Login at opticallimits.com

**Klaus** · 01-19-2022, 10:57 AM

https://www.nikon.com/news/2022/0119_lens_01.htm

Seems that Nikon is racing towards the high-end now.

davidmanze · 01-19-2022, 11:58 AM

This is going to be one mother of a lens ........ 400mm F2.8 to 560mm F4 at the flick of a switch ....... and only 2,950 gms !! (flourite elements as opposed to PF though)

I'm sure it will outperform the current AF-S E high end primes, especially with the converter clicked in .......

IMHO most Z9 owners will be waiting for the Z 600mm F4 S ........ coupled with the 1.4X / 1.7X and 2X converters, which apparently cause very little loss of quality compared the older range.

Still all that is for the well heeled ...... Nikon's dream-ware range!

~~Brightcolours~~ · 01-19-2022, 12:15 PM

Nice lens indeed.

PF and fluorite are not mutually exclusive ;-)
I am under the impression that resolution loss from the use of TCs primarily is due to the cropping the TCs do. So I am a bit sceptical of reports that claim that new TCs cause very little loss of quality compared to the older DSLR TC range...

davidmanze · (This post was last modified: 01-19-2022, 02:11 PM by davidmanze.)

(01-19-2022, 12:15 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Nice lens indeed.

PF and fluorite are not mutually exclusive ;-)
I am under the impression that resolution loss from the use of TCs primarily is due to the cropping the TCs do. So I am a bit sceptical of reports that claim that new TCs cause very little loss of quality compared to the older DSLR TC range...

I think that up until recently long primes were designed as stand alone configurations and TCs were more like an afterthought ......... with today's CAD abilities the two optics can be design to work more harmoniously together ........ certainly tests using the new S series of TCs have shown now that TCs of 1.7X and even 2X have minimum/acceptable IQ loss.
For most AF-S long primes the 1.4E III does the best, the 1.7X TC does not do well and frankly the 2.0X TC is next to useless.

See here:

https://photographylife.com/reviews/niko...e-fl-ed-vr

......... go to the optical qualities section to see the drop in IQ with the TCs ........ (although I really don't see that amount of loss with the TC14E III/ 600 F4E, making me think that maybe the air quality in those tests slightly compromised their results)

Resolution results from this site shows the rather severe IQ loss from higher magnification TCs ..........

"PF and fluorite are not mutually exclusive" ....... I didn't understand that ....... PF is considered lighter though.

dave's clichés

thxbb12 · 01-19-2022, 01:56 PM

Speaking of TC, how about generalizing the concept further?
For instance by building a 3 focal length lens, e.g. 20-35-50 f1.8?
I guess it could be made smaller than a zoom while providing better image quality?

~~Brightcolours~~ · (This post was last modified: 01-19-2022, 04:24 PM by Brightcolours.)

The IQ loss one at least should expect is dividing the resolution by the magnification factor the TC offers. So, a 2x TC always will halve the resolution of the lens. It depends on how sharp the lens is, and the resolving power of the sensor, on how one would rate the results...

(01-19-2022, 01:56 PM)thxbb12 Wrote: Speaking of TC, how about generalizing the concept further?
For instance by building a 3 focal length lens, e.g. 20-35-50 f1.8?
I guess it could be made smaller than a zoom while providing better image quality?

Any (not ancient) TC consists of a number of elements that all work together to crop the image without introducing (too) much CA, distortion and so on. So, it is not as simple as just sliding an extra lens element in the optical path. 2 TCs, as you seem to suggest, would want to live in the same space....

As such, it can't be made smaller... And making a 20mm lens into a 50mm lens makes for the need for a 50 / 20 = 2.5x TC... That means more than halving the resolution. How will that provide better IQ?

Also... a TC lowers the F-stop. 20mm f1.8 + 2.5x TC = 50mm f4.5 .... (and of course a 35mm f3.2 in between)