“In few days”

After spending almost an hour trying to translate the few cryptic sentences I received, the final word on the lenses release date is "in few days". We know for sure that Nikon has a press events scheduled in multiple countries on February 3rd, 2010. We also know that the new Coolpixes will be announced on that event. This means that all Nikon websites will be updated with the new products around midnight on February 2nd (tomorrow). I am still not sure if this will be the event for the new lenses or there will be a separate release date - the time frame "in few days" doesn't tell us much (unfortunately, I do not have any contact info on that source).

Anyway, the lenses are coming for sure before PMA.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

    “in few days” does not sound right. how about “in a few days”.

    Anyway, hope that 16-35/4 is ture.

    • MrMoo

      “ture” does not sound right. How about “true”.

      • carl

        “.2 seconds into the first round, Mr. Moss wins by knockout. DNHJR may never recover.”

        • carl

          oops … “Mr. Moo,” not “Moss”.

      • Anonymous

        lol mrmoo got owned.

  • zeeGerman

    How often has there been a lens only update? Aren’t most of the dSLR announcement a combination of lens and body updates?

    • WoutK89

      no, look at the 35/1.8 DX last year.

      • zeeGerman

        You are right, it did happen before, but I was asking how often, the chances are rather speaking for a combined announcement, I think.

        On the other hand, we haven’t seen a really fast wide angle in a very long time, plus a f/4 zoom is also something many are hoping for.
        This might be bold enough.

        • WoutK89

          You can check at Nikon Worldwide (nikonimaging.com) for the press release dates of all previous announcements. I am too lazy to look for you 😛

        • D900_Buyer

          Sorry for asking a dumb question… Why an f4 zoom? Why not 16-35mm f2.8? Is this simply so that the lens will be less expensive?

          • Anonymous

            it is vr…. but i agree!

          • WoutK89

            And smaller/lighter

  • isitfebyet?

    So if/when there is a second press event, and if/when there are lenses and possibly DSLR(s) in that event, what is the time frame for those products to get into stores/online sellers for the average joe (a.k.a. me) to get one? one month? two months? I’m chomping at the bit to update my D100 and having a very hard time with all this waiting/uncertainty.

    • zeeGerman

      two month might cut it a bit too close, but usually within 3 months. Amazon seems to be one of the first to be served (from the big ones), and their advantage over many other bigger ones, is that they accept pre-orders at an very early stage.
      to be among the first ones to be served, I recommend to place a pre order asap.

    • no Nikon DLSRs on the horizon

      • Roger

        This makes sense since I don’t think Canon is releasing anything else this month.

        They aren’t going to PMA. So why didn’t they release a new body for CES? All they released was the 70-200L 2.8 IS II. It’s been three years since the 1DMk3, and they released the MkIV ahead of schedule by a few months because the Olympics start shortly.

        So if Canon isn’t releasing a new body, Nikon isn’t going to either. Maybe they’re both waiting to see what Sony decides to do with the A700 replacement. If it doesn’t have video, I don’t think we’ll see more improvements on the video side for a while. But then Sony adds video, you’ll see some rapid deployment on the C/N cameras to upgrade their offering, since Sony has a leg up on even Canon when it comes to camcorders. (More experience than Canon)

        • PHB

          I think you have it backwards. Nikon and Canon are not going to say to themselves, ‘what are we going to show at PMA’ and then decide to make a new camera. They make the cameras and lenses and then the marketing folk are told to go sell them.

          If the body is ready for PMA timeframe it will be announced at PMA, otherwise not.

          Low end products such as the coolpix can be planned for launch because they will have a facelift rev every year regardless. Even if nothing new is added there will be a new case, new colour or whatever.

          The 16-35 may be interesting. I had not really thought about it, but the real interest in the lens may be that it is a different zoom range to the trinity. If you care about weight you probably prefer to carry two lenses rather than three. A 16-35 plus a 35-150 probably covers 90% of the shots you would use the trinity for.

          It will be very interesting to compare the performance of the 16-35 FX on a D700 with the performance for the 10-24 DX on a D300/D300s.

          Of course that is going to mean that the price of a D300 + 14-24mm is going to be awfully similar to the price of a D700 + 16-35.

          • rhlpetrus

            No, D700+16-35 will be much more expensive than D300+10-24. Each FX piece will be/is more expensive than the DX counterpart. My guess: 16-35mm f/4 ~ USD1,100.00

          • On the topic of the NEW “holy trinity”… (14-24, 24-70, 70-200)

            I think for landscape photographers, the “holy trinity” will be:

            16-35 f/4 VR, + 70-200 f/4 VR. This is how Canon did it, and both of those lenses are pretty impressive for sharpness. Throw in a pocket-sized 50 1.4 to fill the range gap and off-set the fact that your other options are limited to f/4, and you’ve got the landscapers trinity! Either that or a macro 50 like the Sigma 50 2.8, depending on which is more important to you as a landscape photographer; macro or low-light…


  • Bob

    The last camera I want is a coolpix

  • low

    yay for NR!

  • I’m tired waiting for that D900, I’ll call Nikon right now !

    • GlobalGuy

      Haven’t you heard the news about the D900? Its not coming…..


  • Few days before a release I get too excited (especially when I know what’s coming) and when I get excited I make mistakes, so I have to be very careful what I write on NR in the next 48 hours in order not to confuse anyone.

    • WoutK89

      I am already confused, getting three new threads within an hour, instead of just updating the old post 😉

      • Louis

        hey no being hard on the man who’s organizing all this!

        • Michael


      • This time I will be writing a new post for every news. Updating existing posts is not good because all RSS, twitter, facebook and email subscribers won’t get the updates and I got multiple complains about that during the last announcement.

        • WoutK89

          Then at least, just a hint, close comments on the older ones, if the topic is the same, to prevent people from saying the same in multiple threads 😉

          • Tired

            Or maybe you could possibly not be so down on not only the Admin but Everyone?! You seem to never have anything good to say. You are Mr. Negative. You have been for months. Never anything positive. You seem to never have any constructive or positive, just dowing everything everyone says. Why is that?

          • WoutK89

            So, I have a stalker, that only reads my comments? How about reading into it, then you get that I am not only negative. I am just sick of people repeating themselves in every single post, IT IS A RUMOR SITE, no one but Nikon knows exactly what will come… Learn to wait, be patient, and learn to search for facts if you cant seem to get a grip on things

          • WoutK89

            I hope you have a good day 🙂

    • Anonymous

      sounds dangerous like a dangerous predicament… excited = mistakes lol 😉

      • yes, for example the 100% post is against my own policy 🙂
        100% is when Nikon makes the announcement – I should have gone with 99% but got too excited and wanted to share the news. Live and learn…



    • WoutK89

      Wow, you said exactly the same, but with a different avatar, in CAPS, in the 100% thread 😛

  • Ed

    I’m curious as to
    1. How much the 24mm 1.4 is ($1500-$2100)?
    2. How fat is it going to be?

    I patiently await…… and now I gotta go scrounge up some funds.

    • WoutK89

      You might wanna take a look how big the lens is on Bob Krist’s camera, if that’s the 24/1.4, or you can look at the size of the Canon version.

  • Louis

    maybe the nikon guy stated that they plan on surprising everyone because very few people know what will be released…. hence surprising us all at least concerning the exact specs….?
    …..perhaps this is the publicity stunt wording of steve jobs on the iPad “the most important thing i’ve ever done” 😀

  • JBL

    I wish it was a 28 1.4 rather than a 24 1.4…

    • LGo

      Now why would you want it in 28mm instead of 24mm?

      • DNHJR

        I think I would like 28mm also. I love my 28/2.8, but a 1.4 would be great. 28mm would have less distortion the 24mm

        • GlobalGuy

          Exactly, 24 is way too wide. It truly begins to define super-wide, pushing things back very obviously. Remember, that at the wide-end even a few mm makes a big difference.

          28-35mm is a wonderful range though. Its wide, but within an artistic normal range. You can use it for landscape as well as for events where you dont want things pushed back. I personally like about 28-30mm. Some people like 35. Some people like 24.

          I’m hoping that if Nikon is making a 24/1.4, they are keeping the door open for a 30/1.4 or 35/1.4 later on.

          • LGo

            Hard to see how the 24mm would be considered as ultra-wide in a Nikkor FX World of 14-24mm f/2.8 and 17-35mm f/2.8, and now the new 16-35mm f/4.

          • When you shoot people, 24 is un-deniably wide. I’d much rather have a 28 1.4, or better yet a 35 1.4. I wouldn’t have to worry so much about ladies arms getting distortedly fat when they stand at the edge of my frame… 😛


    • photonut

      And I wish it would be f2.8 instead of f1.4

      • full frame freddie

        Why? Seriously…Why?

        • DNHJR

          Maybe because a 1.4 is going to cost $2000 or more.

          I would not mind a 28 f/2 around the size of the 50/1.4G.

        • photonut

          weight and size.

      • WoutK89

        I think f/2.0 is enough to keep costs and size low.

    • Pat Mann

      A number of reasons for Nikon to bring out a 24mm f/1.4 rather than a 28mm f/1.4:

      24mm is a more useful lens for DX – a 37mm equivalent f/1.4 for DX fills a more important hole in the DX line than a 43mm equivalent f/1.4. It’s a significantly wider angle than the 35mm DX.

      Lots of people who would want a 28mm f/1.4 already have the 28mm f/1.4.

      24 is the new 28. It IS the threshold of superwide, as others have stated. Technology should have advanced to the state at which Nikon can introduce a 24mm f/1.4 even better than their 28mm f/1.4, for (I’m optimistic here) the same price.

      And once they bring this out, they can get back to the lab and bring the same formula out as a 16mm f/1.4 for DX. That’s what I’M talkin about. Something sweet for my D400x, or s, or sx, whatever.

      I can’t wait to see what they do with this lens. Will this introduce the heavy construction of the f/2.8 zooms to primes, or willl they stick with the aesthetic of the 28mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.4? Or something completely new?

  • Bert

    So, what is the “suprise” that Thom is talking about? Where is my 35mm 1.4?

    • ttl

      Thom doesn’t know sh*t – on dpreview he said that admin’s list of lenses is not correct, but now we have that at 100%. Regarding the “surprise”, I think he is talking about the interview posted here earlier (last week I think).

      • PHB

        I don’t know that Thom said anything about this next announcement specifically. All Thom would know is that Nikon have some new lens design in really advanced testing that is really likely to come out sometime in the next year.

        Thom’s list looks pretty compatible with the admin’s. Just don’t expect all of them to arrive in February.

    • b

      where is it?
      come on, where is it?
      make it happen!

  • Harvey Steeves

    these focal lengths do make some sort of sense – they can serve both the FX and DX markets at once. A 28/1.4 would not be wide enough for DX.

  • Here is Nikon’s surprise:
    A new DSLR with 3 sensors (DX size ?), one for each primary color, red, green, blue.
    Better colors and better sensitivity.
    Video cameras pro already have 3 sensors, why not in a DSLR ?

    • RumpelHund

      This would need some prism (size and geometry will never fit into a SLR body) and three times the sensor size in silicon, topping a d3x’s price by far. Furthermore the optics for 3CCD need to be exceptional well and alignment well in the sub-pixels would be way too expensive.

    • WoutK89

      You mean like a Foveon sensor? I would like that idea, if it makes the camera perform equal to or better than current sensors, but so far you lose resolution (3 x 4 MP is not 12 real megapixels but effectively still 4)

  • Alfamatrix

    anyone know about the 80-400mm replacement??
    or de 300mm f4 replacement?


    • WoutK89

      Only time will tell, if Admin knew, he would have shared, lucky enough you are not the only one waiting for those lenses 🙂

  • shivas

    to the poster above, the 24 1.4 will def be 4-5x the cost of the existing 24 2.8 prime (around $1999). It’ll hover close to the 14-24 2.8, which right now is at $1899.

    When I realized that, I decided to get the 24 2.8 at $260 used. . . .probably flares more, not as sharp, but SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper than whatever new one announced. . .

    • WoutK89

      Are you shooting FX, or DX? I think the 24 is still a decent performer for DX, just hope Nikon will come with anything like 35/1.8 but wider for DX.

  • Zorro

    Where are the DX primes?

    • SZRimaging

      The DX primes are the same ones you use on FX. Really, no reason Nikon shouldn’t make them compatible with both.

      • Pat Mann

        Once you get to 35mm and wider, the wider lenses can be much less expensive if made specifically for DX. As the angle of view goes up, the price goes up dramatically with all the sharp curves, wide glass and aspherics. Since the FX lenses have to be built for a much wider angle of view, they’re much more expensive than they need to be if they were designed for DX.

        This isn’t so much a factor at 35 mm and longer.

    • huh

      ha ha. people have been waiting decades for fx primes and by the time they get around to DX primes we’ll be taking 3D pictures.

    • DX format was made because at the begining of the digitals SLR, the technology was not ready to produce FX sensors (DX sensors were cheaper).
      FX sensors are more efficients and give better results thank DX sensors.
      Many pro are now switching to FX cameras and it’s mostly pro who are interested in primes lenses so there is no point for Nikon to develop DX primes lenses.
      DX camera will be to the DSLR what “110 & 126” formats were to 24x36mm films.

      • WoutK89

        DX is to stay for the lightness, compactness and free “teleconverter”, although the D3X is pretty close to making that last statement obsolete, it is not affordable yet

      • PHB

        Nope, the ‘advantage’ in the FX format comes from two issues.

        The first is that bigger glass means more light is reaching the sensor. So if you have a longer focal length lens with the same f/stop number giving you the same field of view, you have a bigger front element. A 50mm f/1.4 on DX format will give exactly the same light response as a 75mm f/2 on FX format. Tio get the speed ‘advantage’ you would have to use a 75mm f/1.4, a much larger and more expensive lens.

        Every other feature of the DX optical system is identical, same field of view, everything. Newtonian optics is scale invariant. OK so there is a slight scale issue in that the lens coatings have a specific thickness. But if you think Nikon or anyone else makes lenses to tolerances of nanometers you are wrong. The focusing cams are nowhere near that accurate.

        The only other advantage to the FX format is that at the wide end, the mirror sweep is less of a constraint.

        At the moment, the D300s has exactly the same speed response as the D700. There is no advantage to the FX format unless you buy the D3s. As for the idiots demanding f/4 ‘lightweight’ FX glass, they are victims of Canon FUD. If you want lightweight buy a DX body.

        That said, I can see the DX format going away in about five years time as the MX format takes hold. If you don’t require more than 24MP and you can cope with ISO 1600 as your max ISO, the MX format is likely to be the one to go for. The DSLR is going to own pro-photography for decades, but the D3000/D5000 range will head off to MX land.Today, DX is the best compromise between weight and performance for most, but I can see that going to separate camera technologies for general purpose (MX) and low light / sports (FX DSLR).

        • Sorry “PHB”, your logic is dumb. You completely ignore the high ISO quality of the FX format. If you think DX format is the Jesus format, then by the same logic a PS with a 1/2.5″ sensor is better than DX since the sensor is smaller. The D300s and the D700 are not the same, the larger sensor is what makes the quality show. I mean the sensor of FX is twice as large as DX.
          Most of my indoor shots are done without a flash, and all of these shots would never have even happened if I was on a DX.

        • Kuv

          f/1.4 is f/1.4 no matter what size the sensor is. Period. Does the D3x lose a stop of light when you switch to DX mode? A 50mm 1.4 is NOT like a 75mm 2.0 n DX. It has an angle of view of a 75mm, the dof of a 50mm 1.4, and receives the amount of light trough an f/1.4 aparture.

      • fotosniper

        Im a pro and im much more interested in carrying a few good zooms than a whole bag of primes. and thanks to the holy trinity nikon has proved that zooms can outperform primes. only fringe shooters want all these primes.

        • longtimenikonshooter

          exactly. take a look at joe mcnally’s bag. how many primes he’s got?

          “Nikon Lenses

          AF-S VR Zoom NIKKOR 200–400mm f/4 IF-ED

          AF-S VR NIKKOR 200mm f/2 IF-ED

          AF-S VRII Zoom NIKKOR 70–200mm f/2.8G

          AF-S VR Micro NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED

          AF-S NIKKOR 24–70mm f/2.8G ED

          AF-S NIKKOR 14–24mm f/2.8G ED

          AF Fisheye NIKKOR 16mm f/2.8D

          AF-S Auto Focus Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

          AF-S VR NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G

          AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II”


          • This is what I have (and all I need in my bag):
            Nikkor 20mm f/2.8 AF-D
            Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 (excellent but feel like a plastic toy)
            Nikkor 105mm macro AF-S f/2.8
            Nikkor 300mm f/4 AF-S VRII (well, not yet)

        • tim

          Ah the never ending prime/zoom debate. I carry a 24mm 2.8 (interested to see, what the 1.4 will look like), a 50mm 1.4, a 16mm fish and a 70 200 2.8. I must say its a much lighter bag than those bulky 24-70s, and 14-24s.

        • Obviously you haven’t seen a wedding photo lately. Primes are ALL the rage with portrait photographers…



  • Alfamatrix

    mmmm i want to buy that 16-35!!! just have to wait…
    does anyone no..about the new telephotos..?
    thank you very much!!

  • Zorro

    DX will remain as the mainstream format – hence the need for DX primes. There are plenty of FX primes now and the FX fad will soon subside.

    • NikoDoby

      Yeah you’re right the 35mm format has been around for what like 50 years and it never really caught on. APS film, now that’s the wave of the future! 🙂

      • Zorro

        Yeah, and 8 x 10 and 4 x 5 single sheet has been around for how long? How much are they used today?

        • Who still uses 4×5 and 8×10? Veteran, gallery exhibiting landscape photographers like Rodney Lough Jr, Peter Lik, Thomas Mangelsen, Clyde Butcher. You’d get laughed out of town, shooting DX and calling yourself a master-class landscape photographer.

          (I actually strongly advocate DX for adventure photography, don’t get me wrong. I really think it’s a great option. And when they make a 24 MP D700 kinda body, FX will be an amazing option as well. But that still doesn’t match an 8×10 Velvia, when you’re making a massive gallery print…)


      • PHB

        If Nikon APS cameras had outsold 35mm cameras by 20 to 1 then they probably would be considered the wave of the future.

    • WoutK89

      There is no problem with FX primes, they are backwards compatible with DX, DX lenses however…, not so much

    • Astrophotographer

      DX is popular in the amateur market. That market prefers zooms. The pro market wants IQ, where FX has the edge. Any primes will likely target FX.

      • Pat Mann

        Amateurs who want lens speed like the lower price and lighter weight of the f/2 prime lenses compared to the pro zooms.

        Amateurs who like available-light shooting want a nice f/1.4 wide lens as well. Maybe not a whole collection, but a 50 and a 25? That’s nice. And a 16mm just for DX.

        • huh

          I just don’t see it happening given the main buyers of expensive high end optics is the professional market which can be asked to pay upwards of 1k for lenses and they will. Even if they shoot DX (which some pros do), they know an FX lens will perform better since they are using the best part of the lens (the center). The majority of DX users, simply do not care to pay more than their camera’s worth on a lens that doesn’t zoom.

    • huh

      plenty of FX primes there are. however nikon’s full frame line up has the following huge gap for AF-S lenses:

      nikon simply needs to keep addressing those gaps so that it can keep the professional market happy.

      As far as the DX market, there is already two normal primes. That’s one more than FX which only has one (50G). Thus it makes total sense for nikon to let the DX market enjoy the selection of DX zooms and DX primes while addressing the needs of the professional market.

    • huh

      with the two major dslr makers charging full steam ahead, this fad isn’t going anywhere. What I do see is DX being pushed to even more basic models and eventualy excuded from the professional body lineups completely.

  • Gordon

    Sigh…no new DSLR bodies on the horizon 🙁 Nikon seem content on turtling along.

    • longtimenikonshooter

      Nikon wants to get all the juices from the current line up before adding new.

  • Bob

    All I want is a 24 mm/1.4 (so, great news) and a 35 mm/1.4 (please), that’s all I need.

  • Rob

    Any chance of the P7000 here? I was about to pick up a p6000 until I read about there being a possible replacement in the works!

  • MichaelStano

    I almost placed an order for a 14-24 over the weekend. Then, I stumbled on the rumors of a 16-35. I get that it would take filters, and the 14-24 can’t. I get that the 16-35 is likely to be an f/4, and maybe $700 cheaper. But, price aside, is there anything in the rumor mill about the 16-35, or other wide zoom, that would seriously challenge the quality of the 14-24, and cause me to wait to order the 14-24?

    TIA for any insights.


  • Back to top