NatureScapes.net Forums

Workforce is less than 10% of the cost of a product like the 80-400. If people do not buy them at the rate they are being produced then they will cut back production and offer rebates. Keep your eyes tuned to the rebates about 6 months after this lens ships and I bet you will be able to get it for $2400 or less

Well, if the rumor of rebate on the new D7100 becomes reality, we may not have to wait long. NR is reporting that the D7100 will sport a $100 rebate at launch.

Yeah I read that too although I think it only applies to the version that comes with a cheapo kit lens.  Just stupid, if you are offering rebates at market intro it might mean that you overpriced it to begin with...

EJ, those very questionable "inflation" figures from the same insolvent governments that are ramping up the printing presses to pay their bills need to be taken with a whole shaker full of salt.

The $100 off instant discount on the D7100 has gone live at Best Buy and new rumor at NR is a $200 off discount on the Coolpix A (based on BB ad). Given that, is a $300-400 instant rebate on the 80-400 in the offing? Time will tell....

Baywing wrote:  Given that, is a $300-400 instant rebate on the 80-400 in the offing?  Time will tell....

Of course but not at launch IMHO.

It sounds like the lens is shipping in the USA with delivery for some pre-orders of today.

Scott Kelby on D7100 + new 80-400. It does seem as a very nice and portable combo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIvK7ixsiEY

Well everything seems fantastic...

Giulio Zanni wrote:Scott Kelby on D7100 + new 80-400. It does seem as a very nice and portable combo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIvK7ixsiEY

Note on his D7100 review where he is raving about the low noise, when he shows you the pictures on the LCD he was shooting in JPEG which has very aggressive noise reduction applied in camera when you get to those ISOs so the whole noise discussion he was having is complete nonsense unless you look at RAWs without in camera NR.  On the lens, you simply can not evaluate overall sharpness on hockey shots where the subject is in the center and the corners are white ice.  I'm sorry but this sounds like a Nikon promo video and not a real objective review.

I have this combo and like it a lot, af is fast and accurate, lens is a lightweight as is the body (it's all relative)range is very useable in a variety of situations, IQ is OK, probably about the same as the Sig 120-300 os version. As far as noise, I am rather conservative so for me the upper limit is ISO 800, and 400 would be my standard if the light was good.

I am aware that some will push the noise to extreme levels and use noise reduction, however this is just my opinion and the way that I work. YMMV

I am one who is still waiting for VR to be added to the 300 f/4. I think I may be waiting forever on that one So this new 80-400 intrigues me and raises a few questions:

1) Does anyone know what the minimum focus distance will be at 400mm? Might it be as close as the 300 f/4?

2) Do you think this lens will be as sharp as the 300 f/4 at 300mm? As sharp as the 300 f/4 and 1.4x at 400mm?

If the minimum focus distance is similar and the lens is as sharp, then perhaps it can/will replace the need for VR on the 300 f/4.

1. A simple look at the specs on Nikon's site says 1.75M for MFD
2. That would be quite a feat. At 300mm the new lens is an f/5.6 lens. At that aperture the 300/4 is already stopped down a stop plus that lens is an exceptionally sharp prime where the new lens is a pretty high zoom ratio zoom. Just looking at the MTF curves reveals that the 300 is better than the 80-400 at either te wide or the long end so there is virtually no way that it will be as sharp as the 300/4. However it has the latest generation VR which, in many situations, will make up for the lower inherent sharpness.

Guess I am still waiting for a 300 f/4 with VR then

Shouldn't be too much longer, only took Nikon about 10 years to get afs in the 80-400 so I'm thinking by 2024 give or take a year......

Tim,

Check out the Nikon forum on fredmiranda.com. Sample images from consumers have been posted with and without the TC14E. Pretty impressive.

Unless they are giving you 100% RAW files or at least 100% samples of high frequency detail in center and corner, anything posted on the Internet is a meaningless representation of the actual capability of the lens and quite often the emotional attachment of purchasing something clouds the objectivity.

E.J. Peiker wrote:Unless they are giving you 100% RAW files or at least 100% samples of high frequency detail in center and corner, anything posted on the Internet is a meaningless representation of the actual capability of the lens and quite often the emotional attachment of purchasing something clouds the objectivity.

Thanks for saying that. Lots of money has been spent on the basis of sharp, well exposed 500 pixel-wide images.

E.J. Peiker wrote:Unless they are giving you 100% RAW files or at least 100% samples of high frequency detail in center and corner, anything posted on the Internet is a meaningless representation of the actual capability of the lens and quite often the emotional attachment of purchasing something clouds the objectivity.

+1.

Des wrote:

E.J. Peiker wrote:Unless they are giving you 100% RAW files or at least 100% samples of high frequency detail in center and corner, anything posted on the Internet is a meaningless representation of the actual capability of the lens and quite often the emotional attachment of purchasing something clouds the objectivity.

+1.

Well folks, I ordered one today, that is the 80-400mm.

The lens should arrive Monday or Tuesday of next week.

Give me a day or so to calibrate the lens with my D800 and the D800e, then I will go visit my favorite rookery and take some shots.

Will post RAW files you can download and pixel peep.

Why did I buy it?

VR. I love my 300mm f/4, about as sharp as any lens can be. But, frankly I have missed tons of shots because it has no VR. Grumble.

Reach. The 80-400mm range is perfect for what I do and it replaces two lenses, the 70-200mm VR and the 300mm f/4. One lens, not two. It will save me lots of room and weight when I go to Kenya in May.

New Glass. The lens uses some improved glass elements, that is super ED glass (x1) and ED glass (x4) elements.


Yes, it is expensive. But, you gotta put it into perspective. Ten years ago Gold sold for $400 per ounce, today it is hovering around $1,600. Lenses will not get cheaper.


We will see. It is not a matter of charts, opinions, specs, or anything else, it is about how the lens performs in my hands. If it is half as good as I read, well, I will be pleased to use it as the focal point of my wildlife imaging.


Stay tuned.


Bill