Weekly Nikon news flash #239

→ Rare Nikon 13mm f/5.6 lens listed on eBay for AU $50,000 (approximately US $45,000).

Mastering the Nikon D610 book
→ New book: Mastering the Nikon D610.

Nikon-COOLPIX-P330-fotoguide Nikon-COOLPIX-P520-fotoguide Das-Nikon-1-System-Handbuch Nikon-D7100-Das-Handbuch-zur-Kamera
→ New Nikon books in German language:

→ Nikon D5200 DSLR camera equipped with a FSA-L2 field scope adapter and the EDG VR Fieldscope 20-60×85 for a total of 2,625mm focal length.

→ Watch this Nikon D800E camera in a remote controlled buggy gets attacked by a pride of 8 lions and the resulting images (by Chris McLennan).

Zeiss 55mm f:1.4 Otus lens compared with the Nikon 58mm f:1.4
→ Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus lens compared with the Nikon 58mm f/1.4.

nikon-logo  Disney-logo
→ Nikon becomes the official camera of Walt Disney World and Disneyland Resorts.

→ I guess this is big deal: Nikon Corporation has been selected for inclusion in the Ethibel EXCELLENCE Investment Register.

This entry was posted in Weekly Nikon News Flash. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Neopulse

    The Disney World I could have sent it before. They all have D90s in Magic Kingdom and Animal Kingdom the ones that take pics. Including SB-700 flashes as I recall with the battery pack also. Also they had in their belts a wi-fi transmitter that sent the pics automatically.

    • 103David

      I didn’t understand a single thing you said. How ’bout you quit drinking about an hour before you post?

      • Neopulse

        That Nikon has been sponsoring Disney World for years already. Just don’t know why now the post about it, that’s all. “I could have sent it before,” meaning the tip about it obviously.

        • 103david

          Still didn’t understand a single thing on that last post either. Perhaps a confab with a native English speaker? And maybe two hours non-alcohol this time?

          • Neopulse

            Well if you didn’t understand that last post then you probably have dyslexia buddy.

            • 103David

              Hardly, how about sober up & try again. Still trying to figure out what your problem with “Disney World” is.
              Maybe try “come the dawn, forego the bourbon eyeopener” today…for a change?

            • Neopulse

              Since you are so adamant on talking about alcohol and not laissez-faire. You should definitely resolve your daddy or mommy issues, were they drinkers?

      • Jorge

        Made my morning. “…quit drinking…” LOL

    • Elvir Redzepovic

      Lay off drugs!

    • EneMiGo

      A 40MP camera. Only 4 MP higher the the D800/E. Has shitty ISO handling. Larger Body then the D800/E. SD cards ONLY? For that size of file? Cost is double the D800. What fool would purchase that? /golfclap

      • Jeff Hunter

        …also 3 less stops of dynamic range and as you said, very limited ISO range. Only a clueless fool would buy one of those boat anchors instead of a D800!!!

        • Fedupoftrolls

          Have you got one, because you sound like a clueless fool if you don’t understand why people use medium format?

          • Jeff Hunter

            I’ve been doing photography since 1963. I don’t need any advice from you! Medium format is fine if you stay in the studio and have plenty of strobe power.

            Outdoors (and indoors), a D800 is far more versatile. Specification wise it out shines today’s medium formats. Have you got one??? If not, and you enjoy OUTDOOR photography, I highly recommend it!

            If you want to continue to blow money on medium format then keep at it!

            • Fedupoftrolls

              I wasn’t giving you advice, just stating a fact. Medium format has its uses, and ignorant remarks are not called for. And I don’t really care that you have “been doing photography since 1963”. That means nothing, and I think there’s a clue in the phrase “doing photography”, whatever that means. And yes, I do have a D800, and it’s a fine camera, though I’m not always happy with its colour rendition straight out of the camera.

            • desmo

              If your fed up of trolls,

              Why are you trolling?

            • Jeff Hunter

              I apologize for the snarky reply. I’ve stopped taking jpegs altogether, although there are adjustments that can be made to adjust the jpeg output if that’s what you’re referring to. I only do RAW with the D800 and post processing in LR 5. Again my apologies for any and all rude remarks.

          • MyrddinWilt

            Because they don’t understand optics?

            If you look at the optical formulas, the distance between the focal node (point where the light rays cross over) to the focusing screen makes virtually no difference to the depth of field or any other factor. Since you can make the image focused on the sensor as large or small as you like just by moving the focusing screen backwards or forwards, the sensor size simply does not matter.

            What does matter is the size of your lenses. A lens with a 70mm aperture will give a thinner DoF than one with a 35mm aperture. The Pentax lenses are essentially the same size as the equivalent field of view F-mount lenses but they have a lower f/stop number because the nominal focal lengths are different.

            I have been pointing out that the F-mount is going to eat the medium format cameras round about 2016 for quite a while. Hassy will probably survive but they will be niche products like Leica’s.

            The problem is simple: Volume drives sensor costs. It costs about a million bucks to set up a mask set for a new VLSI chip. Nikon spread that cost over several million units a year. The medium format companies spread it over a few tens of thousands. So Nikon has state of the art sensors and the medium format sensors are made in 2008 technology. So even with enormous sensor sites the medium format cameras only deliver ISO 800 performance.

      • Neopulse

        Ummm…. I still made my point that the 645D DOES have higher resolution than the D800/E. So, don’t get why you made such a in depth remark about it. Plus, it is a great camera.

      • Neopulse

        Also forgot to mention, the Pentax 645D was release BEFORE the Nikon D800/E in 2010. At that time no one even knew of the Rumors of the D800 that came out in 2012. So relax with your one-sided comments “enemy.”

      • It’s all very well to point out the D800E may be a better all-round camera or better for the purpose than alternatives, but the claim that the D800E is the highest resolution DSLR is flat out wrong (and kind of dumb — as your comments point out, resolution isn’t everything). There’s also the Leica S2 and a bunch of really high end stuff (Hasselblads for example) which are also DSLRs.

    • Oklahoma, the musical, you could have taken the nails out of that 2 X 4. Wanda ate her Ricoh and I, the other guy, with my service record and compass. That’s what you get when you order.

      • Cantinflas

        We are arguing, because we are. But why? And you can tell me, and I can answer. Fundamental reasons that any person can understand, and they are three: the first, the second, and the third. Who would have thought? But it is what it is.

      • Neopulse

        I do admit, was rather incomplete what I wrote before, then again it was late when I did :-/

        • It was all done in fun.

          • Neopulse

            No worries, I got it. Made me chuckle reading it.

    • saywhatuwill

      I was on a cruise to Mexico with 3 other families. We were all dressed up for the “official” pictures from the ship’s photographers. I decided to pull out the Hasselblad and shoot some “official” pictures of us on the curving staircase. Depth of field was a bitch and I had to choose who was going to be in focus and who wasn’t. I had to use a really slow shutter speed of 1 second to balance the light and one flash that was mounted on the prism. I only had 5 frames left so each shot had to count. I emphasized to everyone NOT TO MOVE. They all did a great job for the most part. I got the chromes back and one or two were very underexposed, but thanks to digital scanning I was able to get something. I printed them out in my darkroom and the photos are hanging in each of our family homes.

      So, the funny thing was that when we were done shooting on the staircase I turned around and saw there was a line forming behind us. Everyone thought I was the official photographer! Heck, why not, I had a Hasselblad. 😉 I had to send them off disappointed.

      • Jeff Hunter

        Yeah right! The average person doesn’t know the difference between 35mm and medium format. They just assumed you were the “official” photographer because you were the one making photos when they walked up.

        I’ve also realized from experience that the photographer that has the largest camera is assumed to have the most knowledge of photography by the general public.

        Here’s a little perspective for you; today’s high end digital cameras, be they medium format or Nikon D800s, have resolving power (i.e., image quality) far beyond what any high grade printer can reproduce. This also includes printed magazines as well as 1080p televisions or computer screens. The recently introduced 4K televisions have 2160 lines of vertical pixels and they are still less than half of the vertical pixels an uncropped Nikon D800 photo produces.

        So, therefore, the practical application of these high megapixel cameras is that you can crop much smaller segments of the photo and still maintain adequate image quality. It’s like shooting 35mm with a 200mm lens and being able to crop as if you were shooting with an $18,000 Nikon 800mm lens. Pretty damn useful, isn’t it?

        • saywhatuwill

          Seeing that a higher end digital at the time was a D200 and the fact I didn’t own a digital camera it really didn’t matter that a D800 is that good.

          I don’t doubt you about the general public’s perception though.

          • Jeff Hunter

            I understand your point now. Thanks for the clarification. A Hassy vs. a D200 no contest. In that context, great story!

      • Neopulse

        You took a Hassey on a cruise? Lucky bastard. I say this because I wouldn’t think of taking an MF camera out of my place (if I owned one of course), because down here it’s so rough they’ll kill you in front of a huge, public place and walk away like nothing.


        In Spanish I know. But the place “Retiro” is a big bus station here.

        • saywhatuwill

          A Hasselblad film camera costs far less than a digital so nowadays the loss won’t be as devastating.

  • Ronan

    Fun photos of the photo-safari!

  • Siva Kumar D

    more than the animals, watching these guys going crazy over the images was very amusing!!

  • 103David

    Fabulous! Sort of reminds me of the lion artificial-insemination project…complete with predictable results. You don’t want to know what happened to the condom.

    • Global

      If they are using condoms while attempting to inseminate something, they are doing it the wrong way. =p

      • Neopulse

        Well he isn’t wrong. He actually mentioned about a ridiculously expensive business that happens in the world.

        • 103david

          Still don’t understand anything neopulse says. This was about lions, right? How lame can one possibly be to morph into an (apparently) proto-dissertation on…what? World domination by…Fuji? Really…what?

      • 103David

        Always nice to know someone got the joke.

  • Elvir Redzepovic

    Speaking of wide angle rare Nikons, there is probably nothing out there that beats this fisheye Nikkor 6mm f/2.8 lens. Although 100 000£ is “little bit” out of my league 😉


    • Assaad

      Good luck trying to put this lens on the small 4×4 rover 😛 (it’s 5.2 Kg)

      • Elvir Redzepovic

        I am sure that whoever would buy this would not put it on any rover and if they decided that is what they want to do anybody who has 100 000£ to spend on a lens can buy powerfull enough rover or have themself one built from scratch to support weight.

  • Marc J.

    better off just sending a regular rc car in since the photos from the zoom lens were fantastic and the the “buggy” photos looked no better than attaching a GoPro.

    • saywhatuwill

      But they’re 36MP vs 1080p (less than…well, most of the D800E sensor). He can make posters from the D800E shots.

    • Dave

      So you think a youtube video is a good way to judge the d800e’s picture quality?

      • Marc J.

        The D800’s picture quality is great on the zoom shots — but let’s just be honest here — from watching the video which is posted on youtube (where it will get it’s exposure primarily) then, yes, yes I do.

        The GoPro Hero 3 at 1080p produces some killer video quality and pretty excellent stills — frankly, on par with what he got out of these. You could have sent a Nikon d3100 with a fisheye lens and got the same quality too.

        Sure, the d800e is higher quality — but the scenario doesn’t take advantage of it. That’s my point.

  • saywhatuwill

    I love the lion pictures!

  • jk

    so will there be any kind of real D700 successor for us?
    and when will we get a AF-S300mm f4GED Vr lens?
    tired of waiting a decent 300mm f4 lens with VR.

    • neversink

      I hope you are joking…

    • groucher

      Just use Nikon’s fabulous 300mm f4 lens carefully – no need for VR which in any case, only does half a job.

      • fred

        ‘Half a job’, yes.
        VR is only useful in low light (slow shutter speeds). If you have bright sun and can get greater than 2000th sec with a 300mm lens you don’t need VR on. Some birders switch VR off at high shutter speeds.
        High shutter speeds are even easier to maintain now with the newer better higher ISO cameras/sensors.
        Half a job, ( maybe first 2 hours, last 2 hours of day is useful).

  • fjfjjj

    What a greenwash is this “Ethibel” thing. Nikon is part of the Mitsubishi empire of gross environmental irresponsibility.

    • groucher

      As is anyone who buys any of their products – at least they would be if Ethibel itself was anything other than green guff.

  • neversink

    Living in Africa, I am not thrilled by yet another interference to disturb the animals in Africa. This use of a robot is not new. Yes, National Geographic did an amazing story using a series of these remote controlled camera robotic vehicles. However, they spent more than a year studying the animals and weren’t really satisfied with the pics until the animals ignored the robots and went back to their daily life of survival. My fear is that everyone will now be launching these devices and just get cute pics of animals fascinated by a robotic device. There is enough pressure on the wildlife in Africa. Perhaps I am over reacting. I think the photos are great, but I just hate seeing wild animals being played with like this.

    • Plug

      To a degree I agree, and when I find myself, as I often do, in the African wild then I like to be as unobtrusive as possible. But I have seen lions behaving exactly this way with a tortoise and I don’t think that this interaction has affected these lions at all. Of course if every casual visitor goes out of their way to interact then the situation would be different and negative. If you are just a tourist then slowly, quietly, unobtrusively and show respect. The guiding principle is that the animals’ welfare is absolutely more important than your photography. Believe me, you will still get great shots.

      • neversink

        Your last sentence says it all. Unfortunately, I have witnessed some tourists make their “guise” chase the lions during a hunt and interrupt the hunt just for a photo. I have admonished these people on a number of occasions and their drivers if they are with a guide, and if I don’t speak their language, we say it in Kiswahili to the driver and he translates it. Of course, we have to also deal with unscrupulous poachers and other illegal activities.

        • MyrddinWilt


          You are lower than low sir? If you go hunting wildlife don’t go complaining about what other people who aren’t killing them are doing.

          Hope you find yourself hunting them with a pointy stick rather than a gun and no shoes either. Or rather, them hunting you.

          • Plug

            I think neversink was referring to the interruption of the lions hunting their prey?!?! If you ever go to the Masai Mara you will see the awful behaviour of many guides egged on by their ignorant clients. Hunts are regularly disrupted and cats go hungry, it is difficult to see why such people are there in the first place. By the way, hunting by humans of big game is illegal in Kenya.

            • neversink

              Thank you Plug, I have replied to MyrddinWilt with some suggestions on how to help wildlife. If people are going to go on safari, I suggest they use one of the smaller tented eco-camps where clients are limited, the guides are knowledgable and love and respect the animals and where the human footprint is minimal.
              Most of the good guides will not break the law or harass the animals. However there are more and more resorts going up in these fragile areas, and their guides are often, but not always, as well trained.

          • neversink

            What are you talking about. Please read my post carefully before you assume that I hunt. I do not hunt big game, or little game. It’s illegal to hunt big game in Kenya, where I live, or in many other African countries. Unfortunately, some countries like South Africa allow hunting of big game on private reserves.
            And even more unfortunately there is incredible criminal poaching encouraged by the Chinese demand for ivory, and rhino horns.
            No need for an apology. However,if you feel so strongly about wildlife, please start an organization to embarrass the Chinese government into making ivory trading illegal, and for them to destroy all their ivory and their trinkets and to close down the fourth floor of the Beijing Jewelry center, where ivory carvings and trinkets are sold. And to make the selling and trade of ivory illegal in China. They can make carvings on wood, plastic, stone, bone, but there is no need for China to be the major contributor to the destruction of Africa’s wildlife heritage. And please donate to the Wildlife Conservation Society in NY and the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust in Kenya, an orphanage for baby elephants and rhinos whose parents and families have been slaughtered by these heinous individuals. Thank you!!!!

    • R!

      I’ll go farther and say:this is again a non scientific stupid act of human beeing egoist comportment that is killing today documentary sector.
      I usually find old documentary on wild life more interesting because of the want to get a more scientific aproach and not wanting to have spectacular images like most of today cruel and nonsense films that you can see on cable chanels (specially in the US).
      Mankind will never understand.

      • mikeswitz

        Off your meds again?

        • R!

          Are you on drug or some!?you probably the one needing meds ,personally I don’t even need aspirin I’m a healthy youg man full of power.
          You probably a sad dude with nothing to say.
          Get a life.
          I and some people we’re saving the planet.

          • Polygon

            yes. much save. very planet

            • orpickaname

              No man is an island. No island is a planet. But I AM a No-man. Mwahahahahaha.

            • Dpablo unfiltered

              Do you come from the land?

          • zoetmb

            I have to disagree. I consider myself an environmentalists and wild animal lover and I contribute much money to help organizations that support this. I see nothing wrong with wildlife photography, including the photography accomplished by Discovery and the BBC, which is quite spectacular and IMO, does much to save the remaining wildlife and ecosystems in the world by driving interest in these amazing animals. If people don’t feel a relationship to these animals there is no chance they’ll be saved. These media outlets help accomplish that. It’s hard enough saving them even with the appeal that they have against the economic interests that are all too willing to destroy their habitat, whether that be local farmers burning down the rainforest in the Amazon or international conglomerates exploiting natural resources just about everywhere.

            The one thing I would be concerned about is damage to habitat caused by masses of tourists, building of hotels, damage to water supplies, etc. but we live in a world of lesser evils, and in order to get local populations to give up hunting (legal or illegal), they’ve been encouraged to base their economies on eco-tourism instead of hunting. So don’t complain when eco-tourism happens.

            I don’t think a camera pointed at a lion from a distance really has a major negative impact on that lion. Let’s not over-react. 100 years ago these animals were hunted to almost-extinction. We’ve come a long way.

    • Ronan

      We’ll send you next time with a Nikon D800 to get photos up close of lions 🙂

      • Elvir Redzepovic

        You are aware that there are telephoto lenses right ? Or that there are safari guides that will take very close to lions without putting you in danger, shooting from prepared cars made for that purpose. If you wan’t to be sarcastic at least try not embarrass yourself while doing it.

        • Degsy

          Someone in need of a humour transplant

      • neversink

        OK, just give me an 800mm lens with that D800 and a vehicle.
        And one more time. I enjoyed the pics of the lions. I am just worried about a possible trend occurring.

    • Squidward

      I live in Africa for many years too. I’d rather see these camera jockeys looking for a new and more interesting shot, than those vile creatures who go into the bush and kill everything that moves. Over the years, the number of guns has reduced and cameras increased.

      I do laugh though. Everyone with an DSLR is a ‘professional’ photographer. I had one guy who had an old beat up film SLR, and two very old lenses, one of which was wrapped in a hankey. He told me he shot for a magazine. Not unless it was ‘Antique Camera Enthusiast.’ Still, at least he didn’t have a gun.

      • Kynikos


        Africa’s not my bag, Antarctica is. While Antarctic tourism very mildly disrupts the nature down there, the understanding it creates goes a long way to trying to protect Antarctica overall.

        Very much a lesser-of-evils deal.

        • Neopulse

          Have to ask, why the Antarctic? I’m asking since I got turned off by an acquaintance of mine that said it was terrible place (he was working there at a base) and that he didn’t see anything of interest except other than the Australis :-/

          • Kynikos

            It’s not for everybody. I like the vast emptiness. Gives me a sense of peace.

      • Polygon

        Steve McCurry shot his best work and still shoots on an “old beat up” nikon fm2.

        • R!

          Sometimes he uses F6 also,I love Mc Curry is a real Artist and the F6 is the best from Nikon for sure.

      • zoetmb

        Actually, that guy with the old film SLR is more likely to have been a pro than an obnoxious rich guy with the $18,000 800mm, a bunch of other lenses and 2-3 D4s. Pros have to work on a budget and know that the camera is just a tool. Rich guys think they can achieve photographic success just by purchasing the most expensive thing they can find. Then they come on forums like this and complain that the camera sucks because their results weren’t very good.

        Some years ago, an acquaintance of mine who knew absolutely nothing about photography (didn’t even know what an f-stop meant) bought himself a new F4. That really made me laugh. He seemed pissed when I told him that it was way too much camera for him, especially since he almost never shot anything but family snapshots. Years, later, he’s shooting digital and his spouse didn’t let him spend a ton of money, he still doesn’t know anything about photography, but he shoots on Auto and he’s happy (when he can figure out how to get the images off of the memory card and onto the computer.)

        • Squidward

          I quite agree with your point, however if you’d seen this guy (who had a beard and a cardigan) carefully unwrapping his zoom lens from an old hankerchief you would have doubted his story too. I wanted to take a photo just so I could provide visual aids when I recounted the story later, but the opportunity never presented itself.

          Most, if not all, are just amateurs enjoying their hobby – as I was. I work on the theory that those who are, don’t tell you. Those who want to be, tell everyone.

    • Andy Aungthwin

      “My fear is that everyone will now be launching these devices and just get cute pics of animals fascinated by a robotic device.”

      Your fear is misdirected. It is up to the guides to determine what is and what is not acceptable.

      It is not possible for “everyone” to just turn up with robotic devices to get their cute photos. It is an expensive and even a risky project.

      This was done by professionals and what they did has a valid use, perhaps not necessarily in this instance or the way it was presented.

      To study nature up close you need to get up close. There is no better way.

      • neversink

        I wrote this below, but I will write it again.

        National Geographics used similar robots for more than a year. The lions got used to the robots, got bored with them, and stopped banging them around. Then Nat’l Geo was able to follow the lions around, study their habits and get photos of everyday lion life. I have nothing against scientific research. I just don’t want to see every safari vehicle equipped wit robotic devices.
        I have enough pics of lions, but will never get tired of photographing them. I meant no disrespect for the photographers who took these photos. My fear is that these robotic devices will become more common and even mass-produced. And that they will be on every safari vehicle. The cost of these robots is minimal compared to the cost of a safari.
        Yes, this is just a minor worry now, but their use could increase.. These animals have poachers, and new roads, and more resorts to deal with. The pressure on some of these animals is enormous.

        • zoetmb

          Don’t worry. There aren’t too many people who can either afford the robot or would be wiling to risk a camera like the D800 inside the robot. Besides, in the end, the shots taken from the distance (which we could tell because we saw the robot in the shots) were every bit as good as the shots taken with the robot, except for a very few.

          The bigger issue is going to be the use of drones. There’s an article in the NY Times today about that.

          By the way, I’d like to know what they shot the video with. Anyone know?

    • I dunno, looks to me like the lions were pretty playful with the camera. They were curious, grabbed it and had their fun with it. Perhaps from the animals’ point of view, this was something enlivening their lives?

      Just a different way of thinking of the situation …


      • orpickaname

        My thoughts exactly. Both parties two and four-legged animals seem to have some little fun, at least in this case.

        But I can imagine things going too far when some kids start equipping the buggy with mini rocket launchers…

        • True. Fortunately I don’t think most adults will invite kids on these trips, since I think they cost about $20k a person when all is said and done …

          • orpickaname

            I meant ‘adult kids’ hehe

  • Squidward

    Mastering the D610

    Chapter 1:
    It’s the same as the D600, but you don’t need to clean the sensor as much.

    The End.

  • User

    What is a “DSLE”?

  • stormwatch

    You see that nice manual aperture ring on the mighty 50,000$ Nikon 13mm lens? Well, you better buy some expensive silver auto spray to make it posh, it won’t work on a Df anyways!

    • Actually, that lens would work on a Df. Some of the other rare fisheye Nikkor lenses would not work.

    • Thyl Engelhardt

      From the times when Nikon was the dominant professional photo equipment maker of the world. How times have changed. And as Gordon said, it will work on the Df. There are a number of old wide angle lenses that require to move the mirror up, since they will intrude into the Body, but not this one.

  • Bob Loblaw

    You’re all just jealous that these shots weren’t captured by you. Interference and disturbance of animal life? Give me a break. How’s this any different than pet-cat owners giving them a furry ball to play with or a laser beam to chase? They weren’t endangering or harming these lions in any way. To me, the lions seemed playful with the camera/robot and were curious. It wasn’t like it was in mid-chase of its dinner and you fired off a rifle to change its destiny.

    • neversink

      National Geographics used similar robots for more than a year. The lions got used to the robots, got bored with them, and stopped banging them around. Then Nat’l Geo was able to follow the lions around, study their habits and get photos of everyday lion life. I have nothing against scientific research. I just don’t want to see every safari vehicle equipped wit robotic devices.
      I have enough pics of lions, but will never get tired of photographing them. I meant no disrespect for the photographers who took these photos. My fear is that these robotic devices will become more common and even mass-produced. And that they will be on every safari vehicle. The cost of these robots is minimal compared to the cost of a safari.
      Yes, this is just a minor worry now, but their use could increase.. These animals have poachers, and new roads, and more resorts to deal with. The pressure on some of these animals is enormous.

      • Bob Loblaw

        I can respect your concerns. I, too, am a lion lover (with an extensive collection of lion DVDs/documentaries, and am a leo [astrologically] myself).

        I was just taken aback by your overly-pessimistic concerns over this subject matter. The bottom line is that there was nothing inhumane about what the photographers were doing and no harm was done to the leos.

        I can bet a large sum of money that the WWF, and other organizations of the like, are well aware of these photographic techniques deployed by humans – and these humans I’m speaking of are photographers and NOT poachers or trophy-hunters. If the WWF et al. haven’t pinned red flags on this matter, it might not be “as bad” as YOU may think. (“As bad” in quotations because there isn’t “any bad” that I can see.)

        • neversink

          Your comments are well taken. However, i don’t think that a few robots out there will harm anything, but believe me, this could catch on. It is not cheap to go on safari, and those with the means will see that robots and drones are within their reach financially. Combine this with certain tourists who interfere too closely with a lion’s hunt and abort the hunt (which I have seen on a number of times, and have reported the guide.) All this only harms the lion in its quest for survival. View the animals from a distance, but don’t send in your mechanical toys and respect their right to live quietly, with little interference as possible, in the few areas left for them in this world.
          Poaching and hunting of these wild animals are both obviously heinous, but that is a different discussion. And destruction of habitat and climate change are also giant threats to these creatures.
          I’d guess that 90 percent of photos taken by tourists of lions are of the animals sleeping, or resting. It takes days and days to often find the animals in action.

  • 103david

    Doesn’t look like any lions were injured in the making of this video…only deserving Nikon product.
    This was not nearly as frightening as my last law school reunion.

  • Guest

    That 15mm was from a time when Nikon had boldness. Now they’re timid, and spend more time listening to the beancounters than to the engineers.
    Lions? Oh, yeah. Boring. But now I want a Fosters…

    • neversink

      Oops – you meant 13mm, but what is a two mm difference? About $44,000 in price difference!!!

  • AluKed

    I think this is worth some highlight, as well: the guys from nikonhacker.com got manual Shutter Speed and ISO control on the D5100 working.


    • I think I reported that few weeks ago.

      • AluKed

        IIRC, it previously required fiddling with the eeprom, something that most users can’t do. Now it’s just a firmware update, it seems.

        • I see, thanks. I will add in the next weekly post.

  • Bret M

    Damn the Zeiss beats the Nikon 58mm pretty hard. I still don’t understand the point of that 58mm lens, performance is great but not excellent, aperture great but not excellent, size is fine, focal length is meh. I mean, if it had been 58mm f/1.2 as the original then it would’ve made a little more sense and as least would have an excuse for being a little less sharp.

    Also, they’ve been using Nikon bodies (not lenses) at Disney for at least the last 10 years, originally outsourced to Colorvision which provided those bodies along with some sampling of Tamron superzooms. I guess the only real difference is that now all of those little “Kodak picture spots” will be come “Nikon picture spots.”

    And last comment, I wonder what the aperture equivalent of that field scope is mounted on that camera? f/16-ish?

    • Can’t Believe It

      That’s so sad, the Kodak picture spots were little yellow beacons of beauty and calm in the chaos of Disney. I can’t even imagine what color the Nikon picture spot signs will be. Black and silver? The red of the swoosh on the camera bodies?

      • Bret M

        Haha I live down here, and I actually knew this was coming because Kodak didn’t renew their contracts. I went around one day with my family and we took a bunch of pictures in front of them.. but they were too cool to do what I really wanted: I wanted to take a picture imitating exactly what the people in the “picture spot” example pictures were doing.

        I thought it would’ve been hilarious.

  • Spy Black

    At one point in the late 70s, I considered buying a 13mm. Could kick myself for not going through it. At that time I thought the lens would always be available later on…

  • rame

    These pictures are not worth anything (nor from an artistic or “scientific” point of view). They do not legitimate disturbing these animals at all!

  • Back to top