My Estimate of 800 F6.3 PF z Price

[RichF]

I used historic data from Nikon to estimate what they 800 F6.3 PF Z will cost. Most likely I am completely wrong but this was a fun exercise (I am a math geek).

Like to hear other thoughts on my estimate. Estimate at the bottom of the page, $10,400

I started by estimate the cost of a stop increase/decrease in lens speed (doubles the cost) and then used the 300 PF and 500 PF to estimate the discount for a PF lens vs an non-PF lens (30% discount). Finally z lens seem to be around 10% more expensive than their FX counterparts.

1 Stop Premium
300 F4		$2,000
300 f2.8		$5,500	175%
70-200 F4		$1,400
70-200 F.8		$2,350	68%
14-30 F4 z		$1,300
14-24 F2.8 z		$2,400	85%
24-70 F4 z		$1,000
24-70 F2.8 z		$2,300	130%
Range is from 70% to 175%
Say a stop double the price (SWAG)
PF Discount/Premium
300 F4		$2,000	0%
300 F4 PF		$2,000
500 PF F5.6		$3,600	-30%
500 F5.6 Adj	$5,150
500 F4		$10,300
Two cases. One, 300 F4 vs 300 F4 PF, is similarly priced. 300 F4 is an older lens while 500 F5.6 PF vs 500 F4 (adjusted to 500 F5.6) show a 30% discount.
Z Premium
70-200 f2.8		$2,350
70-200 F2.8 z	$2,600	11%
14-24 F2.8		$1,750
14-24 F2.8 z		$2,400	37%
24-70 F2.8		$2,100
24-70 F2.8 z		$2,300	10%
Z premium vs non-FX lens is around 10%. 14-24 is an older lens and prices has been reduced over time
Now let's estimate 800 F6.3 PF based upon 800 F5.6 FX lens
800 F5.6		$16,300
Adjust to F6.3. If full stop cut price in 1/2 or $8,150
So say 1/3 of cut or $2,700
800 F6.3		$13,600
30% PF discount
800 F6.3 PF		$9,500
Add premium for Z (10%)
800 F6.3 PF z	$10,400

 

[Charlie Lasswell]

An 800mm f6.3 is about the same physical aperture as a 500mm f4, so I think the price will be about the same as the 500mm f4. Of course, newer versions cost a little more so it'll be around $11,500. The weight, however, will be under 6 lbs (based on physical aperture size comparison with the 6.5 lbs 400mm f2.8).

 

[GrandNagus50]

Ok, Nikon Rumors today indicated the announcement for the lens will come on April 4, and that the price will be "significantly lower than originally expected" because it's a PF lens. So, we shall see, we shall see . . .

 

[RichF]

Ok, Nikon Rumors today indicated the announcement for the lens will come on April 4, and that the price will be "significantly lower than originally expected" because it's a PF lens. So, we shall see, we shall see . . .

Lower than expected - based upon what a 800mm non PF lenses cost? Or based upon the price of the 500mm PF?

 

[GrandNagus50]

No details were given (you can look up the Nikon Rumors blurb yourself, of course), but I think that the "expected" price was based on the 800mm f5.6 price, maybe a bit lower. I think a lot of people put the expected price in the $10,000+ range, and the implication here is that it will be lower than that. How much lower is where the drama remains.

 

[Palouse]

Add me to the who the heck cares, group. Posts such as this serve no civil purpose.

 

[GrandNagus50]

Add me to the who the heck cares, group. Posts such as this serve no civil purpose.

Did someone forget his morning coffee? It's your comment that serves no "civil purpose." Lots of people in this forum have expressed interest in this lens, and there was, in fact, an entire discussion of how it might be priced. If you don't like a thread or a post, skip it.

 

[arbitrage]

Nikon Rumors could have made it more clear as to what the "initially anticipated" price was that their source was referring to. NR had an article about the price in relation to the 800E and he had guessed $16-17K but I don't think many believed it would be that high. I felt the pessimists (like myself) but the price in the $10-$12K group and the optimists were way down in the $6-7K range.

I think that even with this "lower than expected" article that I will stick with my $10-$12K sort of range as my guess.

April 4th is just around the corner so won't be long.

 

[GrandNagus50]

Nikon Rumors could have made it more clear as to what the "initially anticipated" price was that their source was referring to.

April 4th is just around the corner so won't be long.

I agree with the above, i.e., that the discussion in NR was too sketchy. But I thought it was germane enough (including the April 4 release date) to justify appending it to the previous discussion of pricing for the lens. Personally, I have decided that if it costs more than $8000 I will pass. If it costs less than $7000 I probably will buy it. If it's in between I will dither. The fact is that I really prefer a lens that has options, at least, for less magnification, e.g., a 600 with teleconverters or the 500mm PF with teleconverters. But I expect that optical performance of this lens to be stellar, and if it is indeed hand-holdable (subjective, I know), it will be very tempting.

 

[Charles Loy]

I tossed a dart at the board, and hit 10,444 dollars and 49 cents - give or take 2000 dollars

 

[arbitrage]

I agree with the above, i.e., that the discussion in NR was too sketchy. But I thought it was germane enough (including the April 4 release date) to justify appending it to the previous discussion of pricing for the lens. Personally, I have decided that if it costs more than $8000 I will pass. If it costs less than $7000 I probably will buy it. If it's in between I will dither. The fact is that I really prefer a lens that has options, at least, for less magnification, e.g., a 600 with teleconverters or the 500mm PF with teleconverters. But I expect that optical performance of this lens to be stellar, and if it is indeed hand-holdable (subjective, I know), it will be very tempting.

My thoughts are similar....I don't really want a lens that starts off at 800. Especially not a $10K+ one.

My dream lens has always been a 600 f/4 PF(DO) and I guess if Nikon had made this 800mm a 600 f/4.5 which would have scaled with 1.4TC to 840/6.3 that would have been close enough to the dream and I would be much more interested. Would be similar cost to make but should be a shorter and lighter lens.

 

[NorthernFocus]

I agree with the above, i.e., that the discussion in NR was too sketchy. But I thought it was germane enough (including the April 4 release date) to justify appending it to the previous discussion of pricing for the lens. Personally, I have decided that if it costs more than $8000 I will pass. If it costs less than $7000 I probably will buy it. If it's in between I will dither. The fact is that I really prefer a lens that has options, at least, for less magnification, e.g., a 600 with teleconverters or the 500mm PF with teleconverters. But I expect that optical performance of this lens to be stellar, and if it is indeed hand-holdable (subjective, I know), it will be very tempting.

Going price for used Nikon 600mm FL is running just shy of $9k. For comparable price I'd go that way. The 800 would have to come in well below to be of interest.

 

[Darrellhar]

I'm guessing they are going to try and shock the industry by pricing it under $10,000. Nothing to go on other than gut feeling.

 

[GrandNagus50]

Going price for used Nikon 600mm FL is running just shy of $9k. For comparable price I'd go that way. The 800 would have to come in well below to be of interest.

I would have most preferred a 600mm f5.6 PF, which is what some people were speculating about a year or so ago. But Nikon did not consult me . I already own a 600mm f4 (VR version, sharp but heavy). The appeal of a PF lens would be its portability, of course. I already use my 500mm f5.6PF much more than the older 600mm, especially for travel. Given what I already own (and real world budget limitations) a $9,000+ 800mm PF lens is too rich for my blood.

 

[abc123brian]

I would have most preferred a 600mm f5.6 PF, which is what some people were speculating about a year or so ago. But Nikon did not consult me . I already own a 600mm f4 (VR version, sharp but heavy). The appeal of a PF lens would be its portability, of course. I already use my 500mm f5.6PF much more than the older 600mm, especially for travel. Given what I already own (and real world budget limitations) a $9,000+ 800mm PF lens is too rich for my blood.

I think we might see a 600mm PF in a year or two. It is something I’d be interested in to replace my 500mm PF with. The 800mm would be of interest for me if birds were my main interest. If it was really surprisingly low priced, I would consider it anyway.

 

[RockvilleBob]

Going price for used Nikon 600mm FL is running just shy of $9k. For comparable price I'd go that way. The 800 would have to come in well below to be of interest.

Hey Dan - just curious. I am interested in the 800PF but if priced too high I like your idea about the 600f4. Is the 600mm FL significantly better than the AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4G ED VR. I am getting really good results using the 500 G on the Z9. I would use either model on a gimbal so a pound or two difference is not critical to me. Thanks - I would appreciate your insight.

 

[NorthernFocus]

Hey Dan - just curious. I am interested in the 800PF but if priced too high I like your idea about the 600f4. Is the 600mm FL significantly better than the AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4G ED VR. I am getting really good results using the 500 G on the Z9. I would use either model on a gimbal so a pound or two difference is not critical to me. Thanks - I would appreciate your insight.

I've shot G version but not E. Optically I doubt you'd notice any difference. E version is almost two pounds lighter and no mechanical linkage for aperture.

 

[Palouse]

Did someone forget his morning coffee? It's your comment that serves no "civil purpose." Lots of people in this forum have expressed interest in this lens, and there was, in fact, an entire discussion of how it might be priced. If you don't like a thread or a post, skip it.

I meant to write No social purpose. What I was trying to say, posts like this, and I have authored a few, serve to push people into corners, since we have no hard data to go on. Fun for sure, but not what I like spending energy on.
My sincere apologies if I pi$$ed folks off. Not my intent.

 

[RichF]

I think we might see a 600mm PF in a year or two. It is something I’d be interested in to replace my 500mm PF with. The 800mm would be of interest for me if birds were my main interest. If it was really surprisingly low priced, I would consider it anyway.

I'll be interested to see which AF-S lens get converted to Z format. Big questions in my mind are the 300 and 500 PF, looks like Nikon will offer 400 and 800 PF lenses. 300 and 400 are too close, ditto for the 400 and 500 PF. Perhaps the final Z PF lineup will be 400, 600 and 800mm ??? For me, 100-400 w/ 1.4 TC which becomes 140-560 and 800 are match, though I would have like to have a 700 PF - perhaps that role is delegated to the 500 PF + 1.4 TC?

Also what Nikon's plans for 180-400 TC? Nothing on the road map. THe 200-600 does not look like an S lens.

 

[John Navitsky]

Also what Nikon's plans for 180-400 TC?

i think that’s the 100-400

Nothing on the road map. THe 200-600 does not look like an S lens.

correct

 

[abc123brian]

I'll be interested to see which AF-S lens get converted to Z format. Big questions in my mind are the 300 and 500 PF, looks like Nikon will offer 400 and 800 PF lenses. 300 and 400 are too close, ditto for the 400 and 500 PF. Perhaps the final Z PF lineup will be 400, 600 and 800mm ??? For me, 100-400 w/ 1.4 TC which becomes 140-560 and 800 are match, though I would have like to have a 700 PF - perhaps that role is delegated to the 500 PF + 1.4 TC?

Also what Nikon's plans for 180-400 TC? Nothing on the road map. THe 200-600 does not look like an S lens.

I think that is the Z PF lens plans. It makes sense and they will need something between the 400 and 800 so the 600mm makes sense. There were a lot of people wanting a 600mm PF in F mount so it would make sense for them to do it in Z. The 200-600mm is not an S lens, but Sony’s version is a G not GM and people love that lens. I‘m hoping it is at least as good as the Sony. I’m not as concerned about internal/external zoom because there are pros and cons of each, such as external zoom collapses down farther for transport. This seems to be a more important spec for other people though.

 

[eaj101]

i think that’s the 100-400


correct

I don't think the 100-400 is really a replacement for the 180-400. One is f/5.6, the other f/4. The 180-400 was the replacement for the (unfairly, in my opinion) maligned 200-400 f/4. The 200-400 used to be one of the most popular wildlife lenses around, but its successor was too expensive for most.

I do wonder if Nikon thinks fast zooms can replace some fast primes now. Does the 120-300 f/2.8 make the 300 f/2.8 prime unnecessary? I for one would like to see a more reasonably priced fast pro zoom in the 200-400 range. (Is that an oxymoron?)

 

[DavidT]

Interesting chart. Nikon told me they priced the 500PF wrong and that it should have been a higher price point and it sold to well at the lower price. I wouldn’t expect them to make that mistake again. I also wouldn’t expect them to make a z Mount 800f5.6 so I’d bet this lens will be more in the 600f4 price point. You’ll pay for the size and weight vs a 600f4 with tele.

 

[John Navitsky]

I don't think the 100-400 is really a replacement for the 180-400. One is f/5.6, the other f/4.

maybe, but it’s a lot of overlap

 

[GrandNagus50]

I meant to write No social purpose. What I was trying to say, posts like this, and I have authored a few, serve to push people into corners, since we have no hard data to go on. Fun for sure, but not what I like spending energy on.
My sincere apologies if I pi$$ed folks off. Not my intent.

I like to think that people talking about the potential price of this lens aren't taking this game of "The Price is Right" too seriously. I confess I am an inveterate telephoto lens freak and this optic seems very exciting to me (even if I end up facing the stark reality that I can't really afford it). It's kind of fun to follow the rumors and anticipate what the lens will be like (and how much it will cost).