scene through a lens Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 <p>Can anyone verify that Nikon may introduce the VR2 system to the 80-400 nikon zoom? I'm really interested in buying this lens but if Nikon are going to opt for the the better VR system then I'd probably wait.</p> <p>Thanks</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 <p>Kevin, I am afraid that nobody here in this forum can "verify" any Nikon product that has not been officially announced. Personally, I think the 80-400mm badly needs an upgrade to an AF-S version, but none of us can tell you when that will happen.<br> If anybody has insider information from Nikon, they are under non-disclosure agreement with Nikon and will not disclose it in a public forum such as this one.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rnt Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 <p>The 80-400'd be a killer lens with AF-S! Mine seems like it's grinding coffee or something if it needs to rack from near to far... While they're at it, maybe they could make it a 2.8 :-). In the day, I used to use a Nikkor 50-300 zoom (4.5?) for occasional concert shots, nature, etc. What a beast! It puts the 80-400 in perspective, so maybe it isn't so annoying after all...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User_276104 Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 <p>The price of the 80-400 VR hasn't gone up with the recent jump; it's actually a bit lower than it has been for years - currently US $1,370 at B&H. It stayed at US $1,420 its entire run (maybe some slight variation), which is what I paid in July 2001. I don't know if leaving it behind in the wake of a price increase says anything.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawkman Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 <p>Since the end of 2005 I have been hearing Nikon wants to or is upgrading this lens, it has been more than three years now...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 <blockquote> <p>While they're at it, maybe they could make it a 2.8 :-)</p> </blockquote> <p>A 80-400/2.8? Who is going to carry that? And is going to pay for it? The current 400/2.8 AF-S VR is about $8500 and weighs 10.2 lbs - a 80-400/2.8 would be substantially heavier and pricier.</p> <p>80-400/4.5-5.6 AF-S VR - Thom Hogan thinks it's coming http://www.bythom.com/2009predictions.htm .</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 <p>Take Thom Hogan's predictions with a grain of salt. For someone with so much knowledge about Nikon equipment, his prediction success rate is probably no better than 50%, which is very surprisingly low.</p> <p>For example, Canon added IS to their super-teles back in 1999. People kept predicting that Nikon would "soon" do the same. In reality, it took them 8 years while plenty of people switched to Canon for that one reason in the mean time. You can spend all sorts of time speculating about what Nikon might do, but eventually you still are not sure until Nikon officially announces those products.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 <p>A lens with the 80-400 range, good image quality (better than the 70-300 VR but not as good as the 200-400/4), equipped with AF-S, VR II, nano-coating, a solid tripod collar, and an internal zoom design would consideration for a place in my bag. That's a long list of improvements for Nikon to work on, though ;-)</p> <p>If we ignore the build quality and the autofocus, are people generally happy with the image quality of the current 80-400? I think at least for landscape use it seems to be quite sharp.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User_276104 Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 <p>I've always been happy with my 80-400 VR's image quality with slide film, but I haven't found it as good with a D2x. I've seen some beautifully sharp photos posted here with DX-sensor cameras so I know it's possible. I'm willing to admit that it could be a PP issue, since I'm not skilled in expert sharpening.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven_sklifas Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 <p>I have my doubts that any new version of the 80-400 will be introduced any time soon.<br> From what i can gather, its a good seller for Nikon and image quality is considered good.<br> There are complaints about slow focus, however with every new camera body introduced by Nikon it seems to get quicker and quicker.<br> From all reports its very usuable on a D3 and D300</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rnt Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 <p>Sorry, Dieter... My poor attempt at humor. It seems when people (including me) start making wishlists things get out of hand fairly quickly- I was just helping it along...:-)</p> 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