Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/4G ED VR

[John.B]

I've been waiting a long time to see N develop and ship counterpart zooms to the ever popular C f/4 zooms.

www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009VZOK0Q/
www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/897230-REG/Nikon_2202_NIKKOR_AF_S_70_200mm_f_4_0G.html
www.adorama.com/NK702004U.html

Compared to the 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II, this is half the aperture, half the weight, 40% of the ED elements, 60% of the price.

Wide:

Tele:

----------

This should make quite a good companion backpacking lens for the 16-85mm on a D7000. Esp. since N refuses to add VR to the 300 f/4.

67mm threads, just like the C 70-200mm f/4.

Tripod Collar Ring not included. :hmm:

Supposedly 5 stops of VR. We'll see...

 

[Mr.Noisy]

Tripod Collar Ring not included. :hmm:

that's a pain, when I got my 70-200 f4 IS lens, in the UK I paid another £125
but i wanted an original Canon item, there are plenty of aftermarket ones, but would it be so hard to include them as they do with the f2.8 (to my brother if your reading this, yes if your f2.8 version had fit, i'd have swiped it ...)
but as with the filters, would it be so hard to add 10mm to the diameter? your not adding any extra glass after all, just making it easier to use 77mm filters across the board

 

[mulo]

bla bla 77mm

use a step up ring, their like a dollar.

 

[John.B]

Can't wait for these to hit the street!

that's a pain, when I got my 70-200 f4 IS lens, in the UK I paid another £125
but i wanted an original Canon item, there are plenty of aftermarket ones, but would it be so hard to include them as they do with the f2.8 (to my brother if your reading this, yes if your f2.8 version had fit, i'd have swiped it ...)
but as with the filters, would it be so hard to add 10mm to the diameter? your not adding any extra glass after all, just making it easier to use 77mm filters across the board

The N 70-200mm f/4 has 67mm threads for the same reason both of the C 70-200mm f/4 lenses have 67mm threads, it's optimizing the smaller size with the smaller aperture (vs. the f/2.8). I know because I have the similar C f/4 IS.

If you want the smaller size and lighter weight, then that is the trade-off that has to made. If you don't care about the size and you need f/2.8 then obviously the bigger lens is the way to go.

BTW, I love that this has the internal zoom/internal focus like both of the C f/4 lenses. What I don't love is that it's $300 more expensive (though the C versions are fairly mature at this point in the pricing cycle). Looking forward to putting one through it's paces...

ETA: I thought I remembered the C version of the f/4 IS coming with an included tripod collar, but I went back through my invoices to check and it turns out that I had to buy that as a separate item.

use a step up ring, their like a dollar.

The step-up ring will work in a pinch, but you can't use one with the hood.

FWIW, if I didn't already own the awesome 67mm B&W Kaesemann CP, I would buy one for this glass alone. (A cool benjamin at B&H, Adorama, Amazon, etc. and worth every penny IMO).

 

[avro707]

It could make the 70-200mm F/2.8 obsolete for many purposes and the much lighter weight will be very welcome if you are juggling two cameras.

But we'll see how that VR system works in practice, as opposed to the claims.