ShunCheung Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 (edited) The 24-105mm S becomes a 24-120mm/f4 S. The 400mm/f2.8 with a 1.4x TC built-in is pre-announced, but according to this roadmap, there will still be 400mm, 600mm, and 800mm super-teles; no max aperture is specified. Could some of those be PF lenses? (BTW, Canon has a 600mm/f11 and 800mm/f11 for their mirrorless RF mount.) And there will be another compact, FX lens, a 26mm. Two new DX lenses are added, a 24mm compact and a 12-28mm DX wide zoom. Yet to be introduced, 200-600mm and a 85mm S, most likely an f1.2. Edited October 28, 2021 by ShunCheung Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 It's good news that Nikon intend to expand the compact prime lineup, I really like those lenses at least on paper without having had the chance to use one yet. They are less expensive and more compact. A DX wide angle compact prime should be great for Z50 and Z fc users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted October 28, 2021 Author Share Posted October 28, 2021 The thing is that among "compact lenses," there are already two flavors of the 28mm/f2.8 and one 40mm/f2. Another 26mm seems strange; unless that is a macro, but then it should be listed under macros. I am glad to see two more DX lenses on the map, though. The 12-28mm DX is a much needed wide DX zoom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted October 28, 2021 Author Share Posted October 28, 2021 A different version of the new roadmap. The 26mm FX seems to be a true "pancake" lens. We know that the 400mm/f2.8 S has a built-in 1.4x TC, similar to the F-mount 180-400mm zoom. The other 400mm S looks small. It could be a 400mm/f5.6 PF lens. The 800mm S looks awfully short for an 800mm also. The 600mm S is almost certainly an f4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 Yes, the 26 mm appears really neat, especially considering the Z bodies can be quite thin it's nice that the lens doesn't stick out as much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_halliwell Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 The 800mm S looks awfully short for an 800mm 800mm f8 PF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 I'm all for pancakes and have placed an order for the 40/2, but anything more narrow than the grip is irrelevant IMO - unless of course they intend to make another body without a grip. The Z fc has no grip. I would think they'll make an FX version of that camera body soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niels - NHSN Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 I'm all for pancakes and have placed an order for the 40/2, but anything more narrow than the grip is irrelevant IMO - unless of course they intend to make another body without a grip. Niels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 800mm f8 PF? To my eye the 800mm appears like it could be an f/5.6 and the smaller 400 mm maybe f/4? Give or take. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted October 28, 2021 Author Share Posted October 28, 2021 800mm f8 PF? The front of the 800mm seems to be just as wide as the 400mm/f2.8. That should make it a 800mm/f5.6, and you definitely need PF to make it short. But a 800mm/f5.6 PF is really going to be expensive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 smaller 400 mm maybe f/4? Doubtful - the front diameter looks about the same as that of the 200-600 (which I expect to have a 95mm filter diameter); so the 400 can't be f/4 (requires 100mm filter diameter at least). It might be f/4.5 though as f/5.6 would not need a large front as shown in the image. I expect a 400/4.5PF to cost substantially less than a 400/4PF (factor of 2?). But a 800mm/f5.6 PF is really going to be expensive. $18k? Or breaking the $20k barrier? What about the 400/2.8 with 1.4x TC? The current 400/2.8 is some 11k, so the new one is going to be $13k+? Even $15k? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 My "give or take" was meant to account for the possibilty of f/4.5. 1 stop is typically worth a doubling or halving of the price of a lens, given equal quality. One third stop has only a minor effect on the price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 One third stop has only a minor effect on the price. I look at it differently - front element larger than 100mm = $$$$$$, less than 100mm can be substantially cheaper. I expect a 400/4PF to cost $8-9k at least whereas a 500/5.6 is less than $4k. Yes, it is one stop but it is also just around that 100mm borderline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 The Canon 400/4 DO IS II is $6899. I don't see a jump in price at any particular threshold of element diameter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Naka Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 yay, a 24-120/4, rather than the shortened 24-105. :) 70-200/4 is still missing. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcassity Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 (edited) I should know this since I once owned the 80-400 but, I wonder what focal length changes the new 100-400 to f5.6. Or, I guess asked in another way, what focal lengths will enjoy f4.5? Edited October 28, 2021 by pcassity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_smith3 Posted October 29, 2021 Share Posted October 29, 2021 For me, if I had the new 100-400mm, I would likely not buy any new 70-200mm, either f2.8 or f4. I would likely keep my current 70-200mm f4 and use it with the FTZ adapter. My S lenses would the 14-30 f4; 24-70 f4; 100-400mm; and a 500mm or 600mm f5.6 pf (if ever made by Nikon). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian_niemi1 Posted October 29, 2021 Share Posted October 29, 2021 The 100 - 400 mm f/4.6-5.6 VR S will be the second Z lens to work with the Z Teleconverters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_halliwell Posted October 30, 2021 Share Posted October 30, 2021 So, why the 24-105mm 'typo'? Trying to spot a leaker? Fast lenses are now so much more about using shallow DoF and OOF effects than letting in enough light to get a fast enough shutter speed etc. Film completely ran out of gas at ISO3200, I don’t start worrying about noise until well past ISO4000 on the Z6ii. Anyone know how good those long and very slow Canon lenses are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 30, 2021 Share Posted October 30, 2021 (edited) So, why the 24-105mm 'typo'? The lenses in the roadmap that have not been officially announced are in development and the specifications can change before they go into production. This also happened to the 60mm macro in the earlier roadmap, it became a 50mm. Fast lenses are now so much more about using shallow DoF and OOF effects than letting in enough light to get a fast enough shutter speed etc. For me they are about both things and I often need both. Film completely ran out of gas at ISO3200 I felt ISO 400 was maximum for colour film if I wanted the images to look nice and if going into larger prints, ISO 100. There are lots of opportunities in low light that could not be used for quality photography back then. I don’t start worrying about noise until well past ISO4000 on the Z6ii. Just one week ago I was forced to ISO 70000 with an f/2.8 lens. It would have been nice to have a fast lens in that situation and shoot at ISO 6400. There are lots of dark situations and places. Lower ISO always looks nicer than higher ISO. When using a high resolution camera, the difference is more obvious. Anyone know how good those long and very slow Canon lenses are? I got tired of the high ISO I often had to use with the 500/5.6 and sold the lens in favour of a shorter and faster lens. I can't imagine working with an f/11 super tele. f/4 is OK, faster would be nicer IMO. :) But I realize an 800mm f/4 is not very realistic to use without a robot. Edited October 30, 2021 by ilkka_nissila 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted October 30, 2021 Author Share Posted October 30, 2021 I have this bad habit of keeping the old versions of the Nikon Z lens roadmap over the last several years. In 2019, they added a 60mm and 105mm S macros, but in 2020, Nikon switched the 60mm to a 50mm, which was formally announced in June this year, along with the 105mm S. Both turned out to be f2.8. The 24-105mm S has been on the roadmap for a couple of years, all the way to another version of the roadmap earlier this month when Nikon announced the 18-140 DX. Perhaps initially Nikon had a 24-105 in mind, but I am sure they had known for at least a year or two that they were switching to 24-120 S. You need to ask Nikon why they didn't update it earlier. You would think 24-105 vs. 24-120 is not such a big secret that they need to hide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Naka Posted October 30, 2021 Share Posted October 30, 2021 (edited) So, why the 24-105mm 'typo'? Trying to spot a leaker? Fast lenses are now so much more about using shallow DoF and OOF effects than letting in enough light to get a fast enough shutter speed etc. Film completely ran out of gas at ISO3200, I don’t start worrying about noise until well past ISO4000 on the Z6ii. Anyone know how good those long and very slow Canon lenses are? That depends on what YOU shoot. For ME, shooting high school sports in a dim gym or field at night, it is all about light. I need enough light to get a decently sharp image. DoF or OOF effects is way down my ladder of importance. In fact, I would rather have MORE DoF than less. As it is, with an f/4 lens, I am up at ISO 8000 to 16000. As for the f/11 Canon lenses . . . Again it depends, and it is not only the lens. If you shoot thing that don't move very fast, during the DAY, it is OK. Using the sunny 16 rule, to be at 1/1000 sec, I would have to set the SS to ISO 1000, on a sunny day. Even faster if you are shooting a fast moving subject. I shoot tennis at 1/2000 sec, so my base ISO was 2400. But if it overcasts, you can quickly be up to ISO 6400 and higher. Been there, done that. So what is the IQ of your camera at ISO 6400+ ? IF the camera has GOOD high ISO IQ, you can do it. Edited October 30, 2021 by Gary Naka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Davies Posted October 30, 2021 Share Posted October 30, 2021 I have this bad habit of keeping the old versions of the Nikon Z lens roadmap over the last several years. In 2019, they added a 60mm and 105mm S macros, but in 2020, Nikon switched the 60mm to a 50mm, which was formally announced in June this year, along with the 105mm S. Both turned out to be f2.8. The 24-105mm S has been on the roadmap for a couple of years, all the way to another version of the roadmap earlier this month when Nikon announced the 18-140 DX. Perhaps initially Nikon had a 24-105 in mind, but I am sure they had known for at least a year or two that they were switching to 24-120 S. You need to ask Nikon why they didn't update it earlier. You would think 24-105 vs. 24-120 is not such a big secret that they need to hide. I had been waiting to see the specs on the 24-105 (now 24-120), I'm going to pass and get the 24-70 2.8 as I originally intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 I noticed a Nikon video where the 100-400mm internal mechanisms were shown to keep the center of gravity fixed during zooming (as there are groups of elements that move in opposite directions) and how the lens prevents self-creeping when being carried. This seems like a great design! I have a small fluid head which I really love to use for medium size telephotos and I thought I would need a non-extending zoom for use with that to keep the balance during zooming, but Nikon have apparently managed to make an extending zoom that is compact during transport yet maintains balance when zooming. Fascinating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted September 23, 2022 Author Share Posted September 23, 2022 This is the latest installment of the Z lens roadmap, 20th September 2022: Newly added are another 35mm S, probably f1.2, a 135mm S, a 70-180, which is probably a rebadged Tamron, and the 12-28 DX is now labeled as a Power Zoom (PZ). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now