Just recieved my copy of the new Nikon 80 400 yesterday. What a lens !!!! . Build quality is very professional. It's a heavy lens. It's SHARP !!!!!!!!! Autofocus extraordinary fast!!! Manage to take very very sharp photos even wide open at 400mm. VR is excellent and works perfectly. A bit pricey buth worth every penny.

Congrats!! I'm using Canon right now (3 bodies, 10 lenses) but the new D7100 and AFS 80-400 are really tempting me to switch back to Nikon  

I know two people that are using this lens(with a D300 and D700&7000) and they are getting really nice results from it. I'll have to wait till the price comes down a bit though

Congrats!

Thanks a lot !! The D7100 and the new 80 400 seems to be a great combination. I'm using it on a D7000. Wish to upgrade to the D7100 but right now I'm financially restrained. I was tempting to switch to Nikon because of their 100 400 but was always hoping for the Nikon upgrade and finally it's here. It seems that they've put many effort in creating this lens.

Congrats on new lens! Dream for me right now but I hope to get one one day  

Quoting scopedude (Reply 1): I'm using Canon right now (3 bodies, 10 lenses) but the new D7100 and AFS 80-400 are really tempting me to switch back to Nikon

I've always thought chopping and changing brands was a mistake in the long term (not to mention expensive), but I have to say Canon really need to get their act together. They are still dragging their heels on the 200-400 (which is far too expensive for most of us) and have ignored their "workhorse" 100-400 for years. Yet they have found the time to update the extremely specialist 800mm.

What is going on at Canon? They seem to be interested only in the budget and high end pro sectors of the market, and completely ignoring that huge sector in the middle. IMHO too much effort has been invested in video at the expense of any real advance in still camera and lens development. The flag ship 1Dx and 5D3 are fine cameras, but hardly innovative - just fairly conservative evolutions of what has gone before.

Compared to Nikon, Canon just seem to have run out of steam in the last 5 years. I'm not likely to switch - too much invested, and my Canon kit works well enough - but if I won the lottery tomorrow, I'm not sure Canon would be seeing any of it!

Cheers,

Colin

Quoting ckw (Reply 5): What is going on at Canon?

The 70D and 7Dmk2 are promising, if they ever see the light of day!

Frankly, I think they've doubled down on the lower "consumer" end of the market, which features larger volume sales and higher equipment turnover than serious hobbying or professional shooting.

Quoting angad84 (Reply 6): The 70D and 7Dmk2 are promising, if they ever see the light of day!

Well I'm sure they'll be fine - a bit better than what's gone before ... but I doubt they will be exciting.

I think Canon's decision to produce their own sensors has come back to haunt them. While this allowed them to take an early and commanding lead back in 2000(?), it was largely successful as good alternatives were not readily available to other companies. Now Canon is not competing against - for example - Nikon alone, but the combined might of Nikon working with Sony sensors. Can Canon put the same resource into sensor development as the mighty Sony?

There are supposed to be super large sensors (40 - 50mp) being field tested - but I fear these will be intended to compete with medium format and priced accordingly!

I hope that Canon can still pull a rabbit out of the hat for consumers - perhaps a Foveon style sensor - which could be a real game changer and suitable for use across all models. Sigma were on to a good thing with Foveon, - image quality is stunning - but they just didn't have the capability/resources to build a serious camera system.

Failing that I fear we may be stuck with tarted up versions of previous models - more gimmicks and slightly improved specs, but no real photographic benefits.

Having said all that, I am very happy with my 5D3. It may really be all the camera I ever need. In fact if it weren't for the missing 100-400 mk2, I probably wouldn't care what Canon are up to!

Cheers,

Colin

I want this lens badly, but I'm going to play the waiting game for a while. If I don't see a movement in the price, I might break the piggy bank and grab one.

At last Nikon seems to get the ball rolling and very fast. With the introduction of the Nikon 70 200 f4, D7100 and 80 400, once again they became the leading photographic equipment company. I'm sure that immediately Canon will respond with some new equipment.

To add a bit of balance to the discussion.
The 1Dx has devastated Nikons Pro market sales with with autofocus issues on the Nikon D4 and D800 rife over the boards. One gent at Freds went through 4 yes 4 bodies to get a decent D800 with no AF issues.
Combine that with the weight reductions Canon achieved in the super tele's and the amazing performance of the 1Dx in any conditions ie day/night/rain with lenses that weight 25-35% less than the opposition sorry but Canon has cornered the pro market again.
As for the new Nikon 80-400 lens is heavier,a thousand dollars more expensive and from the shots on the boards of full frame tests at 5.6 only matches or slightly improves on the 100-400 in IQ.
It took Nikon 15 years to match the 100-400.
Looking at lenses Canon's 24-70 is the best on the market..the 70-200/2.8 again the best..Nikon have a new 70-200F4(complete with AF problems) to again compete with Canon's well tried and tested stellar 70-200F4 with only the 14-24 offering something in an area Canon dont offer in the zoom dept. And a killer lens it is.
The 100-400 which to this day 15 years after release has only in the last 2 months been matched by a Nikon release its pretty clear the "lead" people speak about is where??????
Not to mention with an ancient lens mount they are unable to release modern F1.2 lenses that can compete with the Canon ones which lead the field ie the 50 and 85L's.
Having only just released a fleet of new super tele lenses at massive design expense to match Canon's and arrive some 5-7 years later than the oppositions releases there's to then have Canon upgrade all of them to weights and IQ with AF performance with TC's unseen or heard of is a disaster of giant proportions to the pro sales.
If anyone is trailing it is Nikon with quality control issues, market share slipping having only just got a foot back in over the last 4 years and now the D4,D800 problem and simply being behind in glass quality for 15 years in almost every area.
Oh and if you ask i shot Nikon for over 10 years and loved my F100's but im just telling it how it is..
New doesnt mean better..in this case 4 stop VR is the only feature that is better than a lens that has sold for 15 years is way cheaper at least as good if not better build and already taken millions of amazing images and will continue to do so.
Any wonder Canon havnt updated it, it took Nikon 15 years to match it..

I don't think Darren's saying anything I disagree with really - the top glass is certainly good, and there is nothing to match the 1Dx - but as I said, this is all stuff for pros - and pros with deep pockets.

I still maintain that Canon had let the middle market (most of us on A.net) slip badly. Sure Nikon have had some problems (but how quickly we forget the 1D3 focusing fiasco!) but that's because they're pushing the envelope hard.

I'm not of course anti-Canon (I've stayed loyal for more than 30 years - even through the trauma of a lens mount change). But maybe they've got a bit complacent? Particularly when it comes to camera bodies for the middle market.

Cheers,

Colin

Quoting ckw (Reply 11): I still maintain that Canon had let the middle market (most of us on A.net) slip badly

Yes! The 7D may have been the last good prosumer product released by Canon. OTOH, Nikon has stepped up and delivered well in the prosumer segment with the 70-200 f4 and 80-400 mk2 that Nikonians have been clamouring for. Not to mention the fantastic D5000 and D7000 series of bodies (no AF issues as far as I'm aware).

My question would be what is Canon's middle market?
They have re-aligned for better or worse from a price point what you get over the last two years.
With the jump in orice of the 5Dmk3 but also extra features and then a large drop to the 6D feature wise.
If anything they have pushed there old middle up and left a hollow below that all the way to entry level so im thinking a 7Dmk2 or whtever would slide in under that.
With the new sensor tech factory coming on line id imagine we will see something soonish.
Also when they get around to replacing the 100-400 it wont be cheap around the same price as the Nikon but with luck and according to recent releases it again will be stellar quality.
The big hole in the Nikon line up has always been the poor performing 80-400 its nice to see a good one appear for the Nikon guys!

I think this discussion of quality control can apply to either party. Canon has had their share of issues, and it's not hard to find complaints about their 100-400 lens, quality and performance wise. They've also had a range issues with some of their bodies.

Show me the best Canon pic and I'll show you one from Nikon that easily matches it. I've held a canon body with the push-pull 100-400 and I'll be honest, I didn't care for the push-pull action. I guess it takes a little getting used to.

Anyway looking at the MTF of both lenses, 100-400mm vs the new 80-400mm, it's quite clear the Nikon is superior especially at 400mm. I've seen the samples and they were very impressive.

[Edited 2013-04-19 23:19:05]

[Edited 2013-04-19 23:20:11]

I agree with some of the opinions here; Canon has a lead in the flagship 1DX market - because 1DX is indeed an excellent camera. I played with it for several hours, put all my lenses on it and I was surprised to see they look 'sharper'. That sensor is really something and the AF is probably the best money can buy right now.

But, problem is, I don't have 1DX budget and it's too heavy. I sold my 60D and 'upgraded' to 650D (T4i), and the 650D (T4i) is a slightly better camera (newer sensor, weaker AA filter, better AF for sure because 60D refused to AF with my 70-300L on 1.4 TC while 650D will do just fine). I also do landscape photography with my 6D (was using 5D2 but found 6D a better camera in term of IQ for what I need, at high ISO it's even better than 5D3).

My point is Canon has not done enough, really. Whatever the 6D can do, D600 can do better. I also used D800e several times, and when paired with good Zeiss lenses, there is no comparison. First, shadow noise (esp underexposed parts) and second, highlight DR. Both are Nikon's strong points right now, including in their DX cameras.

If both 70D and 7D II use new 21MP (or even 18MP) sensor, I hope the DR and noise would be at least on par with NIkon's offering. Is there a remote chance Canon will omit the AA filter? With lower res sensor we will get moire, but D7100 proves that 24MP and w/o AA filter is the way to go. Even with my M9, I don't get moire that often but in return the details are just breathtakingly high  

It's getting too long, Canon!