Nikon introduces 3 new wide-angle NIKKOR lenses: AF-P DX NIKKOR 10-20 f/4.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S NIKKOR 8-15 f/3.5-4.5E ED (fisheye zoom.) AF-S NIKKOR 28mm f/1.4E ED ETA: VR designation on...

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

AF-P DX NIKKOR 10-20 f/4.5-5.6G ED VR

AF-S NIKKOR 8-15 f/3.5-4.5E ED (fisheye zoom.)

AF-S NIKKOR 28mm f/1.4E ED

ETA: VR designation on the DX lens.

MtnMan Loc: ID

I see the the 10-20 comes in a VR version, is VR, and is reasonably priced. It will become the landscape lens for Nikon DX.

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

The one that interests me is the DX lens, but sadly, it's an AF-P and will thus not work with my aging D5200. I guess it's time to upgrade the camera body.

Or maybe it does.

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

Yes, the DX 10-20 is a VR lens.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-p-dx-nikkor-10-20mm-f%252f4.5-5.6g-vr.html?cid=img_en_us:EML:MKT:5312017:na:2017-05-31_Lens-announ:na:img:10-20mm#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-Overview

MtnMan Loc: ID

Pegasus wrote:

The one that interests me is the DX lens, but sadly, it's an AF-P and will thus not work with my aging D5200. I guess it's time to upgrade the camera body.

Or maybe it does.

It might work. I know I can get a firware update for my D5300 to have it "work". But I think that is only needed to turn off the VR by menu.

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

I believe you are correct. Reading the fine print it says there is limited functionality with my D5200, however when I did some research at the Nikon website a while back on their new AF-P lenses, I could only find something about needing to refocus if you held down for exposure or some such. Yes, the VR thing will definitely not be on the menu, so to speak.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

Pegasus wrote:

AF-P DX NIKKOR 10-20 f/4.5-5.6G ED VR

AF-S NIKKOR 8-15 f/3.5-4.5E ED (fisheye zoom.)

AF-S NIKKOR 28mm f/1.4E ED

ETA: VR designation on the DX lens.

I'm waiting for an 8mm rectilinear or, for a DX, a 5mm (actually a 5333μm).

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Pegasus wrote:

AF-P DX NIKKOR 10-20 f/4.5-5.6G ED VR

AF-S NIKKOR 8-15 f/3.5-4.5E ED (fisheye zoom.)

AF-S NIKKOR 28mm f/1.4E ED

ETA: VR designation on the DX lens.

Yes, I saw several articles about that last night. Good news for all those gear testers - and us.

joehel2 Loc: Cherry Hill, NJ

The 28mm is a $2000 lens, just a little bit outside my budget.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

joehel2 wrote:

The 28mm is a $2000 lens, just a little bit outside my budget.

For $2,000, at least the 70-200mm is BIG!

mikeroetex Loc: Lafayette, LA

MtnMan wrote:

I see the the 10-20 comes in a VR version, is VR, and is reasonably priced. It will become the landscape lens for Nikon DX.

Hmmm, I have ambivalence toward this lens. For $300 I get a 10-20 range f4.5-5.6, but for $350-400 I already own a Tokina 11-16 at f2.8. Better for landscapes in low light.
A little less range, but pick up two f stops. And it's a pretty fine lens.
Sigma has a 10-20 at f3.5 for around $450. I think I'll stay pat. But what would be the advantage of Nikon's new lens that I'm not seeing?

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

joehel2 wrote:

The 28mm is a $2000 lens, just a little bit outside my budget.

However, it is a prime and should yield some real nice images. The sample photos from the Nikon newsletter on this particular lens were outstanding. I'll check to see if this takes an 82mm filter. I was considering the 24-70 VR but that baby is priced at $2,300 and takes an 82mm filter. I'll probably end up with the 24-120 or $1,100.

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

FiddleMaker wrote:

However, it is a prime and should yield some real nice images. The sample photos from the Nikon newsletter on this particular lens were outstanding. I'll check to see if this takes an 82mm filter. I was considering the 24-70 VR but that baby is priced at $2,300 and takes an 82mm filter. I'll probably end up with the 24-120 or $1,100.

Re: 24-70 Nikkor. I watched and waited and finally got a Nikon 24-70 f2.8 (non VR, figured I didn't need on this short a lens) for $1040. It's a US sourced lens and is in mint condition. I have to admit that I have not had a lens this heavy (32oz) in my kit before and I'll have to see how long it stays. First images are great !! My point is that careful shopping can help the budget. This lens lists on Nikon site for $1800. And I only buy from Ebay sellers with 100% positive feedback and only USA equipment that can be repaired by Nikon or authorized Nikon shops. In retrospect, I wish I had waited and bought the 24-120 f4 - a little less weight and more reach at the long end.

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

FiddleMaker wrote:

However, it is a prime and should yield some real nice images. The sample photos from the Nikon newsletter on this particular lens were outstanding. I'll check to see if this takes an 82mm filter. I was considering the 24-70 VR but that baby is priced at $2,300 and takes an 82mm filter. I'll probably end up with the 24-120 or $1,100.

The 28mm f/1.4E ED takes a 77mm filter.

John Geyer

Had both stick with 24-70....much sharper...when miss 120 take one step forward.