Along with the diminutive 100D, Canon has also announced a replacement for the upper entry-level 650D, the 700D (Rebel T5i). The new 700D, however, isn’t actually all that new, but a mild refresh. Despite Canon’s claims, improvements are as minor as they get. There’s the same 18 megapixel sensor with built-in phase-detect AF points, the same DIGIC 5 processor with the same ISO sensitivity and the same 9-point AF system with cross-type sensors. In fact, almost all the specifications are identical between the two models, except that 700D comes with a slightly different mode dial, has live preview of Creative Filters and a slightly different body finish. Are camera manufacturers taking the habit of announcing cameras for the sake of announcing? In any case, 650D was a popular and likable model. There’s no reason to think 700D will be any different (pun intended). What’s likely more interesting is the renewed kit lens. The EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM now comes with Canon’s stepper AF motor for silent video recording during focusing.
Camera industry has been obsessed with size lately and Canon has moved the standards of small DSLR cameras with the introduction of 100D (Rebel SL1). As of today, this is the smallest and lightest APS-C DSLR camera. At this point, you could say – big deal! Mirrorless cameras are the way to go if you want small. Well, perhaps in most cases. But the 100D is indeed tiny, not just as a DSLR, but even compared to some mirrorless cameras. The Panasonic GH3 – a compact system camera with a smaller sensor – is actually bigger in every dimension. Quite a feat by Canon, I’d say.
As I was writing my Nikon D7100 vs D600 comparison article a while ago, I had a lot of conflicting thoughts that crossed my mind and made their way to the article. I then decided to refrain from making the comparison article negative and rather move my thoughts to a separate post, because I thought that it would be worth the discussion with our readers…
Nikon has been quite active since last year. We have seen a lot of ups and downs of the company, most notably with the amazing D800 and D600 cameras that became available last year, both of which were accompanied by quality assurance issues and escalated into the “Nikon D800 autofocus fiasco” and the “Nikon D600 dust issue“. And as you may already know, these problems were covered rather extensively on our website through detailed posts and reviews.
In this article, I will compare the new Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR and its predecessor, the Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR. Since the lens has just been announced, I have not had the chance to use it and compare it with the older 80-400mm lens. I am planning to expand this comparison further, once I have both lenses in my hands later this year. For now, I will go over specifications and compare both lenses side by side using information provided by Nikon, as well as MTF charts. First, we’ll get started with specifications:
| Feature | Nikon 80-400mm AF-S | Nikon 80-400mm AF-D |
|---|---|---|
| Mount Type | Nikon F-Bayonet | Nikon F-Bayonet |
| Focal Length Range | 80-400mm | 80-400mm |
| Zoom Ratio | 5x | 5x |
| Maximum Aperture | f/4.5-5.6 | f/4.5-5.6 |
| Minimum Aperture | f/32-40 | f/32 |
| Format | FX/35mm | FX/35mm |
| Maximum Angle of View (DX) | 20° | 20° |
| Minimum Angle of View (DX) | 4° | 4° |
| Maximum Angle of View (FX) | 30°10′ | 30°10′ |
| Minimum Angle of View (FX) | 6°10′ | 6°10′ |
| Maximum Reproduction Ratio | 1/5.7x (1/5.1x in MF) | 1/4.8x |
| Lens Elements | 20 | 17 |
| Lens Groups | 12 | 11 |
| Compatible Format(s) | FX, DX, 35mm Film | FX, DX, 35mm Film |
| VR (Vibration Reduction) | Yes | Yes |
| VR Technology | 2nd Generation | 1st Generation |
| Diaphragm Blades | 9 | 9 |
| Distance Information | Yes | Yes |
| Nano Crystal Coat | Yes | No |
| ED Glass Elements | 4 | 3 |
| Super ED Glass Elements | 1 | N/A |
| Super Integrated Coating | Yes | Yes |
| Autofocus | Yes | Yes |
| AF-S (Silent Wave Motor) | Yes | No |
| Internal Focusing | Yes | No |
| Minimum Focus Distance | 5.74 ft. (1.75m) | 7.5 ft. (2.3m) |
| Focus Mode | Auto, Manual, Auto/Manual | Auto, Manual, Auto/Manual |
| G-type | Yes | No |
| Filter Size | 77mm | 77mm |
| Accepts Filter Type | Screw-on | Screw-on |
| Dimensions | 3.8 x 8.0 in. (Diameter x Length), 95.5 x 203mm (Diameter x Length) | 3.6 x 6.7 in. (Diameter x Length), 91 x 171mm (Diameter x Length) |
| Weight | 56 oz. (1570g) | 47 oz. (1360g) |
| Supplied Accessories | HB-65 Lens Hood, LF-4 Rear Lens Cap, LC-77 Snap-On Front Lens Cap, CL-M2 Ballistic Nylon Lens Case | HB-24 Hood, CL-M1 case, 77mm lens cap, Rear lens cap |
Let’s go over the differences between the two now. The very first major difference between the two lenses is obviously the optical lens design. The new 80-400mm lens has a completely new optical formula, with 20 elements in 12 groups, while the older version has 17 elements in 11 groups. So we are not just talking about new tweaks to the lens – this is a whole new design. Here is the comparison of lens construction on both lenses:
In a rather surprising announcement today, Nikon released a major update to the existing 12 year old Nikkor 80-400mm AF-D lens. The new Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR has a completely redesigned internal focus optical formula with Nano Coating, Super Integrated Coating and extra-low dispersion glass elements. On top of that, the lens sports a second-generation Vibration Reduction (VR II) system for up to 4 stops of shutter speed compensation and a silent wave motor (SWM / AF-S), which means that autofocus will function on any modern Nikon DSLRs, including entry-level models like D3200. This is one of the few Nikkor lenses to have “Super ED Glass”, which has a lower refractive index and light dispersion than ED glass, making the new 80-400mm a premium lens for both enthusiasts and professionals. And with a versatile focal length of 80-400mm, the lens is well-suited for sports and nature photography.
Our last comparison will be to show the difference between the new Nikon D7100 and the full-frame Nikon D600, which we reviewed last year. Despite the price differences, seems like a lot of people are wondering which one of the two cameras to choose – the D7100, a cropped-sensor “DX” camera, or the D600, a full-frame “FX” camera. In this article, I will first go into detailed specifications of both cameras, then talk about main features that differentiate the two. Please keep in mind that this comparison is purely based on specifications.
A lot of questions from our readers about differences between the D7100 and the D300s are rolling in, so I decided to do a separate article that compares the specifications of the two cameras. It has now been over three years since Nikon announced the D300s. Since then, both Nikon D7000 and D7100 have been announced with impressive specifications that top the D300s in a number of ways. In this Nikon D7100 vs D300s comparison, I will first go into detailed specifications, then talk about main features that differentiate the two cameras. Please keep in mind that this comparison is purely based on specifications.
With the introduction of the Nikon D7100, there has been both excitement and frustration from Nikon fans. Those who wanted to move up to a higher-end DX camera greeted the D7100 with fanfare, while many existing D300/D300s owners were disappointed with this update. Why? Well, for anyone moving up from an older generation or an entry-level DSLR, the D7100 is a significant upgrade, thanks to its high resolution sensor and top of the line autofocus system. However, for those that shoot sports and action with a D300/D300s, the small buffer of the D7100, lack of a dedicated AF-ON button, slower fps speed and a few other factors left them puzzled about the future of a high-end DX camera. As I initially stated in the Nikon D7100 announcement article, I feel like Nikon has merged the professional DX line (D300s) with the semi-professional (D7000) line into the D7100. A number of factors led me to make that conclusion. With the high-end autofocus system making it into the D7100, lack of an optical low-pass filter, full weather sealing and Nikon’s usage of words “flagship” and “high-end” in their press releases, it just felt like the D7100 killed the possibility of the D400 ever making it to the market. On top of that, both the D7000 and the D7100 were announced after the D300s, making the D300s over three years old and breaking it out of its typical 2 year update cycle (the D200 was released in 2005, D300 was released in 2007 and D300s was released in 2009). Will we ever see a D400 DX, or has the D7100 become the high-end DX?
As I was compiling the data for my Nikon D7000 vs D7100 article, I realized that the D7100 has one major drawback that will immediately draw criticism from current D300/D300s owners – the small buffer size. Even compared to the existing Nikon D7000, the D7100 can only handle up to 9 images in compressed 12-bit RAW format (which is the smallest RAW file size) at full resolution and up to 14 images in the same format at 1.3x crop size, whereas the D7000 can handle 15 RAW files without the crop. Compare that to the D300s, which can take 45 compressed RAW images before the buffer gets full – that’s quite a difference.
Now that it is officially announced, I am sure some of our readers would be interested in seeing how the new Nikon D7100 compares to its predecessor, the D7000. With an improved sensor, high-end autofocus system and other great features, looks like the D7100 will be one heck of a high-end DX camera. The D7000 is no slouch either, with an excellent sensor and great all around performance. Now it is even better. In this Nikon D7100 vs D7000 comparison, I will first go into specifications, then talk about specific features that differentiate the two cameras. Please keep in mind that this comparison is purely based on specifications. Further details, my impressions, ISO comparisons and other useful information will be provided in my upcoming Nikon D7100 Review later this year.
