Check out http://www.klt.co.jp/Nikon/index.html from Nikon Japan's homepage.

The new products include:
F65 "Easy-to-use 35mm (135) AF SLR"
AF Zoom-Nikkor 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D IF-ED "Ultra-wideangle zoom lens"
AF Zoom-Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF "Standard zoom lens with high-quality optics"
AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D IF-ED "A compact AF-S telephoto lens"
AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G "New G-type telephoto zoom AF Nikkor lens"

The F65 will be the N65 in the US and will replace the N60. It has the same AF module that the N80/F80 has and is fully compatible with AF-S and VR lenses. The 70-300 "G-type" lens is the first of a new series of consumer lenses without an aperture ring.

-- Geoffrey S. Kane (grendel@pgh.nauticom.net), August 28, 2000

Answers

The 300mm f4.0 looks very interesting. May be time to sell the old 300mm f4.0 regular AF lens I have. That is if Nikon isn't going to ask $2000 for the new one. I am so happy with my 24 to 120, that the new 24 to 85 doesn't get me too excited. If I'm doing low light work, I have some fast primes, like the 35 f2.0 and 85 1.8 that I'm sure are still better than the new zoom will be in low light.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), August 28, 2000.

What the %^&*! Nikon AF-S lenses are now available in different colors?!

-- Chuck Fan (chaohui@msn.com), August 28, 2000.

Andrew, just found this at h ttp://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT=130907&TICK=NIK ON&STORY=/www/story/08-28-2000/0001299122&EDATE=Aug+28,+2000:
"The new Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF will be available beginning in October of 2000 at authorized Nikon Advanced System dealers at a suggested retail price of $1540.00."

You can find all the Nikon USA press releases at: http://www.prnewswire.com /micro/NIKON

-- Geoffrey S. Kane (grendel@pgh.nauticom.net), August 28, 2000.

Hmmm, interesting, the N65 will have DOF preview, AF system identical to N80, AA-battery capability with MB pack, built-in remote control capability, subject specific programs, weigh 13 ounce, have a suggested retail price of $360 (street $300?), and, gulp, drive AF-S lenses! Has Nikon been peeking at the specs for the Rebel 2000 recently?.

Also, last time when Nikon introduced a new color scheme to an existing product, that product, the N50, disappeared from Nikon product line in 6 month. Does this mean all the existing AF-S lenses that received the new light-grey paint is scheduled for replacement?

-- Chuck Fan (chaohui@msn.com), August 28, 2000.

The 300/4 AFS looks interesting, but Nikon failed again in its marketing: the lens lacks the VR technology. I think the 24-85 will attract more buyers: it has a aperture of f2.8 (and f4) and the price seems right (retail 760$). Hope the optics will not disappoint.

-- Ivan verschoote (ivan.verschoote@rug.ac.be), August 29, 2000.

The disappointment is the "G" lens. I read from the specs that it wont fully work with the N90s, N90, F4, N70, etc, and will NOT work with the older cameras and MF cameras. Link this to the N80 and N65 not metering with MF lenses, and it looks like we are headed for a massive MF/AF split like Minolta and Canon.

-- Steve Jeffries (Stephenk@hotmail.com), August 29, 2000.

The N65 looks interesting... Like the N80 compared to the N90s, according to the product PDF's (http://www.nikonusa.com/assets/N60sellsheet.pdf, http://www.nikonusa.com/assets/n65datasheet.pdf) the N65 compared to the N60 seems to make some advances while at the same time dropping features which might have been useful.

Examples: flash sync is limited to 1/90 (1/125 for N60), built-in flash GN is 39 (49 for N60), exposure compensation is +/- 2 in 1/2 EV steps (+/- 3 in 1/2 EV steps for N60). Neither uses 3D Matrix Balanced Fill-Flash (though they do use regular Matrix Balanced Fill).

Of course the N65 adds some stuff like compatibility with VR lenses, depth-of-field preview, auto exposure bracketing, auto advance to first frame when back is closed, battery pack and remote control accessories, and multiple focus points.

It always has struck me as odd how a body that replaces another in the line is not designed as a complete improvement, but rather as changes that are both positive and negative. Oh well, I'm not a marketing expert.

Just my observations!

-- Kenward Chin (kenward@kwantlen.bc.ca), August 29, 2000.

Steve's right.

I specifically do not want to start a canon vs. nikon thing, but when I decided to go AF, I bought into Nikon instead of Canon for a number of reasons: 1)comparable lens prices were less expensive; 2) I liked the feel and handling of the Nikons; 3)I concluded that a firm which wouldn't make its older lenses obsolete on its newer bodies -- and vice-versa -- deserved my business. There were other reasons, too -- the flash system, I thought the Nikons had a better macro system, etc. -- but the first three were very important.

So, guess what: the AF-S lenses (introduced in greater and greater numbers since I bought into Nikon) are more expensive than their Canon counterparts, and this G lens and the N80 and N65 bodies suggest that they are rapidly moving away from backwards/forwards compatibility. So, after a few more years, the old habit of carrying, say, an all-manual, no fail FM2 to back up an electronic camera on a hike or a trip is not going to be a workable solution.

Not reassuring.

-- john beckman (john.beckman@nyu.edu), August 29, 2000.

"after a few more years, the old habit of carrying, say, an all- manual, no fail FM2 to back up an electronic camera on a hike or a trip is not going to be a workable solution"

Unlikely. Three of the four lenses announced with this press release would be workable with the FM2N. There seem to be move by Nikon to introduce a separate line of ultra-cheap, no savings spared line og G series lens, separate from their normal Nikkor lenses. Also, you are not really missing a great deal by not being able to put this new G series 70-300 zoom on your FM-2N.

-- Chuck Fan (chaohui@msn.com), August 30, 2000.

I take your point, Chuck. But Nikon has already introduced, what, three bodies that won't work with manual lenses. And now they have begun the introduction of lenses that won't work with manual bodies. Could be I'm chicken little, I admit, but it also could be the beginning of a trend.

-- john beckman (john.beckman@nyu.edu), August 30, 2000.

The manager of my local camera store got a chance to handle some of the new Nikon stuff, and he told me the 300mm f4.0 S lens mentioned above does not look or feel anything like a Nikkor,(especially the other S lenses) and suspects Nikon is farming it out. Lets see, who else offers their lenses in silver or black and begins with a "T".

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), August 30, 2000.

I was just looking at the Nikon Japan site again, and they list the $1500 300mm f4.0 S lens as a G lens as well. Does that mean no aperture ring on the lens? If that is the case, I don't care if Nikon or Tamron or Sigma or whoever is making it, as I will have no use for a lens that can't be my 2 other Nikon manual focus bodies.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), August 30, 2000.

The 300/4 AF-S is not a G lens and it does have an aperture ring. You can see it clearly here : howhttp://www.prnewswire.com/nikon/images/AFs_300.jpg

-- Danny Weber (danny_weber@compuserve.com), August 31, 2000.

I wouldn't jump to any conclusions about the 300 being made by Tamron. The design looks consistent with current Nikon lenses to me. Look at the wide aperture ring that Nikon has been using on their long glass. In any case, I don't care if it's made by the Keebler elves as long as it sharp, contrasty, and well built.

The 24-85 is an intriguing addition. It seems to bridge the gap between the 24-120 and the 28-70 f/2.8. Cosmetically, it looks like the design was derived from the 24-120. I wonder if this will eventually replace the 24-120? Seems a bit crowded with the 28-105, 24-120, and 24-85 all taking up the middle ground. Unfortunately, the filter size is also the oddball 72mm.

The product they're not announcing yet is the Coolscan 3000, the new 4000 dpi scanner. Hopefully, this will be released soon and without too many bugs.

-- Barry Schmetter (bschmett@my-deja.com), August 31, 2000.

"does not look or feel anything like a Nikkor,(especially the other S lenses) and suspects Nikon is farming it out. Lets see, who else offers their lenses in silver or black and begins with a "T". "

Actually, 300 f/4 AF-S is offered in grey, not silver. Other Nikon S-lenses such as the 300 f/2.8 AF-S, 400 f/2.8 AF-S, 28-70 f/2.8 AF-S and 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S are now offered in both grey and black as well. The appearence of the 300 f/4 AF-S, with its mottled paint texture, thin ribbed focus ring, detachable tripod collar, and ED tag that incorperate the focus scale window, does depart from the traditional Nikon styling cues such as segmented ribs on focus ring, crinckled paint finish, and separate ED name tag. But the new design style and finish is consistent with those found on other recent Nikon lenses like the 17-35 AF-S, 85 T/S, and 14 f/2.8, as well as the new 24-85 and 18-35 announced at the same time. It looks like Nikon is revamping the styling cues of its lens line to give them a smoother and more contemporary look. Although I personally perfer the older style's appearance, the new mottled paint finish on the 17-35 has shown itself to be much more hardwearing than the older crinkled finish.

-- Chuck Fan (chaohui@msn.com), August 31, 2000.

The new lenses don't look like "T's" to me; they look like "S's." I think we agree, though, that they don't look particularly like "N's."

Before we all get panicked about the G series, one thing to remember about that 70-300G is that it'll have a suggested retail price of $180. It offers low entry price and upwards (but not backwards) compatibility. Photo.net people (indeed, advanced amateurs in general) are not the market at which it is aimed.

-- John Kuraoka (kuraoka@home.com), August 31, 2000.

I couldn't find a 300 F4 AF lens on either Tokina's or Tamaron's web sites. Sigma does make a 300 f4 (actually two, one's hypersonic), but they optics are different (10 elements in 7 groups whereas the Nikon has 10 elements in 6 groups).

-- Geoffrey S. Kane (grendel@pgh.nauticom.net), August 31, 2000.

Geoffrey, sometimes a camera munufacturer will sub out a lens to a third party maker, and it often will not be exactly the same formula as ones offered by that company. A good example was the 28 to 70 lens Sigma made for Leica. The Nikon rep actually told the manager of the local store a while back that Tamron was making some of the current Nikon line of lenses, which was a departure from the way Nikon operated in the past. I wouldn't care either who made the lens if was was A+ optically and machanically, but wouldn't want to pay double for it becasue it had a Nikon name on it.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), August 31, 2000.

The picture of the 300 AF-S clearly shows an aperture ring. The optical formula of this lens is unlike any current 3rd party lens. If Nikon sought to reduce cost by farming this lens out, it would hardly have demanded an unique optical formula that is only made available in the F mount. That would remove the much of the reason why third party lens makers can normally undercut big name camera makers.

Also, it would not really make sense for a company like Nikon, who rely heavily on the professional market, to farm out top end lenses. These lenses generally appeals to users who are willing willing to pay for quality. They generaly carry high profit margins. So the cost savings gain by subcontracting such high margin lenses would not be of prime concern. It really only makes sense to farm out economy lenses meant for lower end of snap shooter spectrum because in that market the margins are razor thin, the qualities are all more or less comparable, and manufacturers survives on lowing cost.

-- Chuck Fan (chaohui@msn.com), August 31, 2000.

I just want to add my 2 cents to this Photokina discussion:

The new 300/4 AF-S looks to me like a big 17-35, i.e. same new design and it is not a G-lens. It has a nice silent AF but no VR (will come back later).

The only G-lens is the 70-300, which seems to be a cheaper copy of the 70-300, i.e. nothing new only cheaper.

I can not say much about the 18-35 and 24-85. As they are new designs, I think reports about their optical quality will be more important than any dsicussion about design.

On Photokina I saw also the 80-400, and I am not sure what I should think about it: in an offical broschure they have an example at 300mm using 1/8s (!!!) which is blurred without VR and sharp with VR. calculating 1/300 ... 1/150 ... 1/75 ... 1/36 ... 1/18 ... 1/9 this is a gain of 5 stops (!!!!), which is much more than I have ever expected from VR. I guess it is quite exaggerated.

-- siegfried boes (boes@first.gmd.de), September 25, 2000.

Siegfried,

I went to the Kina last Friday (next time whe have to meet each other).

At the Kina I was impressed by: - the sharpness and velocity of the new Nikon 300/4 AFS - the older version was NOT in their brochure anymore - the new Contax N1 - very smooth and fast AF (like USM) - the new Metz flashes (MZ54 and MZ70/5) - the pictures produced by the New Provia 400F - the Lowe Pro stealth bags - the quality of the Sigma 14/2.8EX

I was disappointed by - the built quality of the F80 - the soft sharpness of Tokina 28-80/2.8 - the broken VR 80-400 Nikon showed me

other things to remember - the new Digital Contax to come out next spring: 6 million pixels, price around 15.000 DEM - the new Bronica 645 RF rangefinder (NO AF)

Ivan

-- Ivan Verschoote (ivan.verschoote@rug.ac.be), September 25, 2000.

B&H already lists the Nikkor 18-35 f3.5-4.5 (USA) as in stock for $589.95.

-- Lee (atlantis@mit.edu), September 28, 2000.