Nikon Announces AF-S VR Nikkor 200mm F/2G IF-ED Lens, Featuring Newly Developed 'Super-ED' Glass

It all sounds good but in the DSLR arena, a user using 70-200/2.8 VR lens can most certainly bump up the ISO if f/2.8 is not fast enough. So, my question is whether this overlap in features could mean a waste of Nikon resources when resrouces could have been allocated to build VR into the longer lenses. May be the longer lenses is no longer necessary for DSLR since the 200-400VR can serve that purpose with TC's.

The look at f/2 cannot be duplicated at the smaller aperture of f/2.8. Bumping up the ISO can only compensate for speed, but may be enough to make this lens unpopular, and join the extinct ranks of Canon's 200mm f/1.8L.

Even though I don't shoot Nikon, I welcome the new lens and wish it well - it's good to see R&D invested in a prime lens at a time of fashionable zoom bloat.

New, improved, professional digital cameras for 2004 have software (and chip?) improvements which make ISO's relatively noiseless into the 1000's of sensitivity. So the user has to ask themselves, do I invest in one lens of high sensitivity like this Nikon 200 f2, or do I put that money into a new body which then makes all my exisiting glass more sensitive (higher shutter speeds) to light? Bon Chance Nikon!

Turning up iso adds to the noise in the image and after a point this becomes annoying. I for example am willing to use iso 400 when necessary but beyond that the results are what they are. Certainly I prefer to use f/2 before going to iso 800.

You might not be able to produce the same bokeh with f2.8?

I know this lens will be a godsend to many professional sports photographers who very much require the speed of that lens. Though I'm sure I won't be in the market for this seemingly beautiful piece of glass, it would very much be a boon to my images when shooting at 1/250 @ 2.8 @ iso 1600 in DARK highschool gyms, with basketball etc.. As with the D2H, this seems a lens very much designed with the photojournalist in mind. Take a look at sportsshooter.com - i'm sure there will be much applause in our board over there. Additionally, the look of a telephoto @ f2 (or, better, that beautiful 200/1.8 of canon's) really is unmatched. Same with leica's 180/2 R-series lens - whose images are spectacular. This lens is going to open up a Wide range of possibilities with the VR feature ... which wasn't available on the Canon lens. This is a Very promising lens for us nikon-toting photojournalists .. even if our numbers are declining ;)

What is Nikon doing? Does anyone really know? What's the master plan here, or is there one?

New lens. Great specs. But meanwhile this once-great company continues to lose legions of sports and nature photographers to Canon because it has not put VR into its expensive line of long lenses and it continues to get trumped in the camera body department.

Nikon can put out a 200mm 1.0 for all I or anyone else cares, given the current deficiencies of the company's portfolio. This lens is a curiosity at this point; that's about all.

Look around, Nikon, at some professional sports venues today. See all those white lenses? Why do you think you lost all those shooters, eh?

It wasn't because they didn't have a 200mm f/2.0 lens, I can tell you that.

Nikon has a 200-400/4 VR AF-S which should be adequate for a lot of sports photography using a D2H given that in the era of film, few used 800 mm lenses for sports. Obviously, those photographers in sports events are using Canon because that company has had a superior USM and IS system for a long time and there isn't any real reason to "switch back".

This seems to be a "concept lens" , just like a concept car. Great in specs..you can drool all you want over it, but of little practical significance. Most professional gear these days is aimed toward digital, so what can you do with a 200/2.0 on a DSLR that you cannot with a 200/2.8 ? The press couldn't care less about Bokeh.

I think its just an oppurtunity to tout Nikon's latest invention in optics -- "super ED". 'Just ED' has lost its exclusivity as every other manufacturer (Sigma/Tokina/Tamron..) claims to incorporate that glass in their designs. So Nikon comes out with a new technology to stay ahead of the pack. A $4500+ lens (MSRP) will draw attention, but the profits will come from new 'Super ED' versions of existing lenses. Thats my guess.

so what can you do with a 200/2.0 on a DSLR that you cannot with a 200/2.8 ?

Almost the same things that can you do with a 300/2.8 and not with a 300/4; or with a 70-200/2.8 and not with a 70-200/4-5.6. Obviously one stop makes significant difference for some applications. Also fast lenses are more suitable to be used with teleconverters. This lens is aimed to be used with digital cameras, as a very handholdable 300/2 with VR. Nikon seems to have sound strategy and is making pretty good moves in digital.

This lens is already VR equipped, and besides at the lower ISOs you can easily double the speed with minimal or no loss of quality. Sorry, but I still don't see the 2.0 advantage of this lens to be worth the $$$$

What I think is that speed won't be much help for handholding, since this lens weighs around 2.9kg.
But I see the purpose for sports photographers, which need speed to freeze the action and a perfect bokeh to isolate the subject.

It is an often-heard claim that you can double the sensitivity with little loss in quality, but it's obviously not true. On a D70, there is an enormous increase in noise between ISO 400 and ISO 800, this is the threshold where it becomes visible in 8x12 inch prints. Try doing indoor sports or concert photography, and you'll see what the f/2 is for.

VR has absolutely NOTHING to do with how good a lens is. It merely adds to the performance of a lens. Canon and Nikon both, make non "IS" and "VR" fixed focals which are just as good(and in fact, better)as the IS and VR lenses. I forget who wrote, in the previous post about "what is Nikon doing," but I think they KNOW what they're doing.

In the digital world, this new 200mm f2 lens and TC 1.7x will equate to a 300mm f2.0 and a 500mm f3.3 (for the cost and weight of one lens + TC). If the Super ED glass is really that good, this will be a killer combination and I, for one, would like to get on the waiting list (if only I had the money).

The f2.0 will allow the image quality to be better than increasing the ISO and allow a photographer to stop the action at 1600 ISO, when f2.8 would give a blurred photo.

Considering that Nikon's limited edition 300mm f2.0 was $23,000 when it was introduced, this new lens is a bargain.

I think Nikon's strategy is based on the supposition that in its digital photojournalism market, 200-400 f/4 VR, 200 f/2 VR, TC-14E, TC-17E and TC-20E will be able to stalemate Canon's collection of IS supertelephoto lenses.

I think that is not a bad supposition.

'Press(=digi) doesn't care about Bokeh'.

Okay, but since when has press become again the only market for digital, or 200/2.0?....;))

On the EOS list, I have stated many times, since many years, that I want a fixed 200/2.8-IS, possibly Diffractive Optics added, to compensate length & weight.

Since that would be the only way to improve my current 200/2.8 and still fit upright in a side-pocket of my PhotoTrekker.

And make life much easier when shooting Kodak HIE + #87C handheld....

(yes, you can, still using the viewfinder, by placing the filter behind the mirror, between the filmrails....;))

But I could live with an 200/1.8 IS-DO too, I am not that picky....just fitting the damn thing in a backpack, shoot....;))

(no, of course there is no space left, no silly remarks please....:))

In my opinion, there are not enough high quality fixed length fast lenses out there for portraiture. While the 60mm-135mm range seems to be the preferred focal length for most environmental portrait work, I believe there are enough serious people shooters out there using Nikon who would purchase this lens as a workhorse portrait lens. I find the 300mm lens to be too long for my work (I use a DSLR now, and it's a 450mm on my camera), and the 70-200 f2.8 I own produces some awfully good images. But I would NOT hesitate to add a 200mm F2 lens to my kit for environmental portraiture work. If the price is somewhat reasonable, I'll eventually buy one. I'd love to see Nikon produce a similar 135mm f2 version for portrait work.

In the end, I think we'll see brisk sales of this lens simply because there are enough photographers - both amateur and pro - who have the money to spend and it represents the best Nikon has to offer. The best optics - like fine automobiles, jewelry or wine - will always attract buyers even if the quality of the end image is almost indistinguishable from a similar lens from Sigma or Tamron, etc.

We still need to see image test results from this lens. Fat chance it's a dud, but you never know!

I don't know about the rest of you, but personally, I would love to have this 200 f2. I wonder what pricing is going to be like.

Maybe news photographers don't care about bokeh, but they care about sharpness and getting the shot when light levels are low, and you forget about fashion/glamour photographers. They definitely care about bokeh and its effect on their shot. Two of the best lenes I ever used, in 40 years of shooting both news and fashion, are the older Nikkor 200mm f2 and an old pentax screwmount 35mm f2.4 Ziss Flektogon. Both of these lenses are as close to the resolution quality of the best Macro lens. And if Nikon has come up with a better version of the older 200 f2, with better glass, lighter and image stablization thrown in, then I say more power to them.

Here are the specs: http://www.nikonusa.com/fileuploads/pdfs/200AFSVR.pdf

6.4lbs = 2.9kg. Heavy. Wish Canon would equip its 200/2.8 with IS. Keeping it below 1kg.

"I wonder what pricing is going to be like"

Price is aroung 4500 Euro. Read in dpreview (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0405/04052801nikkor200.asp)

Heavy, Costly, only 200mm...

I have this lens and having used it I can only say it is worth the price. And also the bokeh can't be matched by the 2.8 . Assuming that all equipment is overpriced anyway.

photographed with the Nikon AF-S VR 200mm F/2G IF-ED at 1/800 f2

This lens is a very powerful tool for sportsphotographers. I'm looking forward to use this lens with the d2x in 8fps mode...This lens becomes a 400mm f2. What else do you need to shoot soccer, tennis, atlethics,... I used to shoot with the 300mm f2.8 but since I've the 200mm f2 (with the d1x) I can assure you the overall image quality is better. 1/1000 f2 VR compared with 1/500 f2.8 improves the sharpness a lot.

Well, I just want to say that I will buy this lense. If I'm correct, it can be a 200mm f2 on any 35mm SLR, a 300mm f2 on a DX sensor camera, a 400mm f2 on a D2X, a 500mm f3.5 on a DX sensor camera and with the TC 17E Teleconverter or a 650 f3.5 on the D2x and with the same teleconverter...

I own a D2H, so all I need is the teleconverter to have a light AF-S VR Nikkor 500mm f/3.5 IF-ED.

I would like to add that the 200mm is a very nice lens. I purchased one for a variety of photo situations. I shot some very sharp tight head shots and was very pleased with the results. The DOF is shallow and you have to be aware if shooting at F2.0. I am an hobbyist and enjoy the use of the lens. I found the sharpness of the printed images to be better than I had expected. My computer screen did not do justice to the images produced by the lens. The prints were much sharper. I have the 200-400 but enjoy shooting a prime now and then. Good Luck, Dale Keith

seems like a natural choice for nature photographers owning a D2X(s). with HSC becomes a 400mm f/2 add a 1.4x converter you have a 560mm f/2.8 2x converter= 800mm f/4 all in a wonderfully light package with VR. and could have some applications too dusk/ minimum light photography, when alot of animals make their presence. i for one would love this lens.

one last thing to add, look at the minimum focus distance. 1.9m(6.6 feet) on a d2X(s) HSC add a 2x converter and you have an 800mm f/4 that focusses to 6.6 feet. its light enough to use on a smaller tripod or even handhold, anyone up for stalking birds with an 800mm f/4?

Ilkka, it seems that you and I tend to agree. I will avoid turning up ISO any time I can and rarely shoot past ISO 400 using digital. Even though the camera's software may reduce grain at higher ISO speeds, that's usually at the expense of a loss in detail. Having and extra stop on the lens is useful in that respect and very useful if you need the shallow depth of field. --Andrew New York City Photos

This lens has ben discussed over at the Nikon Cafe with lots of example pics. At F2, it is unmatched. The weight seems a concern for those that want to handhold it. Otherwise, a monopod is great.