Further readings for the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR
To provide photographers with a broader perspective about mobiles, lenses and cameras, here are links to articles, reviews, and analyses of photographic equipment produced by DxOMark, renown websites, magazines or blogs.
Back in 2013, Nikon introduced its first AF super-telephoto with fluorite to reduce the weight while also suppressing color blurring with the 800mm f5.6E FL ED VR. The 400mm f2.8 is the second model in the maker’s super-telephoto lineup to undergo the same treatment. Read on to find out how well this substantially revised lens performs.
Just in time for the Football World Cup Nikon have launched a new super telephoto prime lens for professional sports & news photographers. The AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8E FL VR promises improved optical performance, in a lighter and more ergonomic design, together with a brand new SPORT VR mode.
Also I would be curious to know why your test differs from so many others. Lenscore (see their results at the bottom of this post)for example tested the new version to be a LOT better than the old one and they're also testing with what seems like a pretty sound technique to me? Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR
So this test has really baffled me. I find it really hard to believe that Nikon would 'progress' by making a considerably worse (and more expensive) lens if your measurements are correct! Surely the cost of designing and manufacturing a whole new version of this lens only for it to be worse than the existing one is ludicrous? So what would be your logical explanation to this story?