advantage, I'd still rather be starting from the same point and being able to handhold at say 1/60 or 1/30 rather than backing up an f-stop before the equation even begins.</p>

<p>Canon's 70-200 f/4 L lens with IS runs almost $1,300 so if this lens measures up and is priced right, it should certainly claim a chunk of the market as well as providing Nikon users with something not previously available.</p>

<p>As the similarity of the prices for Canon's 70-200/4 IS and 70-200/2.8 non-IS demonstrates, it can be expected that Tokina's 70-200/4 will be priced similar to Nikon's 80-200/2.8 non-VR lens. That leaves you with a lighter lens with AF-S and VR vs one that is one stop faster. While I can understand Craig's reasoning - one thing he is missing is that a f/2.8 70-200 with AF-S and VR is also about twice the cost of a f/4 version. And not everyone is willing to spend that much, or carry such a heavy lens, or need f/2.8. And VR certainly still has an advantage over a lens without one - even if (or especially when) the lens starts at f/4.</p>

<p>I have the Nikon 80-200/2.8 - and I only use it for special occasions when I need the f/2.8- certainly not often enough to warrant the expense of a 70-200/2.8 VR. If the Tokina has similar performance, I will be very tempted to trade - the AF-S and VR would be the most compelling reasons to do so - and so would the expected reduction in weight. In my case, I would expect the f/4 zoom to be used a lot more.</p>

<p>I expect though that the main competitor to the Tokina 70-200/4 AF-S VR will be a used Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VRI....</p>

<p>on a slightly different subject<br>

when clicking on the link I see that Tokina is also coming out with a new version of the 11-16 in March<br>

I just picked up one of those in January that is on it's way back<br>

The new version has better glass and an internal motor<br>

I have a D7000 but I also have a D40 for a backup<br>

Release:<br>

A very good news for DX users: Tokina announced a new version of their very popular 11-16mm f/2.8 lens. The updated lens includes an aspherical element, new coating for improved performance and a Silent Drive-Module autofocus motor. Now one can use this lens even with Nikon DSLR cameras that don’t have an integrated AF motor (D40, D3100, D5100 etc). Nikon version of this lens is supposed to start shipping in March, 2012.</p>

<p >This lens will bring for sure butter on bread to DX shooters! Bravo Tokina!</p>

<p>Well this lens is definitely of interest to me. I currently own a Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 non AF-S/non VR. A great lens but as a landscape photographer its weight and size often times deter me from lugging it with me on those long hikes. I don't need a max aperture of f2.8 as I mostly shoot from a tripod and am stopped down to f8 or smaller. A smaller lighter f4 version of this focal range is something I've wanted for awhile now. Thanks Tokina.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The new version has <em>better glass</em>...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Do you have any info you can't point to on this? I'm considering the Tokina so I'd love to check this out.</p>

<p>IMHO it is very interesting the way goes Tokina. They launched recently a 17-35mm f/4 FX zoom that seems to be better for landscape and architecture than Nikon 16-35/4 VR, with about half distortions degree, also in a smaller package. Now they bring a 70-200/4 that seems to be very interesting and at least for Nikon users is greatly welcomed considering that canonistas have great Canon offers in this range. What's next? Probably a 24-70/4 or a 24-105/4 with stabilization? Not so bad at all! </p>

<p>John, Dennis is quoting from the original article you can read <a href="http://www.nikonplanet.com/3rd-party-lenses/tokina/improved-version-popular-lens-tokina-11-16/">here</a> that the new lens includes <strong>an aspherical element, new coating for improved performance</strong> and a Silent Drive-Module autofocus motor...</p>

<p>Life is good for DX users!</p>

<p>I was slightly underwhelmed by their two recent FX lenses, the 16-28mm and 17-35 f4. The 16-28mm is a good lens but huge, and the tests I have read seem to say that is not better optically than equivalent 16-35mm lenses. The 17-35mm seems not to have set the world on fire (?) either. Yes they are cheaper, but equally they are either slower or have a smaller focal length range and, for my money, that means they should be the same or better optically than the competing Nikon/Canon versions. There is no direct competitor for this lens in the Nikon line and it's a good idea, but I am not very confident it will deliver the goods. We shall see.</p>

<p>tokina has some winners in its glass selection. it has to because it doesnt make cameras. i'm not in the market for a 70-200, but this seems to be an example of a 3rd party manufacturer hitting a slam dunk by exploiting a hole in nikon's product line before nikon could get around to it. unlike the nikon 80-200, the new tokina has a focus motor so it will work on entry-level bodies like the d3100 and d5100, which is probably as big a deal as stabilization.</p>

<p>For those of us who don't want to lug around an artillery piece like the f/2.8, this looks like an attractive alternative. Of course it's possible Nikon's own version, filling out their f/4 range, won't be far behind - they've already applied for a patent on a new design:<br>

http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00ZOS4</p>

 

<p>Are you sure this is a DX lens? If I read correctly this is an FX lens: ATX-Pro SD 70-200 F4 IF FX</p>

<p>Thank you for the link Mihai. I note the details, other than the motor, is that <em>"the updated lens includes an aspherical element, new coating for improved performance... " </em>How much does this reliably translate in to "better glass" and most important, amount to better results? </p>

<p>It is FX compatible. Tokina for the most part makes good stuff and I will definitely consider swapping out my 80-200 2.8D for this lens if the optics are in the same ballpark. Looks promising.</p>

<p>I don't see the excitement over a consumer level lens that is f/4? Is this for the people that do not want to spend the money on an f/2.8? Good used Nikkor 70-200mm VR can be found on eBay for around a grand. I would rather have a new looking lens from a premium line that was well cared for, that gives me f/2.8 for the same money.</p>

<p><em>"I don't see the excitement over a consumer level lens that is f/4?"</em></p>

<p>Canon's 70-200mm f/4 IS cannot be considered a consumer lens for $1,300. Maybe I'm old fashioned. But, this new Tokina offers similar features, though the price has not been revealed.</p>

<p><em>"Is this for the people that do not want to spend the money on an f/2.8?" </em></p>

<p>I realize that f/2.8 has a certain look, but in this age of digital ISO 800 looking as good as ISO 100 a few years ago, f/4 is acceptable as a fast aperture lens.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>How much does this reliably translate in to "better glass" and most important, amount to better results?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>John, nobody knows yet... but at least we can hope that Tokina did some tweaking in order to solve the higher amount of CA, the only "weak" part of the existent version. </p>

<p>Its success will depends on its cost and IQ. Considering how low in cost Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 lenses are and the exceptional IQ they deliver, it may be a tough sell.</p>

<p>Even Tokina's f2.8 entry is pretty reasonably priced in the used market.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I don't see the excitement over a consumer level lens that is f/4? Is this for the people that do not want to spend the money on an f/2.8?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A lot of ppl. have been waiting for a consumer zoom lens with VR and optimized for digital to replace the older 70-210 (nikon) versions, because such a lens would be relatively light and very versatile , i think.. ,</p>

<p> I myself am still using aan old 70-210 zoom (nikon) because i have not seen a good equaly sharp, affordable and light replacement for that yet, ( i do own a 70-300 VR also, but that one is bulky again..) .</p>

<p> Since Nikon seems to hestitate to make an F4 zoom in this category available, i guess the tokina is a viable option if it is any good...</p>

<p> This is not about spending the money for a 2.8, but it is about weight and versatility, and being less afraid to carry a very xpensive lens in circumstances i'd rather not ...</p>