Comments on: Nikon 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED AF-S DX lens in stock

By: Bruce Daily

Bruce Daily — Thu, 14 May 2009 21:25:32 +0000

I picked one up last week and really like it. It’s solid, though it has a plastic filter ring. I have never used a Tokina, but it’s definitely better than the Tamron. I haven’t shot a lot with it yet, but I’m very pleased with what I’ve gotten so far.

Bruce

By: Robin Edgar

Robin Edgar — Mon, 11 May 2009 01:43:05 +0000

I had both the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and Nikon 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 in my hands today at a mini-trade show in Montreal. I shot some test shots and some video on my Nikon D90. On the whole I prefer the Tokina to the Nikon. It built quality seems better, the Nikon zoom ring was stiff. It’s a whole stop faster for the most part. And it is somewhat cheaper than the Nikon. The Nikon is a bit more versatile with the extra zoom range but the difference at the wide end seems negligible. I was unable to try the Nikon on a full frame DSLR but the Tokina is definitely useable on FX cameras in the 14-16mm range as is the Tokina fisheye zoom lens BTW. . .

By: [NR] admin

[NR] admin — Sat, 09 May 2009 04:01:27 +0000

I found also some on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/34586260@N04/sets/72157617879657252/

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 08 May 2009 12:38:01 +0000

Yes, because all of us live just a walk down the road from a camera store…

By: Marko

Marko — Fri, 08 May 2009 06:31:49 +0000

I’m owning a Sigma 10-20. It’s a very unpredictable lens. The characteristic varies a lot during the zoom range and f stops. Really tricky to get it work well. Plus it is vers susceptable to flare. Tons of wasted photos in terms of contrast and sharpness. I’m never sure with this lens till I upload it on my PC.

Yes. I would pay the extra cost for Nikon 10-24 if it is better. I believe it is. After all Sigma 10-20 is starting to show its age when comapared to Tokina and others. Plus with Nikon you get also control over distorsion and CA in Capture NX which is great.

I think Nikon knows perfectly what is doing to squeeze our wallets

By: Micah

Micah — Fri, 08 May 2009 01:39:09 +0000

And what 5.6 lens are you talking about?

By: Micah

Micah — Fri, 08 May 2009 01:38:41 +0000

Why would anyone ask this question?

Try one and find out!

By: Micah

Micah — Fri, 08 May 2009 01:30:53 +0000

The current 80-400 and 85/1.4 are sharper than three of the lenses in your current arsenal. Were there some features lacking in the current lenses that you wanted? Or are you like me and hope they come out with new ones to drive the price of the perfectly good old ones down?

By: PHB

PHB — Fri, 08 May 2009 01:17:00 +0000

The FX format sensor is twice the size of the DX. So you will get twice the ISO performance at the top end for a given sensor.

Comparing the lenses is missing the point. The 14-24 will still be f/2.8 on a DX body. Nikon does not make an equivalent constant aperture f/2.8 zoom lens in DX format. There would be little point. f/3.5-4.5 is close enough.

You get it all back on the top end. Nikon does not make a 600mm f/2.8 but put the 400 on a DX body and that is what you get. And they do not make a 120-600 zoom or a 900mm f/4.

I am pretty sure you can buy a lightweight tripod for a lot less than the difference in price between the D300+10-24 and D700+14-24.

There are certainly going to be reasons for preferring the big glass and FX format, just as there are reasons for using medium format. But methinks some folk protest somewhat too much.

By: Lance

Lance — Thu, 07 May 2009 17:50:38 +0000

Are there any other sample images available? Maybe on an english site? I saw that other review some time ago and can’t read it!

By: Zoetmb

Zoetmb — Thu, 07 May 2009 17:05:34 +0000

Amazon apparently sold out theirs – it’s now being sold on Amazon by Calumet, Willoughby’s and Beach Camera. Willoughby’s has nothing to do with the defunct giant New York-based Peerless-Willoughby’s other than the license of the name. How is it that Calumet and Willoughby’s get lenses before BH, Adorama and J&R? That doesn’t make sense to me. (Unless they’re lying about them being in stock.) I can understand Beach because they’re pretty large.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 07 May 2009 16:33:43 +0000

wake up and smell coffee, the 80-400mm and 85mm 1.4 VR AF-S with nano coatings is like 5 years old rumor that never happened.

why the hell are you waiting? go grab the 80-400mm or 85mm 1.4 that nikon already have to offer.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 07 May 2009 16:29:18 +0000

you make your decision based on thom’s long ass and boring “too detailed” review?

you got a pair of legs so start walking to the store to try the lens out for yourself.

By: PJS

PJS — Thu, 07 May 2009 15:50:01 +0000

PHB – re: “You will get one stop better ISO performance.” If you are comparing the 14-24 f/2.8 and the new 10-24, you will actually get TWO stops better performance on a DX camera when each lens is set to 24mm. It can make a big difference in the forest…

By: Char

Char — Thu, 07 May 2009 15:19:31 +0000

Just be patient, the lenses will come . For now, its the DX people’s time. I’m not too interested in DX lenses either (though I do have a DX camera), but why should I be pissed off when DX lenses appear?

For the time being, you can shoot some nice images – you got the perfect equipment for doing so, don’t you?

By: Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 07 May 2009 14:45:31 +0000

More sample photos here;

http://nikonclub.digiarena.zive.cz/test-noveho-objektivu-nikkor-af-s-dx-10-24mm-f35-45g-ed

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 07 May 2009 13:59:55 +0000

I should have posted the link to Thom’s review of the Sigma glass: http://www.bythom.com/sigma10to20.htm

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 07 May 2009 13:57:53 +0000

I typically give a lot of weight to the reviews of Thom Hogan — http://www.bythom.com — on lenses, and considering that he stopped carrying the Nikon 12-24mm DX lens and only carries the Sigma 10-20mm lens, the question to my mind has to be: is Nikon’s new 10-24mm lens really FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS better than the Sigma glass??? I can almost buy another SB-900 for the difference in price!!!

By: ebraun

ebraun — Thu, 07 May 2009 13:33:09 +0000

D700: 70-200VR, 14-24, 28-105D, 16mm, 50 f/1.4D. I never owned a DX lens even when i shot with DX cameras. DX lenses are of no interest to me at all. The only one i considered buying was the 10.5mm fisheye when i shot DX, but i already had the 16mm and thought it was silly to own 2 fisheyes so i just waited for FX.

By: PHB

PHB — Thu, 07 May 2009 12:40:00 +0000

If you buy the 14-24 you are limiting yourself to heavy FX bodies and lenses forever. You will get a given pixel resolution in the flagship FX body up to 12 months before you get it in DX. You will get one stop better ISO performance. You will get 1kg extra weight.

If you want the lighter D700x you will be waiting maybe a year after the launch of the D400 and to make use of it you will have to use the $1800 zooms and $1000 primes, all weighing upwards of 1Kg.

Note that none of this has to do with cost.

Now for long lenses the tradeoff is completely different. A DX 70-200 zoom would weigh only slightly less than an FX 70-200 zoom. In fact there are folk who think that the falloff issue in the current 70-200 is because Nikon optimized it for their D2 bodies. So it certainly makes sense to insist on FX for any pro lens 50mm or longer. But that is hardly a difficult decision as Nikon do not and almost certainly will not make a pro DX-only lens longer than 50mm.

There will however be some lenses that are particularly useful for DX use and merely interesting for FX. For example, an 80-400 zoom is not going to be as interesting to someone with a D3 and a 70-200 and 200-400 in their bag unless they plan to leave the other two lenses at home. But if they leave the D3 at home and take a D300 instead they will have 120-600mm equivalent in one lens. Nikon did once make a lens like that, it was special order and was definitely tripod only.

The best argument I have heard so far for the D3x is that it is a D3 and a D300 in the same body, so you can take 10MP DX mode shots on an FX body.

I just ordered one for next day delivery on Amazon. I will test it out and report back.