[totsmuyco]

I don't think these new lenses will come in cheap. I guess it'll have to cost much if you want quality. With SR in it, even if it's not a star lens it will be above the consumer grade quality.

[Paul the Sunman]

I don't think they'll make a new 70-200* - that's just one example for the 70-300 patent.

* maybe later, after other gaps are filled.

Surely not. How many 70-200 lenses do they need?!

[Serkevan]

I don't think these new lenses will come in cheap. I guess it'll have to cost much if you want quality. With SR in it, even if it's not a star lens it will be above the consumer grade quality.

Not necessarily. Optical stabilization has been in consumer grade lenses for more than a decade, even Canikon's cheapest kit lenses have had it for ages. If we followed that line of thought, the PLM zoom would have had to be much more expensive since it has a new, much better AF motor and electromagnetic aperture.

[beholder3]

Sony FE 70-300/5.6 in 2016: 1,500 EUR, today that probably would be 1,700-1,800 EUR

That is the most recent OEM sample price point.

I would expect 1,399 EUR to significantly undercut that price level at great value. If they use a cheap plastic build, maybe even down to 1,099 EUR.

[FozzFoster]

Surely not. How many 70-200 lenses do they need?!

I might get a public lashing or two for suggesting this:

Maybe they are making a 70-200 that doesn't focus breath...

[beholder3]

Maybe they are making a 70-200 that doesn't focus breath...

That would absolutely force them to make it 100% extension focusing, so size would be close to twice as it is or it would at least extend that much during focus (no internal focus).

Basically "no focus breathing" is the essence of a completely failed lens by modern standards for zooms. Benefit/cost is just bad.


There is a reason why some macro "primes" purely focus by changing focal length / zooming (= focus breathing).

[BarneyL]

Nikon Z 70-200mm f2.8 VR S review - | Cameralabs

I'm no expert, but apparently, this lens does neither breathe nor extend.

[FozzFoster]

it would at least extend that much during focus

Basically "no focus breathing" is the essence of a completely failed lens

? Why is a lens that extends while focusing a 'failed lens' by modern standards ?

---

I guess focus breathing may be considered something to mitigate rather than avoid completely. Like chromatic aberration - it's going to happen - but we can make some tweaks to mitigate (?)

---

I do not care personally about focus breathing, I just heard comments about Pentax 70-200 lenses focus breathing exceptionally.
And there are apparently other brands who can produce a 70-200 without breathing, so I wouldn't really call it a failed lens by modern standards.

[Serkevan]

Sony FE 70-300/5.6 in 2016: 1,500 EUR, today that probably would be 1,700-1,800 EUR

That is the most recent OEM sample price point.

I would expect 1,399 EUR to significantly undercut that price level at great value. If they use a cheap plastic build, maybe even down to 1,099 EUR.

It's not. The Canon EF 70-300/4-5.6 IS USM ii is from later in 2016 and released at $550.

[FozzFoster]

I'm no expert, but apparently, this lens does neither breathe nor extend.

That's what they're claiming anyway!

"The Nikon Z 70-200mm f2.8 VR S may not be much better than its F-mount predecessor, the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f2.8E VR. But that is good news: the F-Nikkor was simply the best 70-200mm f2.8 zoom lens for Nikon cameras and still is an excellent lens. Nikon's newest telephoto Z-Nikkor zoom improves slightly on some aspects of the F-Nikkor like FX-corner performance, loCA, focus-shift, focus-breathing, close-up performance. And - more substantially - on image stabilization."


Definitely seems like it's not an all-or-nothing kinda design flaw. Slight improvements can be made to help mitigate breathing.

[normhead]

I might get a public lashing or two for suggesting this:

Maybe they are making a 70-200 that doesn't focus breath...

It's funny thing this focus breathing. Extending the lens in and out while focusing inhales and exhales air, which is actually real breathing and will lead to dust getting sucked into and collected in the lens. Internal focus largely neutralizes this behaviour.

Hence my F 70-210 breaths every time I focus. My DA 60-250 with internal focus doesn't breath the same way, but it's a "focus breather." Looking at the same two lenses, you will also notice that on my 70-210, the IQ falls of at the long end as the front element extends. The 60-250 on the other hand maintains constant test chart resolution all through it's range.

Focus breathing is a poorly conceived term not understood by most who use it and coined by as far a I'm concerned someone ignorant of the factors it addresses. Start with the basic physics, as the lens moves forward to focus, the resolution in the centre of the lens is spread over a wider area, meaning at the longest point in it's range it has a fraction the resolution it had when closer to the sensor.

So your choice in focus breathing is, do you want to maintain resolution through the whole range of the lens and limit dust being sucked into the camera and lens, or do you desire the best possible resolution only at the farthest focusing distance and more dust in your lens and camera? Focus breathing also means, the lens has been optimized for optical performance, not strictly magnification without regard to test charts performance. There's no free lunch.

Focus breathing lenses are the best possible technical solution.

[FozzFoster]

Focus breathing lenses are the best possible technical solution.

I guess all the other brands and lots of pro photographers are just nuttzos and they are all trying to solve a problem that doesn't matter........

[BlackTea]

I guess all the other brands and lots of pro photographers are just nuttzos and they are all trying to solve a problem that doesn't matter........

IMHO for stills it doesn't matter.
But for video, when you defocus - you would like to have the same size of the subject.

[MMVIII]

I guess all the other brands and lots of pro photographers are just nuttzos and they are all trying to solve a problem that doesn't matter........

Are you still looking for some "public lashing" or is this a serious discussion?

A good article explains the background here:

https://photographylife.com/focus-breathing

Designing lenses is finding compromises. From the link posted: "Most photographers aren’t even going to notice any differences in angle of view and magnification when using most lenses at close distances. Those who do, are likely comparing different lenses, and just want to find out why they see such differences. So if you are a stills photographer, you should probably ignore the focus breathing issue altogether."

There might be scenarios where it might be a backdraft, if you use these lenses for stacking landscape, macro or architecture photos you would want breathing to be low.

A real problem it is for videographers, because the change of focus also changes the FOV. It is this user group that was mostly aware of this effect and they are picking very expensive cine lenses to avoid it.

[FozzFoster]

for stills it doesn't matter.

In a lot of professional photography work, there is a physical line (barrier) that a photographer cannot cross.
Example: You're a photographer at a music performance. The barrier would be the end of the stage, or a designated photographer area.
If your taking pictures with a 70-200 breathing lens next to a competitor who is using a 70-200 lens that does not breath, and you both try to sell your images, there will be noticeable differences between the two focal lengths of the two salable images. This focal difference may be the deciding factor for a client to purchase one image over the other.

In most hobbyist/enthusiast situations, sure breathing might not matter at all. You can just take a couple steps forward.