More new lenses.

[I @ M]

From the email that hit the inbox a few hours ago,

the updated 70-200
(https://mynikonlife.com.au/gear/nikkor-lenses/af-s-70-200mm-2-8e-fl-ed-vr/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NIK0948%20Nikon%2019th%20October%202016%20WWA%20eDM&utm_content=NIK0948%20Nikon%2019th%20October%202016%20WWA%20eDM%20CID_296c693ddc3cbf5f1e54fee3aad0873e&utm_source=Monthly%20EDM&utm_term=Learn%20More)
and the 19mm PE-E (https://mynikonlife.com.au/gear/nikkor-lenses/pc-19mm-f4e-ed/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NIK0948%20Nikon%2019th%20October%202016%20WWA%20eDM&utm_content=NIK0948%20Nikon%2019th%20October%202016%20WWA%20eDM+CID_296c693ddc3cbf5f1e54fee3aad0873e&utm_source=Monthly%20EDM&utm_term=Learn%20More)

[arthurking83]

Something to note about the new 70-200.
Yeah it has fluorite lenses and it'll be sharper and vignette less and focus faster, and make you the perfect bacon and eggs breakfast .. basically the type of lens you'll want to marry! :p

BUT!.... they've made it focus closer(1.1m) than the previous two 70-200's could focus(I think 1.4 and 1.5m respectively for the VRII and VR models)

So, as the average joe going to be prone to assume, it'll allow 'closer up' portraits :th3:

WRONG!!!

it's maximum reproduction ratio has also decreased .. down from 0.25x for the VRII down to 0.21x .. even taking into account that it's focusing closer!

ie. it's focal length breathing issue is even more pronounced than the VRII lens was, and that one set the forums alight with idiotic posts about Nikon cheating their customers out of focal length .. etc, etc.
Where the VRII was estimated to be closer to about 135mm at MFD, it seems this new one will be more like about 105mm at MFD.

It's going to be a great laugh reading all the forums over the next few months :D


Anyhow ... and just as a side note:
it appears that lens manufacturers seem to (or already have) reached the limits of lens design too.
This new lens seems to have only 22 lens elements in it's design, which is a measly, paltry, pathetic 1 more than the lens it precedes! :confused013
What ever happened to the good ol days when ever updated model seem to double or triple the number of lens elements in it's design?
Is that even good enough nowadays .. when even simple optics like a 25mm f/1.2 lens can have 19 lens elements nowadays! 22 lens elements in a 70-200mm lens is simply lagging behind for future proofing your gear! :p
Even a piddly little 2.5mm fisheye lens can have as many as 18 lens elements is an many groups! Normally these lens types an get away with the use of only 1 lens element, but nope .. not nowadays!! They almost certainly need to have 20+ just to stay in touch with the rest of the pack.

I should have bought shares in a glass making company years back(when lenses had 3 or 4 elements in their design) .. would have made a killing nowadays, and I reckon so few lenses are being made due to the declining (real)camera market .. note that phones all use plastic lens elements! .. I reckon glass demand must be through the roof.

:p

[swifty]

I think you may have read some incorrect information Arthur.
Max reproduction ratio went up from 0.12x to 0.21x so focus breathing should have improved on the new version.

[ameerat42]

Oh, GASP!! Now it makes sense:nod:

But what an anomalous term to describe this process!:confused013
Here's a good visual explanation of it. (http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/12/17/what-is-focus-breathing-and-how-does-it-affect-your-images)

Of parTICular significance is the last bit of the video:nod:

Down-to-earthism: After all, close focusing USUally means the front of the lens moves outwards - an increase in focal length:nod:

[arthurking83]

I think you may have read some incorrect information Arthur.
Max reproduction ratio went up from 0.12x to 0.21x so focus breathing should have improved on the new version.

Oh! apologies for that then .. dunno where I saw 0.25x for the old lens.
Just checked and it wasn't the f/4 lens either!

... like they say in The Castle I s'pose ... "tell him he's dreaming" :D

In that case then .. your comment is correct.

[swifty]

I believe it may have been from the NikonUSA site. The Nikonrumors admin had copied that wrong info onto his site on the comparison post but later corrected it.

[zollo]

is anyone using the new 70-200 yet? would like to hear some first hand experiences