Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/4 VR II Lens Patent

by on September 23, 2011

in Nikon

Nikon 70-200mm f4 VR II

A lens missing from Nikon’s lineup recently appeared in a published patent application at the USPTO.  Canon’s 70-200mm f/4L and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses have been popular lenses over the past few years.  The original f/4L was so popular that Canon decided to make an IS version and keep both lenses in the lineup.

Now, it looks like Nikon will be jumping on this popular lens size…

Nikon filed a patent application for a 70-200mm f/4 lens back in March 2011 with the USPTO.  The application was published in the USPTO database this week.

Of course, there are plenty of patent applications filed that never mean anything; however, lens patent applications frequently surface shortly before the announcement of the final product.  (As was the case with the recent Nikon 1-Series 10-100mm lens.)

Since Nikon Rumors is pegging mid-October for another non-DSLR announcement, the AF-S 70-200mm f/4 VR II lens sure would be a pleasant surprise just as the holiday season kicks off.

Of course, we won’t know anything for sure until Nikon officially announces such a lens, but I would wager pricing to be in the $1300-$1500 range for something like this.  While still a hefty price tag, this would definitely be a “pro” lens and it’s quite a bit cheaper than the current AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II lens.

For those who are looking for some light weekend reading, I’m providing the full patent application for download (right-click and choose “Save file as…”): Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/4 VR II Lens Patent.

What do you Nikon shooters out there think about such lens?  What kind of price would drive you to pick up one of these?

email

 

{ 10 comments }

1 Taggart September 23, 2011 at 1:36 pm

It certainly would be nice if Nikon would add some more f/4 lens such as this to their telephoto line up – this lens would be at the top of my wish list. Maybe some slower super telephotos, too, like a 400 f/4 and 500 f/5.6 – like – ahem – Canon has.

2 Chris Matthes September 23, 2011 at 5:34 pm

It’d be great, but knowing Nikon, it’ll be like $1899, making a used 2.8 VR1 the better deal.

3 Sean Molin September 23, 2011 at 5:35 pm

Unless you’ve got a full-frame camera, then you don’t really want to go for a VRI. It’s pretty miserable in the corners.

4 Mikael Fransson September 23, 2011 at 6:23 pm

You have one so you know for sure? I do and most of that talk is just online rubbish. It’s just fine. Furthermore, 99% of all shots with that lens wide open is for portraits and such where you don’t care about the corners being sharp, you want them out of focus…

5 pavel September 28, 2011 at 6:47 am

Totally agree here. I own one and the corners are soft…. when shooting brick wall ;) I’ve never had problem with corners in the real life shooting. The DOF’s so shallow, that the corners are anyway out of focus all the time.

6 Sean Molin September 23, 2011 at 5:35 pm

400mm f/4? Yes please.

7 Thomas Sandoval September 26, 2011 at 7:12 pm

After agonizing over whether or not to shell out large money for the vrI or the 80-200 af-s, I finally bit the bullet and bought an 80-200 AF-s in ex+ condition from KEH for 1300.00 and dont regret it for a second. The vr I is nice on dx, but I have seen less than spectacular results on d700 with that lens. The f/4 will be a nice alternative, but maybe not. The new 24-120 f/4 was not that great. Personally I am more interested in a new 300mm f/4 with the vrII system.

8 Hannes Svardal September 28, 2011 at 5:01 am

Does the patent say anything about minimal focus distance? Macro ability?
I can’t find anything in the pdf, but I don’t understand most of it.

9 Mindlessbuttonmasher September 29, 2011 at 2:53 am

Seriously need in Nikon line-up. I owned both Canon versions and it was my favorite lens I’ve ever owned. Perfect size and perfect balance.

10 Mindlessbuttonmasher September 29, 2011 at 2:58 am

What I wish Nikon would do is a 50-135 f/2.8 for DX like the DA* Pentax. It’s such a needed focal length that’s been missing since the digital age. Also an updated 17-55 f/2.8 but make it a DX 16-55 f/2.8 please and thinner Luke the 24-70.

Comments are closed on this post, but you can carry on the conversation in the Photography Bay Forum.

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: