Weekly Nikon news flash #382

Nikon D500 books 1Nikon D500 books 3Nikon D500 books 4
Nikon D500 books 5Nikon D500 books 7Nikon D500 books 8
Nikon D500 books 2Nikon D500 books 6Nikon D500 book
Nikon D500 camera books 1Nikon D500 camera books 2Nikon D500 camera books 3
→ Several new Nikon D500 books are now available on Amazon:

Rocky-Nook-books-coupon-code
→ Rocky Nook also has few Nikon D500 books and now they have a 40% off deal when you use coupon code LEARN at checkout (valid for paperback, ebook, and bundles).

nikon_booth_photokina_2016 nikon_booth_photokina
→ Nikon released rendering of their 2016 Photokina booth.

Nikon AI Nikkor 105mm f:1.8S lens
→ New post on nikkor.com about the AI Nikkor 105mm f/1.8S, the fastest 100-105mm class lens of its time.

Nikon Photo Contest

→ More info on the Nikon Photo Contest 2016-2017.

Nikon-India-logo
→ Smartphone photographers driving DSLR sales, at least this is the case in India:

“More than 55% of sales in the DSLR category are now coming from amateur photographers as more people are switching from a smartphone camera,” Kazuo Ninomiya, managing director of Nikon India, said adding that “Nikon has been using the hype created by smartphone brands as an advantage to promote photography.” Nikon India currently has over 55% market share in the DSLR category.

High Nikon prices in South Africa
→ Nikon prices in South Africa are almost twice as high as the rest of the world - see this article “Crazy Nikon rip-off in South Africa”. Here is a price comparison for the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 28-300mm lens:

Retailer Country Local Currency Price Price in ZAR
Orms Direct South Africa R22,195 R22,195
Techno Pro South Africa R24,738 R24,738
Techrific Australia AU$1,074 R11,000
Amazon United States US$947 R12,647
1 AUD = 10.2425 ZAR; 1 USD = 13.3529 ZAR

→ New Nikon company profile video released.

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

    Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy. Can’t wait to submit my photos to the Nikon “only heavily digitally manipulated photos can win” Contest.

    • Art Nau

      get your head out of your …

      developing film is photoshop 0.5 if you know what you are doing … get over it

      • saywhatuwill

        Get over what? You did look at last year’s winners, right?

        I wasn’t making this out to be a film thing. I just threw that in at the end and saw in the rules that it wasn’t allowed. Everything before it was based on last years winners. Sounds like someone named Art Nau needs to get his head out of his…

        • TheInfinityPoint

          A lot of the winning photos are so uninspiring. Especially the 2014-2015 categories A-D.

    • EnPassant

      Remember those days when a lot of photos were made with slide film and most photographers only manipulted the image by the choice of film, exposure and sometimes used a polarized filter.

      Looking at the winners of the single photo contest from 2012/2013 only two have natural colors and the photos together look like parts of a horror story from a nightmare.

      Are these images a forecast about what will happen to the world or should we be worried about the mental health of the jurors? Apparently mostly dark mood pictures succeed in this contest.

      • ninpou_kobanashi

        I think you meant judges, or are you saying the pictures are crimes? (^_^)

        • EnPassant

          Even though my command of English may seem good it is not my first language. I also do not live in USA or United Kingdom. And in my country we do no not have court jury system like in the USA. So for me a jury is a (larger) group of people (usually half a dozen or more) who make judgements in competitions like about photography but never in court. For that we have another name for those people.

          Juror for me then is a member of the jury and jurors several members or the members of the jury. However they can also be called judges. If however only one or a few people make the decisions they are called judge or judges. In the court room there is however only one judge.

          It’s simply one of those small details that are difficult to translate, like the fact that a billion in USA for me is 10 billions and an english mile is 1.6km, but for me a mile is 10km.

          But if you like you could also see it as a Freudian slip as these images are more like bad news in news media, like crimes.

          • ninpou_kobanashi

            Thanks for some illumination into your word choice 😉

      • saywhatuwill

        The Pulitzer prize started the same way. Then it became the darkest of dark photography for winning. Seems Nikon is on it’s way.

        • EnPassant

          For me the criteria for prize winners seem be similar as for news in media. And we know what sells best there.
          As it is difficult to measure which photographs are the best judges can impose their own agenda in their choices of winners.
          That’s why I am curious how they will handle the celebration category in the next competition.

    • ninpou_kobanashi

      “Image data files created with any digital device including smartphones, digital
      still cameras (including medium and large-format cameras).”

      What about a scanner?

      • saywhatuwill

        Or “scanned” film with a digital camera? Unfortunately I don’t think that will count.

        • ninpou_kobanashi

          I do wonder… I kinda interpreted as that they didn’t want to have folks send in slides or negatives. Just send us a JPG and we don’t care if you took it with an iPhone, etc…

          • saywhatuwill

            I’ll give it a whirl and see what happens. 😉 Before I send it though I’ll make sure I digitally manipulate the heck out of it so I’d at least have a chance of winning. OH, and make it dark and sad.

            • ninpou_kobanashi

              Best of luck to you!

  • Nikon Company Profile video is well worth a watch 🙂 for the less informed or the curious.

  • drororomon

    The v1 image is in the render, so it looks like the Nikon 1 hasn’t met it’s death knell… yet. And is that a new lens (silver with black grip)?

    • Eric Calabros

      Yea I saw that. But there is something at bottom left of the body.. dont know its a button or just a label.
      However hope their “larg sensor” mirrorless is not such grip-less toy.

      • drororomon

        You’re right. It looks like the J1 instead. Which is weird why the J1 of all the Nikon 1s…

        • manattan

          It’s just the J1 with its consumer zoom.
          Here is another copy. It’s clear Nikon did that on purpose as the d500 is clearly there. Why advertise the J1 though?
          It’s almost as if to taunt the Nikon 1 owners to say “you suckers”

          The only bright side for Nikon is that Canon’s M5 is supposed to be toylike like previous models instead of a true mirrorless powerhouse.

          • steven8217

            You are right, this Nikon 1 CX 30-100mm VR F/3.8-5.6 is one of the two Nikon 1 lenses that I did not own, since I already owned the 10-100mm F/4-5.6 and the fat boy 10-100mm F/4.5-5.6 PD-Zoom for family video (AW 10mm F/2.8 is the last Nikon 1 lens that I did not own).

    • steven8217

      I own 11 of the 1 Nikkor lens, have not seen one of this, looks like a macro lens at 0:58 at the Nikon Company Profile.

      • Moniqueghage

        Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj46d:
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        !mj46d:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://www.wage8.Com ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj46d:….,…..

      • manattan

        I agree that in the video that looks like a new lens. Sad that there is no new camera and everything is with the J5 in the video.

      • Nikon never announced the 1 Nikkor macro lens – it was shown as a prototype at the very beginning: https://nikonrumors.com/2014/10/08/what-to-expect-from-nikon-in-the-next-few-months-3.aspx/
        I seriously doubt they will announce it now. I think the Nikon 1 system is dead.

        • If the Nikon 1system is dead then it truly is a sad day – some of those lenses were superb and never got the bodies they deserved. I for one will at least look forward to picking up a fire sale j5 and 70-300 cx.

          • I hope I am wrong but I have not seen anything to indicated that this product line is alive.

            • steven8217

              The new DL line is a good indicator the Nikon 1 inch product line is very well alive!

            • Nikon 1 inch products are alive, I am not sure if the Nikon 1 product line is alive – there is a difference between the two.

          • steven8217

            Unfortunately, if the Nikon 1 is dead, the price of the CX 70-300mm might not going down, it mostly going up though.
            I love my CX 70-300mm, great build quality albeit a bit pricey to be built in Japan, (My CX 32mm/F1.2 was built in Thailand)

        • steven8217

          I think the Nikon 1 macro lens might not bring too much value in compare to FT1 + DX 40mm F2.8 Macro, the potential buyer would be extremely limited. However, I like the small package and if Nikon can add on the VR at a reasonable price, then I am on for it.

  • Max

    I’m from South Africa and have been taking notice of the huge price differences (Because NR posts deals from B&H, Adorama, etc.).
    It’s one of the things that keep me voting in the general elections :’P
    Here’s a screenshot from ORMS – I added the prices in USD:

  • MRomine

    I was really hoping for a new 105 f1.8/2 that cost less and weighed less than the new f1.4 version. Like the previous model but with the engineering standards of today’s technology.

  • Michael Turner

    Anybody else read about the old 105? Maybe I have my terminology wrong but why is he saying that 50mm and 85mm are for portraits. Wouldn’t they be best for 3/quarter framing or full-body? Is that the right term 3/quarters? Anytime I do real portraits/head-shots with the 85mm the face is too wide to be pleasing. I had to get a 180mm prime to do the face justice.

    • Aldo

      Do you mean wide as in ‘bigger’ face… or wide as a wide field of view?

      • Michael Turner

        Bigger face/distortion of the face around the edges. Fat-face or warping around the edges.

        • Aldo

          I see… that odd cuz at 180mm you should have a slightly bigger ‘fat-face’… but I guess if we talk pure distortion and not the change in perception then in theory the 180mm has ‘flatter’ elements which yield less distortion.

    • Firebrand

      Are you sure youre not confused? (85mm shouldn’t make the face too wide — or do you mean the lens is too wide, not the face?) 24mm/35mm squishes the face and enlarges the nose. 50mm/58mm creates a slender face. 85mm/105mm creates a natural look. 135mm flattens the face a bit. 200mm/300mm totally flattens and widens the face. 50mm/58mm can be considered a portrait lenses, though. Especially for fatter subjects, it can help narrow their face & body a bit, especially if they don’t have bulbous noses. Its not always flattering to flatten them. 180mm should be fantastic for slender models, where you really want to get that magazine compressed look and bring the background forward.

      As for head-shot vs. 3/fourths vs. full-body, you can achieve those with any lens. Just depends where you put your camera. Obviously, wide lenses have the most issues, when getting too close. So you’re probably right that many people avoid 50mm for face. However, its not universally accepted wisdom. For example, 85mm and 58mm are similar and 58mm is often used for attractive head-shots. However, one thing to remember is that 50mm is 75mm on DX cameras, so pretty close to 85mm (in terms of tight shots). So many many DX camera users use their 50mm as head-shot portrait lenses (probably more than FX body users). Obviously, the 58mm helps make this decision easier.

      I personally like the look of anywhere between 58mm to 135mm on FX, and, in fact, go for the 58mm or 135mm most often for head-shot portraits, for different subjects/different looks.

      • peter w

        could you set this slower 😉

        very instructive hair

  • tap0

    From what we have heard so far, looks like Nikon is going to let Canon steal the limelight at Photokina. I would love to be proved wrong though.

  • br0xibear

    AF DC 135mm f/2 lens officially discontinued according Nikon Switzerland and Nikon UK.
    AF NIKKOR 20mm f/2.8D and AF NIKKOR 28mm f/2.8D also discontinued.

    • Paco Ignacio

      Any chance for a replacement?

      • br0xibear

        I’m pretty sure there will be a new 135mm, when I don’t know…don’t think it will be this year.

        • Firebrand

          I feel doubtful that Nikon is going to clone the 105/1.4, the way it did with the 105 DC and 135 DC. I really hope they make something different and go with a 135/1.8 VR as a 200/2 VR II junior at similar price to the 105/1.4. That’s going to keep Nikon TOP CALIBER and innovative and sell so many copies, itll be unbelievable.

          • br0xibear

            No idea if it’ll be f/1.8 or f/2, but VR would be a good addition.

            • HD10

              A lightning-fast AF like that in the 200mm f2.0 would make the 135mm f1.8 a good sports lens.

            • Firebrand

              Exactly. I think Nikon over-prices the 200/2 VR II. Not that it isn’t professionally worth it — but they are losing a lot of sales, because of the price. Revamping the 135/2 DC design, just making it very slightly brighter, a LOT sharper, and putting VR and faster AF on it will make it a hit seller. I know that’s a lot to ask. But I can only assume that the 105 DC and 135 DC cannibalized each other’s sales due to lack of differentiation.

              If my theory is true, then its better to have a similar 135/1.8 VR and 200/2 VR II than to have a similar 105/1.4 and 135/1.4. Either way, a modern 135mm will be huge (f/1.8 VR or f/1.4). But keeping it at a $2,600 (on promotion = $2,300 maybe?) price point can allow MANY, MANY more buyers than the $6,000 price point of the 200/2 VR II, which can remain exotic.

              Another interesting thought is what if they made a 135/1.8 PF VR and optimized it with lightning fast AF for Sport? Size could be well under control with the PF design, and justify a $3,000 price tag, in Nikon’s eyes. But if they were going to do that, it should be a double-PF design, like Canon, and designed to keep nice bokeh. 135mm does have certain expectations, after all.

            • KnightPhoto

              A 135/1.8 PF VR optimized for lightning fast AF for Sport would be great!

              I wonder what other PFs Nikon can roll out…

      • Firebrand

        Historically, Nikon releases the “best” lens first, and then a watered down version, which is much, much cheaper, yet better optically at least in one way. Once Nikon is done with its f/1.8 line, it’ll probably do f/2.8 revivals (I would guess 2017 or 2018). The f/2.8 lenses will probably be designed to support 50mp resolutions (which f/2.8 primes probably easily can do).

        • That is correct – they do the same with the cameras, more expensive first, cheaper models later.

          • br0xibear

            With the 105mm f/1.4 being made in China, it’ll be interesting to see if the new 70-200mm f/2.8 is also made in China.
            If it is, I suspect all Nikon lens manufacturing in Japan will be moving to China.

            • probably another cost cutting measure

            • br0xibear

              It usually is.

  • Captain Megaton

    I have always greatly enjoyed the “NIKKOR – The Thousand and One Nights” series. This latest entry is a fascinating read.

  • br0xibear

    Nikon AF-S 105mm f/1.4 on a D500 body

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu4gArTcN6s

    • TO-DOUG

      Gee, it’s really a shame that Nikon doesn’t make a 105mm f/1.4 DX lens… then it wouldn’t have to be so large! No wonder that everyone is complaining about the lack of DX primes! [sarcasm alert]

      • Captain Megaton

        Since you seem to know for a fact that reducing the image circle would reduce the size of the lens, perhaps you can tell us exactly how much smaller and lighter it would be…

        • br0xibear

          The obvious comparison between the 35mm f1.8 G ED AF-S and 35mm f1.8 G AF-S DX gives you an idea of possible differences.
          Sizes and weights are here…
          http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-nikon-35mm-f1-8-g-ed-af-s-nikkor-lens/p1547266

          http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-nikon-35mm-f1-8-g-af-s-dx-lens/p1030389

          • KnightPhoto

            Nope. Longer focal length lenses such as 105mm will NOT achieve the same savings as at 35mm. A 105mm DX would save nothing like the size and weight savings at 35mm.

            • br0xibear

              Hi KnightPhoto
              I did say “gives you an idea of possible differences.”
              Ultimately it depends on how they make if they did.
              It might not be the same weight and size savings as the 35mm, but at the moment it’s a reasonable comparsion since they’re as similar as there is.
              It definitely won’t be any bigger, lol.

            • Captain Megaton

              That you cited the two 35mm as an example proves you don’t have a good grasp of the concepts involved here.

            • br0xibear

              You’re probably right…
              Be happy.

            • KnightPhoto

              Hi br0xi – I’ll give you the “gives you an idea” wording. I don’t have a strong grasp other than at “telephoto” end whatever that threshold is, we start to lose advantage. It’s hard to come up with a telephoto example as the DX lenses tend to be slower max aperture so we can’t make the like for like comparison using real-world examples.

              As an aside due to the reverse telephoto design of F-mount wide angle lenses, DX wide-angle primes are also not going to save a ton of weight and size, at least for fast primes. Hmmm the Tokina 11-20 f/2.8 seem to be some kind of magic exception though.

              So we have some sweet spot “in the middle focal lengths” and at slower apertures where DX lenses have a definite size weight advantage, but that advantage evaporates going high and low in focal length.

            • Captain Megaton

              As effective focal lengths and apertures are concerned DX wins above 50 mm and FX wins at 50 mm and wider.

              (Trust me. This is a rule based on far too much time thinking about this.)

              There are a few attractive DX options but those are not really exceptions to the rule. Even the Tokina 11-20/2.8 vs the full frame 16-28/2.8. Same FOV, one effective stop darker, about the same cost and size. FX wins. The 35mm DX… when you consider that this is a 50/2.5 equiv., and compare it in size/price/weight with the 50/1.8G on FX, FX wins. It might look like only a small win for FX until you compare the geometric distortion and overall lens specs then its pretty much no contest.

              On the other hand 200/2.8 on DX vs. 300/4 on FX and you have a real case for using a crop format camera, limited ultimately only by lens resolution (the 200mm lens has to be at least 1.5x more resolving than the 300mm or the FX photos will seem sharper.)

              Factored against the FX advantage at wide angles is the cost and size of the bodies of course.

            • Captain Megaton

              KnightPhoto is correct. A DX 100 mm telephoto will be essentially the same size as a FX 100 mm telephoto. As a result of the crop factor, however, the effective DX version of the 105/1.4 is (round numbers) an 85/1.4. Of course you lose an effective stop of light gathering, but that’s DX for you. The lens length reduction is a direct result of the change in focal length.

        • TO-DOUG

          Yes, as it happens I do know “for a fact” that reducing the image circle from FX to DX would reduce the size of a lens of any given focal length. I think we all know that… don’t we? Unfortunately, not being an optical technician, I can’t tell you exactly how much smaller and lighter it would be. You might have noticed [sarcasm alert] at the end of my message. I was trying to emphasize (unsuccessfully, it seems) that I wasn’t really asking for more DX primes. Why not? Well, because in my opinion any weight reduction would be minimal or counter-productive. One of the advantages of using a FX lens on a DX camera is that you don’t need to worry about the soft corners — because they are outside the DX frame. If you produce a DX lens with a smaller image circle, then no doubt you then have to worry about those soft corners once again. And would Nikon ever make a 50mm DX? Not very likely, as the existing several 50mm FX lenses (even the f/1.4) are relatively small already.

      • Allan

        Where’s Thom when you need him. I’m having Thom withdrawal.

        • Allan

          Oops, I see him on another thread. Sorry Thom.

  • Back to top