What do you mean, pick one, thats just cruel.

In no particular order
1. Canon MP-E 65mm 1x-5x macro = drool, slobber slobber, drool
2. Nikkor 50mm f1.2 AI-s but AF-s
3. Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM but with VR ultra drool drool

ok I'm just gonna pick myself up out of my puddle of drool and get back to reality.

Definitely a long zoom, preferably in the $1200-1800 price range. The rumored 100-500 would be welcome, but a redesigned 80-400 would be great as well.

And for crying out loud, let's try to optimize resolution at the top, huh? I can't speak for everyone, but most folks I know who buy a long tele zoom tend to use it mostly at the long end.

I'd also like to see a Nikon version of the Canon 65 mpe, or some other dedicated high magnification lens.

Also agree on DX wide angle lenses. The 10-24 is fine for daylight, but I'd like something faster for low light like the 11-16, or alternatively a faster widish prime, light the sony 16/2.8, but faster, sharper and maybe wider (obviously more expensive but that's fine).

bmxdad said:

which lens do you think Nikon could copy or improve on

I got a few wishes:

* Carl Zeiss 21mm/2.8 (w. fast AF & same optical quality, price under 3000e)
* Canon MP-E 65mm (a 5:1 macro? YEAH gimme one)
* Canon EF 400mm/5.6 (a lightweight, cheap & excellent BIF lens as it is)

Canon 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM.

Haha, yeah, to hand hold that lens would take a few rocket engines to keep it in the air, but aliens could work.

10-800mm f/1.4 made by aliens. ;)

I would say the sigma 300-800 f5.6 They should add VR technology. It would be a killer wildlife lens if it had VR.

I use the 2:1 minolta 50mm macro on my nikons and it is awesome and goes much closer in than the 55mm micro f/2.8 or the current 60mm micro. I would still like to see a Nikon version of the Mp-E 65. It's a shame because other than the PC-E 85mm f/2.8D I find the once king of macro's lineup, laughable and rather consumer oriented.

As to the Canon 100-400mm with VR... BAH! I love the 80-400 range much more. 20mm does make a difference and so does the 4.5 at the lower end

I would almost sell my soul for a Nikon version of Canon's MP-E 65.

Canon 100-400mm with VR, Canon 400mm f5.6 with VR, 300mmf4 with VR

Let me guess, the odds of winning depends on the number of suckers entering and on the ability to find you after the contest? I like it!

let me guess, the winnner is Niko....

I'm selling the lottery tickets so just send me your money Treckie. $100 per ticket and if you win you get one of each Nikon makes for the next five years! Winners will be announced in 8 to 12 months. ;^)

I would like to see the rumors on the Nikon 100-500 come to fruition. While we are at it, how about winning the nikon lottery and getting 1 of every lens they make?

clillja said:
Canon 17mm TS-E - Want.

Ditto on that one. :]

Hard question. All I can say is that I love the 80-400VR, but I really, really want a refresh of the lens.

However, I do like really like Sigma's 12-24mm full frame ultra wide zoom, which carries a reasonable price tag.

The Hasselblad Zeiss Sonnar 150mm/4. If we could see a 35mm equivalent with an aperture of 2 or 2.4 with a perfectly damped focusing ring and a smooth aperture ring, I'd be all over it in an instant. Nikon's fine on all the lens fronts, I just love the way that the Hass 150 renders.

I'd just like them to make the 28-200 mm f2.8 that they patented. In fact re design and release some of their classic fisheyes too... I'm already happy with the lineup as of today, although the Bigma (Sigma 50-500mm) would be really awesome. So would a nikon rendition of Summarit 70mm prime (like that would ever happen!)

On the improve list... Redo the 80-400mm (I like the lens but that AF!!!), 18-200mm needs to be sharper, Add vr to the 17-35mm 2.8 (the WTF 16-35mm that was just released is not the answer for a shooter like me!), also make the amazing 24-70mm 2.8 fixed length (has been bumped cuz I forget)

just add VR to their pro zooms!

400/4 and 300/f4 with af-s and vr

Totally agree, a 400mm F5.6 VR would be a great lens, would be much nicer than using the 300mm F4 AF-S with a TC, if the optics and AF speed were good.

does it have to be from another brand? I'd like to see the VR on the 300 f4. If it was another brand I'll go with the Canon 400 f5.6. Nikon needs a cheaper long tele prime.

Fargo911 said:
I would like to see them copy either the Sigma 50-150 or Tokina 50-135 and add VR. Something that is fast but smaller/lighter than the monster 70-200.

+1 on the 50-150 F2.8 ....

I would like to see them copy either the Sigma 50-150 or Tokina 50-135 and add VR. Something that is fast but smaller/lighter than the monster 70-200.