New Nikon 400,500 and 600mm VR lenses.

[Daveash]

Well folks, the price and availability I have just been given by Nikon UK for the above new VR lenses is as follows.

The RRP for these lenses is as follows:

400MM F2.8 AF-S VR IF-ED NIKKOR BLACK £6299.99
500MM F4 AF-S VR IF-ED NIKKOR BLACK £5499.99
600MM F4 AF-S VR IF-ED NIKKOR BLACK £6499.99

Availability end of Jan to mid Feb 2008.

These prices look compatible with the existing range.

Daveash

[rezMole]

These prices look compatible with the existing range.




Unfortunately they don't look anywhere near compatible with my earnings!

[Doug Greenberg]

They're actually incredibly expensive, sigh. I never have understood why Nikon superteles need to cost $2000 more than their Canon equivalents. Not all Nikon lenses are more expensive than Canon, so something is afoot here. I have fantasies of buying a new 600mm. f4 VR someday, the rationale being to have the "ultimate bird lens." But $9,500 is awfully hard to justify unless one is a professional and can earn that money back.

[pe'rigin]

Blimey!


The 400mm is more than I expected.

[Gaz Shilton]

It would probably work out cheaper to buy a Canon DSLR and lens (500mm f4 IS) than just one of these lenses. (Maybe even throw in a tripod as well).

[Duke Leto]

I'll take one of each.................. now wheres my medicine3:-)

[bkrownd]

Do they barter? I wonder what my soul is worth....maybe I don't want to know.... :(

I'd just be happy to have the 80-400VR reconfigured to a non-zoom 400mm fixed setup.

[Daveash]

Doug
This is obviously Nikon's pricing policy . If you compare most electronic or Canon camera gear prices between the UK and US they are normally for example 1000 UK pounds or 1000 dollars US for the same item. With Nikon they ask for example 1000 UK pounds but in the US, 2000 dollars. Or in the case of the existing 600mm Nikon prime. 5500 UK pounds from Warehouse Express or 9400 dollars from Adorama.This was why in a recent thread I started I posed the question should I buy a complete Canon camera and lens kit for the price I was likely to pay for the new Nikon 600mm lens. The UK price for a Canon 600mm F4 IS is 5478 Pounds whereas in the US its 7200 dollars, and that's with a full US warranty, not a grey market price. A startling difference from the Nikon prices.

Incidently, I appreciate all the various responses I got to my previous thread "Nikon or Canon 600mm VR." These responses gave me much food for thought. However the price differentials above explain my dilemma. If I was buying in the UK there would be no contest, but with the occasional trip to Houston TX I have the advantage of buying at US prices so the price difference between Canon and Nikon products can give Canon a huge advantage.

Most of my life with four kids to bring up I have been counting the pennies but I am looking to buy myself a retirement present and I want to get it right, it might be the last opportunity to buy the dream kit.

[Doug Greenberg]

Well, the truth is that if the decision is about a 500 or 600mm. VR/IS lens outfit, the answer is that Canon's gear is a better buy. The only qualifier would be if it turns out that the new Nikon lens is measurably/perceptibly better than the Canon. It might turn out to have some slight advantages (don't ask me precisely what these might be) but I really doubt the lens will be $2000 better than Canon's.

So again: for someone just starting out in photography who is focused on bird photography, Canon is (still) the better way to go, and I say this as a 35-year Nikon user. But for people who will be doing many types of photography and buying an assortment of lenses and gear, the advantage diminishes. As I said, some Nikon equivalent lenses are apparently cheaper than Canon's, and Nikon's overall flash system is terrific. And finally, for people who have gathered up a near-lifetime's worth of Nikon lenses and accessories, I think that there is now less incentive to switch to Canon, given that when you sell gear you pretty well must be resigned to taking a beating in terms of recovering your investment.

[citrinella]

Doug
This is obviously Nikon's pricing policy . If you compare most electronic or Canon camera gear prices between the UK and US they are normally for example 1000 UK pounds or 1000 dollars US for the same item. With Nikon they ask for example 1000 UK pounds but in the US, 2000 dollars. Or in the case of the existing 600mm Nikon prime. 5500 UK pounds from Warehouse Express or 9400 dollars from Adorama.This was why in a recent thread I started I posed the question should I buy a complete Canon camera and lens kit for the price I was likely to pay for the new Nikon 600mm lens. The UK price for a Canon 600mm F4 IS is 5478 Pounds whereas in the US its 7200 dollars, and that's with a full US warranty, not a grey market price. A startling difference from the Nikon prices.

Incidently, I appreciate all the various responses I got to my previous thread "Nikon or Canon 600mm VR." These responses gave me much food for thought. However the price differentials above explain my dilemma. If I was buying in the UK there would be no contest, but with the occasional trip to Houston TX I have the advantage of buying at US prices so the price difference between Canon and Nikon products can give Canon a huge advantage.

Most of my life with four kids to bring up I have been counting the pennies but I am looking to buy myself a retirement present and I want to get it right, it might be the last opportunity to buy the dream kit.

It becomes even more difficult when you consider real prices. You can get a real price for a Canon lens (e.g. I paid £3650 from Ian Kerr aka Kerso for a new Canon 500 f4 IS) but the real prices for Nikon ?

Remember if you buy in the US you _are_ liable for import duty and VAT when you bring them back to the UK (unless you keep them in the US for a specified time), which if IUC, works out at ~30%.

I'm sure Kerso would give a price for Nikon too - when available ! He's not good at answering BF PMs, so email him
kerso1123@msn.com

Of course he is not the only option, but I'm not alone in being satisfied with his service.

In all honesty I can't see you going wrong with either set up unless you find the Canon bodies are just horrible to use. That you can try out now. If they are OK, I'd make this decision on price. Yes I am a Canon user - and in the end my decision, Canon or Nikon, was made on price. Given the long time Nikon have taken to produce these new bird lenses, I haven't been wrong yet :-)

Mike.

P.S. I take it Doug meant he wouldn't consider a 400 2.8 for birding. Me neither. Wonderful lenses, but too much weight for the focal legth for birding except in very special circumstances.

[pe'rigin]

I’ve had a play with the all-new gear, I am hoping to borrow from a photographer his D3/D300 and 400mm VR 2.8 when it arrives and test his D3 and D300 on my 600mm.

On the lenses they are different, they have advanced features over my existing lenses. The 500 and 600 are roughly the cost I expected.

The 400mm 2.8mm is a lot dearer; it really is pushing it at that price. I would consider using this lens, it is heavy, and you’ll need a tripod, maybe you can get away with a monopod. Nikon are stating that this new VR II will give you 4 stops. The VR works on the tripod as well. I think you can walk about with this lens on your shoulder (just).

As wonderful as this new gear is, I don’t think that it will make inroads into Canon’s market share. As Doug mentioned about cost etc. Nikon are putting great stay in appealing to the enthusiast market, the cost of the new lenses are really above what the average person can afford.

[ikw101]

Presumably Nikon's lens pricing structure reflects their development costs and some sort of reverse psychology - charge us a fortune and we think we're getting the best. However, where does this leave users of non/semi-pro cameras eg D80/D300. Will a 400 f4 VR II or a 500 f5.6 VR II be brought out for this market or have the non-pro users been abandoned? If it came down to it I'd even settle for a sensibly priced 400 f5.6 VR II.

[Doug Greenberg]

Nikon has pretty much abandoned the "handheld 400mm." market, save for the 80-400mm. VR zoom. This is a good lens overall, but it is NOT at its best at 400mm and f5.6, where the bird photographer is likely to "dwell." The older Nikon 400mm lenses, including the 400mm. f5.6 EDIF and the even older non-IF ED model were both VERY sharp at f5.6. The 80-400mm. VR is so-so at this setting. You really need to stop down a full stop to get optimal sharpness.

Consequently, I do think that Nikon could consider a 400mm. f5.6 VR AF-S lens at this juncture; why not? I am tempted to hope for an f4.5 to add that little extra brightness, but I suspect this would make the lens too large and heavy for handheld use.

[pe'rigin]

I am tempted to hope for an f4.5 to add that little extra brightness, but I suspect this would make the lens too large and heavy for handheld use.

Makes a lot of sense, but will they do it….no!

Reading all their literature and press releases on the new gear, they keep emphasising the words ‘enthusiast market’ over and over again and how they want to appeal to this section. These three lenses and the D3 are not aimed at this group at these costs.

Canon are no better in producing a 10million pixel camera @ £3000, that doesn’t work very well. They too will produce the new version lenses at an equally high retail cost.

The majority of us are caught between these two giants in some way or another.

Please come back Pentax, all is forgiven.

[SLRShooter]

The problem with switching to Canon is they have no bodies to compare to the new D300/D3s. Unless you go for the top of the line Canon at $8,000. Then you might as well buy the Nikon lens. For the immediate future, Nikon will have no problem selling the 3 new lens. Many people have already ponied up and ordered them. I am in line to buy one persons 500mm AFS f4 reject. He wants the VR version. Many of these people own two, if not all three lens. Big Birders = big incomes = big lens....

[davidtucker]

I could do a "deal with the Devil" and sell my soul, that's the only way that I will be ever be able to afford the new 600mm lens.

[Vectis Birder]

Unfortunately they don't look anywhere near compatible with my earnings!


You beat me to it. I just wish that there were good prime lenses available that didn't cost the same amount as a small car.

Reading all their literature and press releases on the new gear, they keep emphasising the words ‘enthusiast market’ over and over again and how they want to appeal to this section.

In their dreams. No average enthusiast can ever afford something like this, unless they have got a very well-paid job or get lucky on the horses or the lottery (very, very few of us, I guess, fill those criteria) so to say that these things will appeal to the 'enthusiast market' is just being disingenuous in my opinion. :C

In the meantime the rest of us will have to carry on with our lower-end zooms and third party stuff. Oh well.

Sorry, felt like a moan. ;)

[bkrownd]

Consequently, I do think that Nikon could consider a 400mm. f5.6 VR AF-S lens at this juncture; why not? I am tempted to hope for an f4.5 to add that little extra brightness, but I suspect this would make the lens too large and heavy for handheld use.

Wouldn't the 300mm f/4 upgraded to VR be the easier route, via a teleconverter? I dream about it every day...

[Doug Greenberg]

You beat me to it. I just wish that there were good prime lenses available that didn't cost the same amount as a small car.

In their dreams. No average enthusiast can ever afford something like this, unless they have got a very well-paid job or get lucky on the horses or the lottery (very, very few of us, I guess, fill those criteria) so to say that these things will appeal to the 'enthusiast market' is just being disingenuous in my opinion. :C

In the meantime the rest of us will have to carry on with our lower-end zooms and third party stuff. Oh well.

Sorry, felt like a moan. ;)

Certainly I am sympathetic, and in a similar situation to everyone else here, i.e., I could not possibly justify (particularly to my wife!) spending $9000+ on a new, state-of-the-art supertele in pursuit of what for me is basically an expensive hobby.

HOWEVER, I will point out that we Nikon users have one continuing ace up our collective sleeve, that is, that we can use the optically excellent and fast older telephoto lenses with which the professionals no longer would be caught dead. If you own a D200/300 you can use all AI/AIS lenses with full metering. You give up autofocus. Is that really such a burden and hardship? We older fellows learned to manually focus, even for bird photos, decades ago. We did not feel martyred or overly challenged.

I have acquired over the years several such lenses, ranging from 400mm to 600mm (f5.6). Even were I to sell all of these I would not even come close to garnering enough cash to pay for a new 600mm. f5.6 VR, I'm afraid. In fact, by my calculations I might come up with about 40% of the cost, tops. Incredible.

[Gentoo]

They're actually incredibly expensive, sigh. I never have understood why Nikon superteles need to cost $2000 more than their Canon equivalents. Not all Nikon lenses are more expensive than Canon, so something is afoot here. I have fantasies of buying a new 600mm. f4 VR someday, the rationale being to have the "ultimate bird lens." But $9,500 is awfully hard to justify unless one is a professional and can earn that money back.
Exactly! I mentioned this in the D40 thread. The average person simply cannot afford to blow their retirement savings on these lenses.

[Vectis Birder]

Certainly I am sympathetic, and in a similar situation to everyone else here, i.e., I could not possibly justify (particularly to my wife!) spending $9000+ on a new, state-of-the-art supertele in pursuit of what for me is basically an expensive hobby.

HOWEVER, I will point out that we Nikon users have one continuing ace up our collective sleeve, that is, that we can use the optically excellent and fast older telephoto lenses with which the professionals no longer would be caught dead. If you own a D200/300 you can use all AI/AIS lenses with full metering. You give up autofocus. Is that really such a burden and hardship? We older fellows learned to manually focus, even for bird photos, decades ago. We did not feel martyred or overly challenged.

I have acquired over the years several such lenses, ranging from 400mm to 600mm (f5.6). Even were I to sell all of these I would not even come close to garnering enough cash to pay for a new 600mm. f5.6 VR, I'm afraid. In fact, by my calculations I might come up with about 40% of the cost, tops. Incredible.


D'you know what? I'd actually forgotten about the older AI/S lenses. Autofocus is no big deal most of the time for me, I often use manual focus. Can you use them on the D80, do you know?

[bkrownd]

Exactly! I mentioned this in the D40 thread. The average person simply cannot afford to blow their retirement savings on these lenses.

I crank up my retirement account contributions at the beginning of the year so I don't get to feeling too rich. I also try to forget the password for my emergency savings account as much as possible. And I'm a safe 2500 miles from any camera stores. A few thousand dollars sitting around in the bank is a very very dangerous thing. It's a good thing they increased the Roth IRA limit by $1000 for 2008, so I could send away all that excess 2007 money last week! :D

It's amazing how sticker shocked I was by $1000 lenses just a year ago, and now it's a totally ho-hum price.

[Leif]

D'you know what? I'd actually forgotten about the older AI/S lenses. Autofocus is no big deal most of the time for me, I often use manual focus. Can you use them on the D80, do you know?

Yes of course, but you have to use them in manual mode, with no metering. That said, as long as the light is not changing much, it's not hard to arrive at the correct exposure using histograms, and then use that value for subsequent shots.

[Vectis Birder]

Yes of course, but you have to use them in manual mode, with no metering. That said, as long as the light is not changing much, it's not hard to arrive at the correct exposure using histograms, and then use that value for subsequent shots.

Excellent. Thanks Leif. :t:

[Doug Greenberg]

Yes of course, but you have to use them in manual mode, with no metering. That said, as long as the light is not changing much, it's not hard to arrive at the correct exposure using histograms, and then use that value for subsequent shots.


One of my Old Teles is a 500mm. f4P. This lens includes a metering chip. One other lens I own is an old 400mm. f3.5 that I had "chipped" by a fellow named Roland Elliot. This worked well for me but I don't know if this option is available any longer.

Otherwise, when I used a D100 I used the trial-and-error method a lot. When you go out to take photos you snap a few test shots and get a notion of the general range of light readings. You then adjust according to whether the bird is in sun or shade, is light or dark colored, etc. It really doesn't take long to get very good at this!

Still, I was happy to switch over to a D200, which provides metering on all AI/AIS lenses.

[SLRShooter]

Certainly I am sympathetic, and in a similar situation to everyone else here, i.e., I could not possibly justify (particularly to my wife!) spending $9000+ on a new, state-of-the-art supertele in pursuit of what for me is basically an expensive hobby.

HOWEVER, I will point out that we Nikon users have one continuing ace up our collective sleeve, that is, that we can use the optically excellent and fast older telephoto lenses with which the professionals no longer would be caught dead. If you own a D200/300 you can use all AI/AIS lenses with full metering. You give up autofocus. Is that really such a burden and hardship? We older fellows learned to manually focus, even for bird photos, decades ago. We did not feel martyred or overly challenged.

I have acquired over the years several such lenses, ranging from 400mm to 600mm (f5.6). Even were I to sell all of these I would not even come close to garnering enough cash to pay for a new 600mm. f5.6 VR, I'm afraid. In fact, by my calculations I might come up with about 40% of the cost, tops. Incredible.

I am one of those old farts who started with all manual focus with a hand held meter - Gossen Luna Pro & Nikon F. Have just about reached the same conclusion - either AIS P or AF-I lens. The P lens will meter and the AF-I was a very short lived, almost a test run by Nikon, and very quickly replaced by the AFS lens series. Only the long lens were AF-I and the nice thing is is that they will work with the TCxxxx II converters. Probably what I will end up getting.

[Leif]

One other lens I own is an old 400mm. f3.5 that I had "chipped" by a fellow named Roland Elliot. This worked well for me but I don't know if this option is available any longer.


I had a 200mm micro chipped by Roland, who inserted a chip from a 300mm F4 lens. I suspect this messes up the CA removal algorithm in Nikon Capture but I might be mistaken.

Rolland still does chipping, and although most people are satisfied (he did a sound job on my lens) there have been a few disgruntled people.

Still, it's probably better to save up the extra to buy the D200 rather than the D80, and not pay to chip each lens.

[Doug Greenberg]

I had a 200mm micro chipped by Roland, who inserted a chip from a 300mm F4 lens. I suspect this messes up the CA removal algorithm in Nikon Capture but I might be mistaken.

Rolland still does chipping, and although most people are satisfied (he did a sound job on my lens) there have been a few disgruntled people.

Still, it's probably better to save up the extra to buy the D200 rather than the D80, and not pay to chip each lens.

I always find it amusing that the EXIF data for my 400mm. 3.5 indicates that the image was taken at "28mm." LOL. The chip was from an old 28mm. f3.5 Nikkor. I have been very happy with this arrangement, though having moved up to a D200 (and now D300), chipping my lenses is no longer of any great benefit.

Yes, Roland is known for being a bit temperamental, and I must say that my second experience with him was not as positive as the first. I purchased, very cheaply, an ancient 400mm. f5.6 ED Nikkor, an amazingly sharp, non-IF model from the seventies. I had Roland "chip" this lens, and it turned out that with the engineering of this particular older mount the exposure control only works properly with the lens wide open. For bird photos this is acceptable, since one usually operates wide open anyway and this lens is very sharp at f5.6. But Roland did not warn me about this beforehand. I have considered removing the chip from this lens, actually.