Pick ONE lens that Nikon should make or update

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon Lenses

Pick ONE lens that Nikon should make or update

(168 posts) (73 voices)

Tags:

« Previous 1 234…7 Next »

heartyfisher

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,701
offline

adamz said:
where did You get this info alpha? it would mean that all of the top Nikkor lenses lost it's quality due to VR - that's bullshit for me

Its true about the slight compromise in IQ.. our young alpha gets most things right ... Thats because the vr elements are like a little movable TC at the back of the lens. But the loss of IQ is only very very small. For most VR lenses, the loss of IQ is more than made up for by the VR feature. for the Micro 105 at macro its not useful .. but 105 is a great portrait FOV and VR would work really nicely if you have a drop dead gorgeous model. :-)

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

Poor design of the 10-24? not mine. I love the lens and have gotten wonderful results. I don't want the size, cost and filter-less 14-24, nor did I find the 12-24 wide enough.

For my use the 16-85 is more useful than the 18-200, I prefer the wide end wider, rather than the long end longer.

Regarding VR on the 105, I never use it when shooting macro, but almost always use it otherwise. I'd be more interested in what the incremental cost and weight of VR involve, since I don't believe there is image degradation involve (not when I look at some of the 600/4 shots).

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

ted2001 said:
Poor design of the 10-24? not mine. I love the lens and have gotten wonderful results. I don't want the size, cost and filter-less 14-24, nor did I find the 12-24 wide enough.

For my use the 16-85 is more useful than the 18-200, I prefer the wide end wider, rather than the long end longer.

Regarding VR on the 105, I never use it when shooting macro, but almost always use it otherwise. I'd be more interested in what the incremental cost and weight of VR involved, since I don't believe there is image degradation involve (not when I look at some of the 600/4 shots).

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

One lens post...

Posted 3 years ago #
SBGrad

new member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3
offline

One lens, huh? 100-500 AF-S VR

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

ted2001 said:
Poor design of the 10-24? not mine. I love the lens and have gotten wonderful results. I don't want the size, cost and filter-less 14-24, nor did I find the 12-24 wide enough.

I wanted to see the 12-24 F4 updated to 10-20 F4, with nano coating, this lens should still be able to have filters attached and would have been optical sharper than the 10-24 they actual made, this could have been a mini 14-24 2.8 which we all know is one of the sharpest wide angle zoom ever made if not the sharpest

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
noxin

preferred member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 246
offline

My one lens in need of the update is the 300 F4. It's about the longest tele I can afford but I won't make the plunge until it has VR. If they don't update it soon maybe Sigma will add it to the 100-300 F4.

Posted 3 years ago #
mikeo21

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 100
offline

primes!

chooose one Nikon:

85 1.8
wide angle 1.8

please! more DX primes! more DX primes!

Posted 3 years ago #
hikerboy47

member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 16
offline

photoboy2005 said:
lol i dont have any VR lenses yet. im getting the 105mm 2.8 macro next

You are going to love that lens. Out of all my lenses, that is my fave!!!

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

hikerboy47 said:
You are going to love that lens. Out of all my lenses, that is my fave!!!

I am trying to decide between this lens or a Tokina 100mm Macro(close to half the cost of the Nikon lens), have any tried the Tokina lens

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
Daf

member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 14
offline

85mm 1.4 (or 1.2)

Posted 3 years ago #
Halogenic

new member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3
offline

I'll love to see lenses like:

* AF 50mm f1.2 N (nanocristals) or at least 50mm f1.4 N
* AF 16-40mm f2.8 N for FX
* AF 24-70mm f2.8 N
* AF 100-500 or AFS 80-400

Posted 3 years ago #
PBrigido

preferred member
Joined: Oct '09
Posts: 253
offline

Halogenic said:
I'll love to see lenses like:

* AF 50mm f1.2 N (nanocristals) or at least 50mm f1.4 N
* AF 16-40mm f2.8 N for FX
* AF 24-70mm f2.8 N
* AF 100-500 or AFS 80-400

I agree.
50mm 1.2
24-70 VRII

Posted 3 years ago #
pcraigs

member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 44
offline

How about
1.4x Teleconverter VR
70-200mm F4 VR
300mm F4 VR

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

1.4TC with VR would be nice, wonder if it's possible

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

If I ever got an FX camera to use my old Nikon lenses, the missing lens I'd want would be an FX version of my 16-85. I think a 24-105+/4 with VR would work well for my needs.

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

ted2001 said:
If I ever got an FX camera to use my old Nikon lenses, the missing lens I'd want would be an FX version of my 16-85. I think a 24-105+/4 with VR would work well for my needs.

This is the one Canon makes and a Canuts friend of mine likes it, I would think Nikon are really lacking in F4.0 FX lenses like this one

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

oh yeah, Nikon lacks a lot of f4 lenses

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

adamz said:
oh yeah, Nikon lacks a lot of f4 lenses

Yes they do, You know I have mentioned in many other posts that I would like to see a D90 size FX camera, but if we actually got this camera there surely is not a lot of lens choices like the ones you can get for your DX camera. Another missing FX would be a 28-70 F4.0, (maybe they could get up to 90mm)I used to have one when I shot Pentax it was both compact and sharp.

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
rhodium

member
Joined: Oct '09
Posts: 46
offline

The lack of f/4 zooms isn't hurting as much as the lack of fast primes. I know a lot of people say that primes with wide apertures aren't needed with the advent of DSLRs capable of shooting clean images at ISO 3200 and up, but sometimes the DOF isolation that f/1.4 gives simply can't be recreated with slower lenses.

On a related note, I'm curious as to why it is harder to produce a 14mm f/1.4 than a 28mm f/1.4. Wouldn't the 14mm have a smaller aperture at f/1.4 than the 28mm? But alas, my knowledge on optics is very limited. Would anyone happen to know?

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

rhodium said:
The lack of f/4 zooms isn't hurting as much as the lack of fast primes. I know a lot of people say that primes with wide apertures aren't needed with the advent of DSLRs capable of shooting clean images at ISO 3200 and up, but sometimes the DOF isolation that f/1.4 gives simply can't be recreated with slower lenses.

On a related note, I'm curious as to why it is harder to produce a 14mm f/1.4 than a 28mm f/1.4. Wouldn't the 14mm have a smaller aperture at f/1.4 than the 28mm? But alas, my knowledge on optics is very limited. Would anyone happen to know?

Alright at this time the Canon 14mm F2.8 is app $2000.00 and our Nikon 14-24 F2.8 is actually sharper(yes Canon Pros will spend $300 on a adapter that allows the Nikon lens to work with aperture control on a Canon body), both lenses have corner softness at F2.8 (canon more so) so it would be pointless to go to F1.4 not even including the cost to do it

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

rhodium said:
On a related note, I'm curious as to why it is harder to produce a 14mm f/1.4 than a 28mm f/1.4. Wouldn't the 14mm have a smaller aperture at f/1.4 than the 28mm? But alas, my knowledge on optics is very limited. Would anyone happen to know?

You're right about the aperture, but the trouble with short lenses is you're gathering light from many angles with the front element. For your example, the 28 needs to accept light from 75 degrees across the diagonal and the 14 needs to accept light from 115 degrees across the diagonal. Compare that with a lens at 200mm, which only has to handle light from 12 degrees across the diagonal. (You can get an idea for this by looking at the lens hoods for different lenses.) This makes the front element need to have a big curve to it and it has to be ground perfectly to get sharp images without too much distortion--some of those lenses can't even take a filter on the front. How much harder it is to go from 2.8 to 1.4 I admit I don't know, but that's why the short primes are a technical challenge for the guys designing them.

Posted 3 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

alphanikonrex said:
Welcome photoboy2005! I've never used that lens—what do you think of it? Is the 18-200 or 18-105 a better choice?

I have an 18-135 too. I bought it with the D40 as a kit. It's a pretty damn good lens, since it was my only lens for about a year. Sharp throughout the range and expectedly gets slow at the far end of the zoom. Build quality is definitely better than the 18-55, and I love the fact that I can get somewhat far without swapping lenses. Only bad part- plastic lens mount and no VR, and if you do care, there is sometimes weird distortion.

Posted 3 years ago #
jbl

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 266
offline

I want a Micro Nikkor AF-S 28mm f/1.4

Yes... a macro 28mm lens.

Sigma has the 28mm f/1.8 macro.. so I want an update of the old 28 1.4 by nikkor, with AF-S and macro

I own a sigma 20mm f/1.8 and I use it on DX (30mm), the minimal focusing distance is so short, it could almost be called a "macro" lens... I know sigma calls their 24 and 28mm f/1.8 macro lenses I love these primes, I'd like one of these 28mm for when I upgrade to FX.

Posted 3 years ago #
denz

new member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 1
offline

I would say update some primes, like the 18mm or 20mm.

Posted 3 years ago #