So what do you see missing, then?
70-200 F/4? Price wise that's covered by the 80-200 f/2.8.
70-200 F/4 VR? Hole
Midrange FX is covered I'd assume you'd agree.
That leaves midrange DX?
But midrage f/4 DX, right?
What Do You Want From Nikon In 2011 ?
(75 posts) (45 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
I'll take a 24-70 2.8 VR (preferably 24-85 2.8).
I'll probably get the 24-120 f/4 because I'm usually at f/4 or smaller anyway and like primes in low light.Posted 2 years ago # -
But personally, to return to the original topic of what do I want from Nikon:
I want something they won't likely make - A 150-200ish mm f/2ish prime. ie an updated 180mm f/2.8.
That means 16-35, 50, 85, and that lens covers all I care about 99% of the time w/o a heavy 70-200/80-200.
Heck, drop the 50 and that's still 90+ of what I care about.
Posted 2 years ago # -
NSXType-R said:
Fast glass is expensive.Maybe a new cheap 85mm 1.8 AF-S for FX?
Since the 1.4 AF-S is so incredibly expensive, it would make sense to make a cheaper 85mm 1.8 AF-S.
But what I am saying is if they can do it with the 35 1.8 then why not other focal lengths? I can see increased price with longer focal lengths, but not the prices of the newest lenses coming out. The 35 1.8 is pretty simple with no VR and all that, but it seems to be very popular and gets the job done...I like it.
Make an affordable 200 mm prime..say a f2.8 Make some maybe a little slower version of the ones they already have, but at prices people that aren't pros can afford. For all purposes I think most can afford lenses in the under $750 range, but once you get over $1000 you lose lots of people...like me :) That is the only reason I would look at a Sigma or Tamron is price...so if Nikon filled that gap I wouldn't ever think about a 3rd party lens.
Posted 2 years ago # -
FWIW the current 180 f/2.8 AF-D is right about at grand street price.
Further from 50 the more expensive it's gonna be. I think Nikon went out of their way to price the 35 1.8 as cheaply as possible, but the f/2 was never that much.
Would you actually buy a $750 Nikon 70-200mm f/4? Or would you spend said $750 on a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8? Because Nikon will never match them on price AND features.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Drab said:
But personally, to return to the original topic of what do I want from Nikon:I want something they won't likely make - A 150-200ish mm f/2ish prime. ie an updated 180mm f/2.8.
That means 16-35, 50, 85, and that lens covers all I care about 99% of the time w/o a heavy 70-200/80-200.
Heck, drop the 50 and that's still 90+ of what I care about.
They've got a 200mm F/2.0G IF-ED VR II lens - for a huge price. It's too expensive for me to get, and not suitable for any of my needs. The 180mm F/2.8 is not a bad one, it's sharp and priced well.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I would like a D300XX.....full manual camera with no video, no editing processes (retouch menu), no world time (lol) and etc. Just give me a pure high level DX camera and I'll be one happy camper!
Posted 2 years ago # -
A 20mm/1.8 (or 2.5) DX in the few hundred dollars range.
Posted 2 years ago # -
broxibear said:
I don't mean which lens, body or accessory you want or would like, I mean what do you want from them in general and as a company ?
Personally I'd like them to stop making so many dslrs that overlap in features and price and a far more defined line between cameras that are for the consumer market, enthusiasts and professionals.I thought that I would repost the OP and see if we could refocus this thread :-)
Posted 2 years ago # -
If this isn't asking too much I would like a camera body in the 18-20mp range, prefer dx (I shoot primarily underwater and cropped frame cameras have an advantage in corner sharpness when in a housing behind a dome). I would like a motor drive of 6-8fps on still for when I am shooting topside. I am 30 years a still photographer but have had some fun with video in the last couple years so I would like a serious attempt at putting better video features in this camera body. Specifically, at least 60fps at 1080 but as long as we're dreaming, 120 fps is gorgeous on film, would love to see it on video too. And of course, no issues with focus-ability during shooting. And I want it in plaid.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The Man From Mandrem said:
A 20mm/1.8 (or 2.5) DX in the few hundred dollars range.Their old 20 2.8 was near $500 last time I looked and it is far from their best lens. Barrel distortion and not razor sharp (I have owned them before). For a decent 1.8, they would ask much more. But, as long as we are wishing huh?
Posted 2 years ago # -
I would have to go with availability as well. There are lens updates and body updates I would like to see over the next year or two, but for me, the biggest issue is actually being able to get your hands on things.
I would love to get a 105/f2 DC or the 135/f2 DC, but neither is in stock 99% of the time. Other lenses and bodies come and go from stock pretty darn fast. Just having a constant supply of the available lenses and bodies would be a huge win.
Posted 2 years ago # -
lol maybe we should change the title ! NAS seems to take over the posters !
Posted 2 years ago # -
Bland said:
I would like a D300XX.....full manual camera with no video, no editing processes (retouch menu), no world time (lol) and etc. Just give me a pure high level DX camera and I'll be one happy camper!Oh yeah - x2.
On the fantasy side of things, how about future cameras covered with more direct-access buttons and dials which are all 'allocatable' to whichever of the cameras functions you want in that place? All same size with snap-on covers for ID. They could lose the infatuation with the smaller DSLR bodies too as small cameras are called P&S's, DSLR's need to be bigger IMHO.
Posted 2 years ago # -
*ADMIN !!!...could you check the forum is working properly because I'm sure I started this thread with "I don't mean which lens, body or accessory you want or would like, I mean what do you want from them in general and as a company ?" But posters seem to be seeing "which lens, body or accessory do you want from Nikon in 2011"?
Posted 2 years ago # -
lol! and i reposted your original post too... heh! didnt seem to help much!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Would LOVE an affordable 400mm lens. 8K - 12K is too much!
Would love to see standardized plates/mounts for cameras/tripods/monopods (Swiss Arca)
Would like UPS to hurry and deliver my 50mm prime today!
Posted 2 years ago # -
sigh... lol
Posted 2 years ago # -
-
I want to say good idea for a post. I wish nikon could keep some things in stock a little better but i can wait for the most part. I would also like to see some difference in their dslr lines but as a few replacements come out and a few get the can I think we will see that.
So overall I feel as though nikon is doing pretty well. I would like to see some 1.8 come out at a reasonable price but we already have so many out their its prob not in the cards.Posted 2 years ago # -
I want a sub $3000 FX body, a cheap but decent 16mm/2.8 prime, a fast focusing 400mm/5.6 cheapo ($1400) birding tube, an improved 14mm prime, some Zeiss quality glass would be nice.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Being that I'm likely to shoot DX for a few years I'd like a really, Really good reason to buy the 17-55 f/2.8 zoom - like add VR, extend the focal range by 10-15mm, and make resolution and IQ equal to the well admired 24-70 f/2.8 - all without upping the pricetag.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I would like Nikon to be able to release new products with sufficient quantities to meet demand.
I don't want to wait months beyond release date for my next body >.<
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'd love for the D800 to become reality, but I hope the price doesn't kick me in the face.
Posted 2 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
