Comments on: What about those lenses? http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx where there’s smoke there’s fire Sun, 14 Mar 2010 09:02:14 -0400 hourly 1 By: sohnjwan http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39573 sohnjwan Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:44:32 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39573 OK we get that you have a VR fetish... How many of you have Parkinson to want so many lenses with VR??? OK we get that you have a VR fetish…

How many of you have Parkinson to want so many lenses with VR???

]]> By: fugue137 http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39538 fugue137 Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:32:55 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39538 Faster fixies! Anything wide at f/1.4 or 1.8 and not too expensive would make me very happy. I almost bought a Canon just to use their 28mm f/1.8, but the last thing I need is another brand. Open standards would have been pretty cool... Faster fixies! Anything wide at f/1.4 or 1.8 and not too expensive would make me very happy. I almost bought a Canon just to use their 28mm f/1.8, but the last thing I need is another brand. Open standards would have been pretty cool…

]]> By: Terry Thomas Photos http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39493 Terry Thomas Photos Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:13:33 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39493 Sorry I forgot to fill in the fields. Terry Sorry I forgot to fill in the fields.

Terry

]]> By: Anonymous http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39492 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:12:33 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39492 I have been a Nikon Pro since the 60s when I was in the US Air Force and stationed first in Texas (where I got my first Nikon F) then in Japan where I loaded up on cameras and lenses. I shoot stills on the sets of movies and TV shows and in recent years I've been quite sad that Nikon has not had fast glass like Canon had. I assumed it was because they were stuck with using 52mm filters and because the corportate executives are so conservative. (I met many of them when I was stationed in Tokyo, so I know from firsthand experience.) It is good news to hear that Nikon may be bringing out some new fast lenses, they will be quite useful on movie productions. As you may know we Stills Photographers (normally) can not set up our own lighting so we have to use whatever lighting the movie people are using. Many times there is an action sequence in fairly dark rooms so we need all the fast glass we can get. I still use many of my old manual lenses with my digital Nikon bodies. That is the great thing about Nikon's compatibility, they are still using the same basic "F" bayonet lens mount as on my 35mm Nikon F bodies. Terry Thomas Unit Stills Photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA Skype: AtlantaTerry http://www.TerryThomasPhotos.com I have been a Nikon Pro since the 60s when I was in the US Air Force and stationed first in Texas (where I got my first Nikon F) then in Japan where I loaded up on cameras and lenses.

I shoot stills on the sets of movies and TV shows and in recent years I’ve been quite sad that Nikon has not had fast glass like Canon had. I assumed it was because they were stuck with using 52mm filters and because the corportate executives are so conservative. (I met many of them when I was stationed in Tokyo, so I know from firsthand experience.)

It is good news to hear that Nikon may be bringing out some new fast lenses, they will be quite useful on movie productions. As you may know we Stills Photographers (normally) can not set up our own lighting so we have to use whatever lighting the movie people are using. Many times there is an action sequence in fairly dark rooms so we need all the fast glass we can get. I still use many of my old manual lenses with my digital Nikon bodies. That is the great thing about Nikon’s compatibility, they are still using the same basic “F” bayonet lens mount as on my 35mm Nikon F bodies.

Terry Thomas
Unit Stills Photographer
Atlanta, Georgia USA
Skype: AtlantaTerry
http://www.TerryThomasPhotos.com

]]> By: BillyBobJohnson http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39428 BillyBobJohnson Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:50:00 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39428 I'd lap up a few of those. It's the wide angle primes that need the most attention though. Some of those babies are as old as me. I’d lap up a few of those. It’s the wide angle primes that need the most attention though. Some of those babies are as old as me.

]]> By: soap http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39357 soap Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:16:50 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39357 DUDE - WE NEED 1.2. @ 10' the DOF difference between 1.4 and 1.2 (on DX) is a third of an inch.(two thirds of an inch on FX) I don't know about you - but I MUST have a 2/3rds of an inch shallower depth of field on my portraits! ;) DUDE – WE NEED 1.2.
@ 10′ the DOF difference between 1.4 and 1.2 (on DX) is a third of an inch.(two thirds of an inch on FX)

I don’t know about you – but I MUST have a 2/3rds of an inch shallower depth of field on my portraits!

;)

]]> By: soap http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39356 soap Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:08:58 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39356 While I agree with you, what happens in two years when Best Buy sells their remaining D700 stock @ $600? Do we just see a noticeable price increase in used lower-end lenses originally targeting budget-minded film shooters? While I agree with you, what happens in two years when Best Buy sells their remaining D700 stock @ $600?
Do we just see a noticeable price increase in used lower-end lenses originally targeting budget-minded film shooters?

]]> By: nobody http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39354 nobody Sun, 25 Oct 2009 15:42:15 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39354 Keep the 80-400 in the line up at $1.500 for those who prefer low cost, and the 200-400 at $6.000 for those who want maximum quality. And add the 100-500 at $3.000 as a great compromise. Makes perfect sense for me to have long zooms covered at three different levels of price and performance. And I would buy the 100-500. Keep the 80-400 in the line up at $1.500 for those who prefer low cost, and the 200-400 at $6.000 for those who want maximum quality. And add the 100-500 at $3.000 as a great compromise.

Makes perfect sense for me to have long zooms covered at three different levels of price and performance. And I would buy the 100-500.

]]> By: nobody http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39353 nobody Sun, 25 Oct 2009 15:15:16 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39353 Keep the 80-400 at $1.500 and the 200-400 at $6.000 and add the 100-500 for $3.000. Makes perfect sense for me. And I would buy the 100-500. Keep the 80-400 at $1.500 and the 200-400 at $6.000 and add the 100-500 for $3.000. Makes perfect sense for me. And I would buy the 100-500.

]]> By: Canico http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39351 Canico Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:12:25 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39351 A 100-500/f4-5.6 would be very interesting for me and i'll buy it if not too expensive. But, it will be more than $2000 for sure. A 100-500/f4-5.6 would be very interesting for me and i’ll buy it if not too expensive. But, it will be more than $2000 for sure.

]]> By: plug http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39350 plug Sun, 25 Oct 2009 09:39:45 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39350 The prime is the better option. The prime is the better option.

]]> By: WoutK89 http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39349 WoutK89 Sun, 25 Oct 2009 08:19:14 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39349 Diffractive optics have been used in the Media Port thing Nikon launched a while back, so maybe we will see it some day, if Nikon thinks its worth it Diffractive optics have been used in the Media Port thing Nikon launched a while back, so maybe we will see it some day, if Nikon thinks its worth it

]]> By: PHB http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39347 PHB Sun, 25 Oct 2009 01:52:06 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39347 A 28mm f/1.4 is more likely to come out first as Nikon already has the DX 35mm f/1.8 lens. A 28mm f/1.4 is more likely to come out first as Nikon already has the DX 35mm f/1.8 lens.

]]> By: PHB http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39346 PHB Sun, 25 Oct 2009 01:45:23 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39346 The old 85mm f/1.4 is AF. It is thus going to be obsolete when the focus motor starts disappearing from the mid range cameras. All that is wanted there is an AFS version of the same old lens. The old 85mm f/1.4 is AF. It is thus going to be obsolete when the focus motor starts disappearing from the mid range cameras. All that is wanted there is an AFS version of the same old lens.

]]> By: PHB http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39345 PHB Sun, 25 Oct 2009 01:43:12 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39345 Nah, the f/2.8 primes are irrelevant. The zooms are better. Most of those lenses will never be replaced. What we need is a set of fast primes optimized for digital, a replacement for the 80-400 zoom and to fill out the range of longer primes. A 200mm f/2.8 and a 400mm f/4 would be useful. The launch of the 100-500 will create a need for a good 24-100mm DX zoom and we need more DX wide primes. Nah, the f/2.8 primes are irrelevant. The zooms are better. Most of those lenses will never be replaced.

What we need is a set of fast primes optimized for digital, a replacement for the 80-400 zoom and to fill out the range of longer primes. A 200mm f/2.8 and a 400mm f/4 would be useful.

The launch of the 100-500 will create a need for a good 24-100mm DX zoom and we need more DX wide primes.

]]> By: PHB http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39344 PHB Sun, 25 Oct 2009 01:30:42 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39344 If you want cheap, stay with the DX format. Nikon is not going to be making cheap FX lenses for a very long time, if ever. If you want cheap, stay with the DX format.

Nikon is not going to be making cheap FX lenses for a very long time, if ever.

]]> By: PHB http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39343 PHB Sun, 25 Oct 2009 01:25:19 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39343 I will buy the 100-500 as soon as I can. I expect that it will cost roughly $2000-$2500. That is considerably less than the 200-400 and a little higher than the Canon 100-400. The 100-500 'Bigma' is not ridiculously large and costs $1000. The Nikon lens is clearly intended to be a rival. Nikon tends to be twice the price of the other lens brands but not much more. The 200-400 is a superb lens, but not a big seller and not going to be replaced by this one. The f/4 CA design means that it is a LOT bigger than the Bigma. Nikon know their market, they are not going to be selling two lenses in the 'too big to carry' category. I can't imagine that we are going to see a $6000 price tag here. I will buy the 100-500 as soon as I can. I expect that it will cost roughly $2000-$2500. That is considerably less than the 200-400 and a little higher than the Canon 100-400.

The 100-500 ‘Bigma’ is not ridiculously large and costs $1000. The Nikon lens is clearly intended to be a rival. Nikon tends to be twice the price of the other lens brands but not much more.

The 200-400 is a superb lens, but not a big seller and not going to be replaced by this one. The f/4 CA design means that it is a LOT bigger than the Bigma. Nikon know their market, they are not going to be selling two lenses in the ‘too big to carry’ category. I can’t imagine that we are going to see a $6000 price tag here.

]]> By: sohnjwan http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39342 sohnjwan Sun, 25 Oct 2009 01:18:52 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39342 As a landscape photographer you may prefer wider DOF, but the rest of us like our portraits without having to go to f/22 all the time ;). As a landscape photographer you may prefer wider DOF, but the rest of us like our portraits without having to go to f/22 all the time ;) .

]]> By: sohnjwan http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39341 sohnjwan Sun, 25 Oct 2009 01:17:43 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39341 I would give my left eye for a 105mm f/2.0 and 135mm f/2.0 without defocus control :D I would give my left eye for a 105mm f/2.0 and 135mm f/2.0 without defocus control :D

]]> By: sohnjwan http://nikonrumors.com/2009/10/22/what-about-those-lenses.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-39340 sohnjwan Sun, 25 Oct 2009 01:16:19 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/?p=7879#comment-39340 It should read "like there is a D700 for those who can´t afford a D3" sorry for the typo. It should read “like there is a D700 for those who can´t afford a D3″ sorry for the typo.

]]>