Nikon Announces an 80-400mm VR AF-S :D

http://nikonrumors.com …r-lens-announcement.aspx/

http://www.dpreview.co​m …m-4p5-5p6G-ED-VR-telezoom

..So yeah... Looks like Nikon beat Canon to the punch of the updated 100-400....

$2800 though... ouch...but I guess not unreasonable, Will probubly settle down into the $2400-2500 range in a few months.. and looks like it should be worth every penny

It's only $2699.95.

Interesting enough in its own right, but I hope this means an updated 100-400L from Canon, that's 50MP-ready.

rick_reno wrote in post #15678010
It's only $2699.95.

I have a feeling a new Canon 100-400 would be around that price, too. Now that the 70-200 f2.8 II set the stage.

$2699 isnt that bad considering, So long as its sharp im willing to pay that...

Now the dilemma, I frequently said it here, Nikon gives a new 80-400 lens before Canon gives me a body I can afford and im interested in and I switch... Do i make good on my word or sit tight...

i just saw this and am also hoping that another 100-400 range is on the horizon for us too!
not jumping to nikon just for this....
but it sure would be nice!

KenjiS wrote in post #15678113
$2699 isnt that bad considering, So long as its sharp im willing to pay that...

Now the dilemma, I frequently said it here, Nikon gives a new 80-400 lens before Canon gives me a body I can afford and im interested in and I switch... Do i make good on my word or sit tight...

4 stop IS, how long will us 400mm shooters who aren't millionaires, be able to afford Canon's own offerings...........

hehehe - just a multi-thouasandaire!

Looks like a nice bit of glass. Why do people always moan and complain about the price of new gear though? Prices fall over time for practically anything in life, besides property, so just be patient if you can't handle a product launch cost. Some of the comments in one of those links just made my hand hit my forehead.

At this price it has to be good .

If it's really good, the Nikon price won't be a big deal to many. Imagine if Canon can offer a new 100-400 with a zoom ring, and light/small. Canon has done well in lightening the big lenses, and the 70-300L is amazingly small and light for it's ability, so I have faith Canon can do the same thing with a new 100-400L.

Until then, I'll make due with my 70-200 2.8II with a 2xTC stopped down to f/6.3, the point at which I can't tell a difference in IQ between the 100-400 and the 70-200.

Canon has a superb 70-300 IS L yes it's shorter (that's what I said ) but it's a lot cheaper.

A lot of Nikon shooters over on nikonrumors don't seem to be to excited over it.

DarthVader wrote in post #15678856
Canon has a superb 70-300 IS L yes it's shorter (that's what I said ) but it's a lot cheaper.

I have a new respect for this lens ever since I moved to bodies with MFA. Once this lens is fine tuned to the body, it delivers really nice image quality.

Buylongterm wrote in post #15681138
A lot of Nikon shooters over on nikonrumors don't seem to be to excited over it.

Excellent for them, they obviously know what they are on about