Imagine the arguments this lens would have caused over on the mFT forums on DPReview
Nikon 28-400/4-8 - 84x141.4mm, 725g
Olympus 12-200/3.5-6.3 - 77.5x100mm, 455g.
March 27, 2024
20
-
-
-
They are already are getting their knickers in a twist over this Nikon lens. When I saw the Nikon announcement, I imagined that a thread on this subject would be under way.
Many of the comments under the announcement are pretty pathetic too.
Pointing out that a Nikon Z7 + 24-200 weighs about the same as a OM1/EM1 + 12-100 earned me a well deserved ban, for breaking DPR Rule 1: Do not point out unwanted truths. Now there is a FF lens that makes the 12-200 a questionable choice.
Still If if is optically acceptable, it looks like a pretty cool lens for outdoors travel and hiking. I am really pleased with my 24-200 for travel. It weighs 570grams. The 28-400 is not drastically heavier weighing in at 725grams. The weight of 1.52 Apples ( An apple weighs about 1 Newton)
-
Cool -- a 14-200 / 2-4 mFT equivalent. đ
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
Keep in mind these are pre-production units. It gets to f/8 at about 200mm.
-
Have to agree. The Sigma 50 / 1.2 Art, however, looks pretty amazing!
-
14x internal zoom is a big ask.
-
-
Interchangeable lens cameras have been invented for you to use the same camera if you have to use long length for birds or WA lens for architecture, not to change lens for every other shot.
-
-
Petapixel has an informal review of this lens. Chris Niccolls speaks quite favourably of it regarding sharpness over the zoom range.
Looks like a pretty cool lens for those moments when one does not want to carry a bag full of lenses. I find my 24-200 is a brilliant lens for holidays and for times when I travel light. I bought it as a one lens hiking solution. The VR + IBIS when I use it with my Z7 is good for architectural details. So the 28-400 might be an interesting lens to add to my collection, for those compressed mountain landscape shots, in the Alps.
Despite the sniffy reactions, by the armchair photography pundits, in the comments sections of the various photo sites and on some forums, I think this lens will be lens that will sell well.
BTW I do not think the F8 limit is very dramatic seeing how even at 1600, image quality is very good with the FF sensors we have now. I was using F11 hand held yesterday and still had a shutter speed of 1/80 at base ISO 64.
-
All tastes are in nature! This is exactly the kind of lens that interests me the least. đđž
Gives acceptable limit photos from 28 to 400mm, but which does not excel in anything.
Perfect for banal and boring tourist photos.
No thanks, I might as well take photos with my iPhone đ -
[deleted]
-
And this kind of comment:
The Olympus 12-200mm is 455g vs 725g for the new Nikon.
because one is 12-200 and other is 28-400
when teleconverters and 'speed boosters' show that the size of a lens is not directly dictated by focal length - rather by angle of view and aperture.
-
-
Quote, from the thread: "All this cherry picking, drives me bananas".
-
Hi,
Meh. Too many X for me. I draw the line at 4x for small format. Less for medium format (2x).
Stan
