the 800 f6.3S VR PF for Z system....

[fcotterill]

This 800 S is very interesting indeed. I enlarged the silhouettes to measure off a flat screen. The 800 is 91% narrower than the 143mm 400 f2.8S TC and ~150mm wide 600 S (f4) but larger than the other Z zooms and 400 f4/4.5 S PF.... So I estimate the 800 PF = 143mm, which is just under the window of a 800 f 5.6. Allowing for the supporting chassis/lens tube etc, it is likely a 800mm f6.3.

Many wildlife photographers will find this a useful optic, especially it maintains the pleasing tradition of performance with the Z-TC's ;-) We will probably have to wait until 2023 to learn more reliable facts....

At approx the same length as the 400 f2.8S TC VR, the estimated length of this 800 S = 35-36 mm (F mount 800 f5.6E = 461 x 160 mm, compared to 400 f2.8E FL = 366 x 160mm)
new 400 for comparison

Given this PF technology has to date thrown up formidable challenges in production of the phase-fresnel element (of such width), the designers may have succeeded in using a narrower PF element(s) in the optical design, which has maintained its IQ yet still shortened the lens with an allometric weight reduction. If this Z prime is introduced into the wild in such form and maintains S Line quality, then it will stand tall as yet another remarkable feat in pioneering optical design by Nikon's engineers!

as noted, in comparison, the 600 S is actually approx 6% wider then the 400 2.8S, which probably reflects the 150mm window of a 600 f4. The new 400 PF scheduled by mid 2023 is slightly wider then the 100-400 f4.5/5.6 (and 70-200 f2.8S (both take 77mm filters), @ 100mm approx dia. it is likely f4.3S (93mm window).

Its silhouette is almost the same length as the new 100-400 f4.5/5.6S, specified by Nikon as 'Approximately 98 mm/3.9 in. maximum diameter x 222 mm/8.8 in. (distance from camera lens mount flange)'. This length is very close to the registered patent for the trio of F-mount PF primes, (confirmed when the 500 f5.6E PF arrived a few months later).

In 2018, 'Nikon filed a patent (P2018-17857A) in Japan for a 400mm f/5.6 (22cm long), 500mm f/5.6 (28cm long) and 600mm f/5.6 (33cm long) full frame Phase Fresnel (PF) lenses."

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[John Navitsky]

I recall seeing some discussion in one of the other threads (the 100-400 talk?) how they've made improvements that allow them to build lenses to tighter tolerances or something along those lines. I wonder if that applies here as well.

 

[DRwyoming]

This 800 S is very interesting indeed. I enlarged the silhouettes to measure off a flat screen. The 800 is 91% narrower than the 143mm 400 f2.8S TC and ~150mm wide 600 S (f4) but larger than the other Z zooms and 400 f4/4.5 S PF.... So I estimate the 800 PF = 143mm, which is just under the window of a 800 f 5.6. Allowing for the supporting chassis/lens tube etc, it is likely a 800mm f6.3.

Yeah, I've suspected that will be an 800mm f/6.3 since I saw that chart but that's assuming the chart is accurate and not some kind of marketing concept graphic.

BTW, I assume you mean the the 800mm graphic is roughly '9% narrower' or 91% of the size of the 400mm f/2.8 not '91% narrower' as that would be an awful skinny lens

 

[arbitrage]

Wish they'd gone for the 600 f/5.6 patent. I'd prefer 600 with option to go 800/8 with TC. I don't think I'd spend the $10K+ they are going to ask for this to be stuck at 800 and f/6.3. Just as I've never had much interest in the 800 f/5.6 lenses on the market.

 

[ChrisM]

A Z600mm f5.6PF would have kept me in the Nikon camp. I would have even suffered the Z9 if I would have had to. But interesting as the 800mm PF looks, it will probably be yet another unpractical lens for me, stuck at 800mm, too heavy in a combo with the Z9, and probably dangerously close to the cost of a 600/4 lens.

 

[vivid]

Indeed, the 600mm f/5.6 PF would have been preferable to either of these teased lenses - as it would likely come in at just around 4 lbs or so. The 800mm FoV can be pretty hard to work with in some situations, not to mention its likely large MFD.

 

[Kjellis]

I think the 800mm looks interesting. Reckon it will be a nice addition to my 500mm f/4 fl for birding.

 

[sid_19911991]

A 600 PF f5.6 & a traditional 400 f4 prime would have been nice for me.

IMO, a pf 400 f5.6 is too short on an FX mirroless camera for birding.

 

[fcotterill]

The 400 focal length has always been the a favourite choice for sports. It is ideal for photographing medium to large mammals. These are 2 among several reasons why the 400 f2.8E is so outstanding, including working well with all 3 TC's - its Sui Generis.

As we known 600 is the standard focal length for photographing many birds, which too often need 800mm and even more! The challenge with a 600 f5.6 PF seems to be the challenges of minting high quality elements of ~108mm ø. It seems Nikon gets declining returns on its Phase-Fresnel designs for shorter & lighter tele primes, because these benefits decrease with focal length, especially if the lens is to have a decent speed - f5.6 or faster.

Besides easier to produce, a 400 f4.5 PF (perhaps 400 f4.3) will also be much easier to handhold, hike, and get on flights. Hopefully, it will also deliver impressive IQ with the Z-TCs (as we're seeing to date), and maintain tight MFD. Compared to fast telephotos on DSLRs, the mirrorless AF is not handicapped by it being 1+ stop slower. This is even with TC2: 400 f4.5; 560 f6.3; 800 f9. Anyway, this is speculation subject to the existing silhouette being the close to the final design. And Nikon may never admit this beyond seeking the optimum in production and market potential, but they may have decided a 400 f4.5 PF with the ZTC14 overlaps / supersedes both 500 PF and 600 PF in many cases.

Considering these realties of designing and producing PF telephotos, the innards of this new 800 mm look all the more intriguing! At 91% the width of a 400mm f/2.8, the dimensions of ~143 x ~350mm equals a fairly hefty lump of glass: Design quests for the fastest f-stop (close to f5.6) in super teles injects such unavoidable penalties, although 800 f6.3 on the Z-AF system means 1120 f9 and 1600 f13 are feasible combinations.

 

[sid_19911991]

The 400 focal length has always been the a favourite choice for sports. It is ideal for photographing medium to large mammals. These are 2 among several reasons why the 400 f2.8E is so outstanding, including working well with all 3 TC's - its Sui Generis.

As we known 600 is the standard focal length for photographing many birds, which too often need 800mm and even more! The challenge with a 600 f5.6 PF seems to be the challenges of minting high quality elements of ~108mm ø. It seems Nikon gets declining returns on its Phase-Fresnel designs for shorter & lighter tele primes, because these benefits decrease with focal length, especially if the lens is to have a decent speed - f5.6 or faster.

Besides easier to produce, a 400 f4.5 PF (perhaps 400 f4.3) will also be much easier to handhold, hike, and get on flights. Hopefully, it will also deliver impressive IQ with the Z-TCs (as we're seeing to date), and maintain tight MFD. Compared to fast telephotos on DSLRs, the mirrorless AF is not handicapped by it being 1+ stop slower. This is even with TC2: 400 f4.5; 560 f6.3; 800 f9. Anyway, this is speculation subject to the existing silhouette being the close to the final design. And Nikon may never admit this beyond seeking the optimum in production and market potential, but they may have decided a 400 f4.5 PF with the ZTC14 overlaps / supersedes both 500 PF and 600 PF in many cases.

Considering these realties of designing and producing PF telephotos, the innards of this new 800 mm look all the more intriguing! At 91% the width of a 400mm f/2.8, the dimensions of ~143 x ~350mm equals a fairly hefty lump of glass: Design quests for the fastest f-stop (close to f5.6) in super teles injects such unavoidable penalties, although 800 f6.3 on the Z-AF system means 1120 f9 and 1600 f13 are feasible combinations.

Hmmm

Yup a 400 mm is ideal for mammals...in which case 100-400 would be better no? As one can zoom out & get better composition.

The 400 f5.6 is neither more flexible than a 100-400 nor is it optically much better than a 100-400.

I guess others have a specific use for it.

 

[arbitrage]

For me the holy grail of lenses would be a 600 f/4 PF(DO) like Canon teased and then subsequently dropped back in 2015. Heck I'd even switch to Olympus if they made this

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[fcotterill]

Yup a 400 mm is ideal for mammals...in which case 100-400 would be better no? As one can zoom out & get better composition.

Definitely, which is why the 70-300, 80-400 and 70-200 f2.8 with TCs get wide uses, as do 3rd party F-mounts in 100-400.

The 400 f5.6 is neither more flexible than a 100-400 nor is it optically much better than a 100-400.

No one outside Nikon has any idea about the quality of this 400 Z prime, which appears to be 400 f4.5 PF, so we have to wait. Going on the 300 f4 and 500 PF primes, it should have excellent performance wide open, and lose very little IQ with the Z-TCs; this pair of TCs are stated to be improvements over the F-Mount TCs

Some photographers will prefer 400 f4.5; 560 f6.3; 800 f9 over 400 f5.6, 560 f8, 800 f11, especially if the prime is the sharper

I guess others have a specific use for it.

By mid 2023, we can look forward to even more options in the Greater Nikon Ecosystem to get to 400mm, since back when Brad Hill covered the main contenders back in 2014, and revisited

 

[thelordofthelight]

I think i m one of those odd ones out that actually prefers an 800 PF (F 6.3, 7.1, 8) and the 400 2.8S with 1.4TC

 

[ChrisM]

For me the holy grail of lenses would be a 600 f/4 PF(DO) like Canon teased and then subsequently dropped back in 2015. Heck I'd even switch to Olympus if they made this

View attachment 27613

Join the club of "forever waiting for a lens that never comes"

 

[sid_19911991]

Definitely, which is why the 70-300, 80-400 and 70-200 f2.8 with TCs get wide uses, as do 3rd party F-mounts in 100-400.



No one outside Nikon has any idea about the quality of this 400 Z prime, which appears to be 400 f4.5 PF, so we have to wait. Going on the 300 f4 and 500 PF primes, it should have excellent performance wide open, and lose very little IQ with the Z-TCs; this pair of TCs are stated to be improvements over the F-Mount TCs

Some photographers will prefer 400 f4.5; 560 f6.3; 800 f9 over 400 f5.6, 560 f8, 800 f11, especially if the prime is the sharper



By mid 2023, we can look forward to even more options in the Greater Nikon Ecosystem to get to 400mm, since back when Brad Hill covered the main contenders back in 2014, and revisited

Yes nobody knows the optical quality of the 400 f5.6.

But going by the price we can assume it will neither be as good as 400 f2.8 nor will it be significantly better than 100-400.

As 400 f5.6 aperture is too narrow & the 100-400 is better for composition... how useful is a 400 f5.6?

As you said, we will have to wait to see how things turnout.

 

[arbitrage]

Yes nobody knows the optical quality of the 400 f5.6.

But going by the price we can assume it will neither be as good as 400 f2.8 nor will it be significantly better than 100-400.

As 400 f5.6 aperture is too narrow & the 100-400 is better for composition... how useful is a 400 f5.6?

As you said, we will have to wait to see how things turnout.

We are expecting f/4.5 not f/5.6 for that 400 on the roadmap. I was hoping for f/4 but others have convinced me that is probably not going to happen. Having owned the Canon 400f/4 DOII for many years I did find lots of utility for that type of lens.

I agree that a 400 f/5.6 PF wouldn't be of interest when one has the 100-400S or even adapting the excellent 300PF with a 1.4TC to achieve the same thing. But f/4.5 is a different beast. I'm not sure if I'm interested in a 400/4.5 but maybe. I'm more interested in the 400/2.8 if the weight is down at Canon/Sony level despite the built in TC.

 

[sid_19911991]

We are expecting f/4.5 not f/5.6 for that 400 on the roadmap. I was hoping for f/4 but others have convinced me that is probably not going to happen. Having owned the Canon 400f/4 DOII for many years I did find lots of utility for that type of lens.

I agree that a 400 f/5.6 PF wouldn't be of interest when one has the 100-400S or even adapting the excellent 300PF with a 1.4TC to achieve the same thing. But f/4.5 is a different beast. I'm not sure if I'm interested in a 400/4.5 but maybe. I'm more interested in the 400/2.8 if the weight is down at Canon/Sony level despite the built in TC.

How is the Canon 400 f4 DOii lens by the way?

It is 2x more expensive than the Nikon 500 f5.6 & just 1300 USD cheaper than a 500 f4 fl Nikon lens.

 

[jpawlan]

New topic related to the above discussion: regarding Nikon's problem of manufacturing good PF lenses in China.
Early this year I put in an order to B&H for a 500PF f/5.6 and it took 6 weeks to get it. And when it arrived I immediately found that there were many highly visible blotches both large and small in the entire field of the images. They were always in the same location so I knew it was in the lens. My D850 had just been returned from Nikon so it was clean.

I returned it to B&H for exchange. They had another in stock they were supposed to send me upon receipt of the defective lens. However someone in their warehouse shipped my replacement lens to someone else and now they were out of stock for another month. When I finally received the replacement lens, it too had blotches throughout the field. They were in different locations that the first lens both just as bad. I considered sending it back to B&H but after talking to Nikon I sent it to Nikon repair in Calif. They put a high priority on it and it came back in a week. It was perfect with no blotches or spots at all so clearly it was indeed in the lens and it was fixable. I told both B&H and Nikon that the Chinese factories in general lack quality control and they do not do any inspection of products before shipping them to their dealers. Nikon did not ever reply. In spite of the very high prices of Nikon PF lenses, they are not well made in China as the lenses that had been made in Japan.

 

[Calson]

A Nikon 800mm PF lens would have a maximum aperture of f/8 which would greatly limit its usefulness. Even the 800mm f/5.6 is not noticeably better than 840mm at f/5.6 using the 600mm f/4 lens and the TC-14 teleconverter.

I prefer the prime plus teleconverter as I then have multiple focal lengths available in the field. When I sold my 500mm f/4 lens and replaced it with a 600mm f/4 lens, with my first trip to Costa Rica with the 600mm lens I realized its shortcomings. Even the 500mm was too long in many situations and so I always had the 80-400mm with me. A 500/700 combo worked better than a 600/840 in Costa Rica (and the Pantenal).

 

[ChrisM]

If anybody can make sense of these recent Nikon lens patents... According to someone on dpreview, these are patents for a 400mm f5.6 and 800mm f8 lens

Espacenet – search results

Espacenet: free access to millions of patent documents. Find out if your invention is unique or if other inventors have filed patent applications that are considered to be prior art.

worldwide.espacenet.com

 

[Drbobcameraguy]

This 800 S is very interesting indeed. I enlarged the silhouettes to measure off a flat screen. The 800 is 91% narrower than the 143mm 400 f2.8S TC and ~150mm wide 600 S (f4) but larger than the other Z zooms and 400 f4/4.5 S PF.... So I estimate the 800 PF = 143mm, which is just under the window of a 800 f 5.6. Allowing for the supporting chassis/lens tube etc, it is likely a 800mm f6.3.

Many wildlife photographers will find this a useful optic, especially it maintains the pleasing tradition of performance with the Z-TC's ;-) We will probably have to wait until 2013 to learn more reliable facts....

At approx the same length as the 400 f2.8S TC VR, the estimated length of this 800 S = 35-36 mm (F mount 800 f5.6E = 461 x 160 mm, compared to 400 f2.8E FL = 366 x 160mm)
new 400 for comparison
View attachment 27590

Given this PF technology has to date thrown up formidable challenges in production of the phase-fresnel element (of such width), the designers may have succeeded in using a narrower PF element(s) in the optical design, which has maintained its IQ yet still shortened the lens with an allometric weight reduction. If this Z prime is introduced into the wild in such form and maintains S Line quality, then it will stand tall as yet another remarkable feat in pioneering optical design by Nikon's engineers!

as noted, in comparison, the 600 S is actually approx 6% wider then the 400 2.8S, which probably reflects the 150mm window of a 600 f4. The new 400 PF scheduled by mid 2023 is slightly wider then the 100-400 f4.5/5.6 (and 70-200 f2.8S (both take 77mm filters), @ 100mm approx dia. it is likely f4.3S (93mm window).

Its silhouette is almost the same length as the new 100-400 f4.5/5.6S, specified by Nikon as 'Approximately 98 mm/3.9 in. maximum diameter x 222 mm/8.8 in. (distance from camera lens mount flange)'. This length is very close to the registered patent for the trio of F-mount PF primes, (confirmed when the 500 f5.6E PF arrived a few months later).

In 2018, 'Nikon filed a patent (P2018-17857A) in Japan for a 400mm f/5.6 (22cm long), 500mm f/5.6 (28cm long) and 600mm f/5.6 (33cm long) full frame Phase Fresnel (PF) lenses."


View attachment 27589

I have an 300-800mm f5.6 constant aperture Sigma that is amazingly sharp throughout the range. It's also an internal zoom so it mantains balance I am a pixel peeper.Yes it's heavy yes at 800mm you better dot your I and cross your T. Especially with a D5oo. I have no reason to wait. Lol

 

[fcotterill]

I had a go at inferences, based on estimating overall size, and existing pair of PhaseFresnel lenses. See first post above

If anybody can make sense of these recent Nikon lens patents... According to someone on dpreview, these are patents for a 400mm f5.6 and 800mm f8 lens

Espacenet – search results

Espacenet: free access to millions of patent documents. Find out if your invention is unique or if other inventors have filed patent applications that are considered to be prior art.

worldwide.espacenet.com

 

[vivid]

As we known 600 is the standard focal length for photographing many birds, which too often need 800mm and even more! The challenge with a 600 f5.6 PF seems to be the challenges of minting high quality elements of ~108mm ø. It seems Nikon gets declining returns on its Phase-Fresnel designs for shorter & lighter tele primes, because these benefits decrease with focal length, especially if the lens is to have a decent speed - f5.6 or faster.

I've always thought that the 500mm PF was - if not a loss leader - then a lens that Nikon didn't necessarily make a lot of money on. However, I'm certain it did help them sell quite a few bodies. A number of people, myself included, had switched systems (or picked up another one) just for the 500mm PF, buying D500s and D850s along the way. Unique offerings like the 500PF convert or introduce people to the brand, and I do wonder if Nikon itself fully appreciates this factor.

But then again, it's just speculation on my part with some extrapolation from personal experience and few forum posts here and there.

 

[fcotterill]

Similar back-of-envelope sums in this NikonRumours concur with my own a few weeks ago.
We can look forward to a 400 f4.5S and 800 f6.3S. And as generally concluded these are likely to be compact PhaseFresnel primes, which should weight close to 2kg.
We can also look forward to them pairing well with the ZTC14 and ZTC2 : so highly versatile if this premise holds out to be correct

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

The 400 focal length has always been the a favourite choice for sports. It is ideal for photographing medium to large mammals. These are 2 among several reasons why the 400 f2.8E is so outstanding, including working well with all 3 TC's - its Sui Generis.

As we known 600 is the standard focal length for photographing many birds, which too often need 800mm and even more! The challenge with a 600 f5.6 PF seems to be the challenges of minting high quality elements of ~108mm ø. It seems Nikon gets declining returns on its Phase-Fresnel designs for shorter & lighter tele primes, because these benefits decrease with focal length, especially if the lens is to have a decent speed - f5.6 or faster.

Besides easier to produce, a 400 f4.5 PF (perhaps 400 f4.3) will also be much easier to handhold, hike, and get on flights. Hopefully, it will also deliver impressive IQ with the Z-TCs (as we're seeing to date), and maintain tight MFD. Compared to fast telephotos on DSLRs, the mirrorless AF is not handicapped by it being 1+ stop slower. This is even with TC2: 400 f4.5; 560 f6.3; 800 f9. Anyway, this is speculation subject to the existing silhouette being the close to the final design. And Nikon may never admit this beyond seeking the optimum in production and market potential, but they may have decided a 400 f4.5 PF with the ZTC14 overlaps / supersedes both 500 PF and 600 PF in many cases.

Considering these realties of designing and producing PF telephotos, the innards of this new 800 mm look all the more intriguing! At 91% the width of a 400mm f/2.8, the dimensions of ~143 x ~350mm equals a fairly hefty lump of glass: Design quests for the fastest f-stop (close to f5.6) in super teles injects such unavoidable penalties, although 800 f6.3 on the Z-AF system means 1120 f9 and 1600 f13 are feasible combinations.

 

[vulpess]

If they bring a DX-version of the Z9 (ala D500), pairing that with the 400 f4(.5) PF would be a dream I think!