Nikon related links/new

This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • The video from Lichter — left me a bit un-impressed of the subject and the topic – why doesn’t Nikon get Chase Jarvis to say a few words…maybe I’m off my rocker.


    • eh??

      why don’t you go to your local camera store to try the D3X out for yourself?

  • Mike

    The 10-24 test shots do not impress. The f/8 shot of the bench… check out the trees in the upper left corner… zoom in on them… this is what the Tamron version did too. I will wait to bring my camera into a store nearby and try it before giving final judgment. Nikon’s 3.5-4.5 lenses seem to be “so-so”.

    • eh??

      enough pixelpeeling and its a consumer grade lens so that’s what you gotta expect for. F/8 is the only sweet spot on few versatile aperture lenses.

      • fuzz

        the 10-24 is “not” a consumer grade lens… at $900 its nearly as expensive as the 12-24 which is considered more “pro”.

        considering the price of the competition (sigma and tamron) if it was “consumer” is would have been at least $300 cheaper.

        • eh??

          oh, really, then can you explain why is 18-200mm are selling for $700+? have you seen any professional grade lenses with versatile maximum aperture?

          • Chris

            80-400mm f/4.5-5.6
            gold band pro lens 🙂
            I would call the Tokina AT-X 10-17 f/3.5-4.5 fish pro grade. and a need for most underwater pros.

            the 10-24 is not pro but the cost does put it next to some better glass. (like the 12-24)

    • What other 3.5 to 4.5 lenses have you tried? I had the 24-85 AFS for a while and it was great for portraits and closeups, but lacked critical sharpness for landscapes.

      The 10-20 appears to be in another league entirely. Looks good to me.

      What on earth are you talking about with the f8 bench shot? You do realize that the camera is focused on the bench? That top left corner is falling off because of depth of field. f22 might pull it back in, but then you’d be dealing with a touch of diffraction. I do see the faintest softening in the last .01% of the corner, but it’s damn subtle. I’m curious to compare this with 11-16 Tokina.

      Also note that these are shot with a d200–there’s not much CA and the d200 doesn’t correct it anyway.

  • JimmyD

    my sigma 10 20 at f8 is so much sharper! and the d5000 shots are so damn noisy! not impressed nikon update your damn fx glass asap!!!!

    • My 10-20 was damn sharp too. But the shots above make me think this new lens has the edge. At least where CA is concerned. I would get sharp images with moderate CA as far as 35% away from the edges of the image. It cleans up in post…but time is money. Ok, time isn’t money, money is time commodified, but you get the idea. Saving time is worth money to me.

      Also: can you get ANY third party lens with a rubber gasket on the mount?

      • eh??

        the cheapest solution = rubber band.

        • I like inexpensive solutions. But I also like ones that don’t take more time than they save. Wrapping a rubber band around takes too much time. And it’ll always end up with a gap unless it’s smaller diameter than the mount.

          I am considering having my friend who repairs cameras retro-fitting a nikon-mount to a third party lens. Seems like it wouldn’t be tough.

          • eh??

            well, try taking the mount off a 50mm 1.4 AFS and put it on older lenses rather than doing that to expensive nikkors like 14-24mm or 24-70mm.

            i think the rubber gasket is more attached to the body barrel than on the mount so im not sure.

            rubber bands are faster when you practice putting it on quicker and quicker.

          • Good lord, why trash any lens if it works? You can order the part from Nikon. Most non-glass parts seem to be between 10 and $80. Well, I bet a VR part would cost a bit too.

            Anyway, yeah, I wouldn’t tear anything off a 14-24 or a 24-70. That would be madness.

  • reverse logic

    Nikon D3x price drops to 7,5000 @ Amazon.

    Is that in Yen? 7,5000 eh, bargain! Not.

  • NB

    Most of those D5000 samples are really technicaly poor.. the person who shot them must be a real noob to do such a poor job. They look poorly focused and really soft.
    Surely the camera is capable of much better results.
    Same goes for the 10-24’s samples, but I’m sure it’s a very nice lens.

    • Stud Lee

      I’m sorry, but the 10-24 seems like a really poor lens. poor corner sharpness, poor sharpness overall, CA is good. Bokeh is the ugliest I have seen in an ultra wide.
      Is this a Tamron Rebadge.???????
      Sve yourselves some time and money and get the Tokina 11-16. Nobody ever uses these lenses at 16-24mm, and if you do then get the 12-24. Tokina or Nikon.

  • Zoetmb

    Those IDC worldwide DSLR stat figures don’t make sense, at least not as compared to the CIPA numbers. They’re claiming a 5% drop to 9.2 million units on DSLRs. The overall number makes sense because CIPA claimed shipments of 9.686 million in 2008 and a 5% drop would take that to 9.202 million. However, in the first two months of this year, only 735,000 units were shipped. Adjusting for seasonal shipments (12% of the annual total was shipped in Jan/Feb in 2008), that would imply that 6.156 million units will be shipped this year, which is a 36% drop compared to 2008.

    • Probably has to do with the fact that Q1 is a horrible quarter for sales. Sales numbers don’t stay constant throughout the year.

    • Oh. I failed at reading your post. Sorry – I see that you adjusted for seasonality already. Sorry.

  • eh??

    NR admin, if you haven’t noticed, B&H is selling D3X for $7,719.95 now.

  • web

    I’m glad to see I’m not the only person out there that wears fingerless gloves during my studio shoots! Oh, and we have the same earrings as well – maybe I should ask this guy out!?

  • Back to top