Nikon introduces 3 new wide-angle NIKKOR lenses
Jun 1, 2017 09:40:39 #
DaveyDitzer wrote:
Re: 24-70 Nikkor. I watched and waited and finally... (show quote)
DaveyDitzer, you bring up some good points - I have always shy'd away from eBay. I am getting up there in years and so I tend to go for the VR type of lenses. I have the 28-300 on my D750 and I am thinking I will trade this in for the 24-120 f4. Slightly lighter in weight and it is an "N" lens as well as VR.
Jun 1, 2017 09:43:43 #
John Geyer wrote:
Had both stick with 24-70....much sharper...when miss 120 take one step forward.
John, I take it you had both the VR and non-VR versions of the 24-70. How do you feel about the 24-120 f4/VR/N ??
Jun 1, 2017 10:15:44 #
mikeroetex wrote:
But what would be the advantage of Nikon's new lens that I'm not seeing?
I think the interesting things about this new 10-20 are 1) Size/Weight - significantly lighter and smaller than my Sigma 10-20 3.5, with 72mm filters rather than 82mm and 2) VR
I will wait to see reviews of the image quality before pulling any triggers, but this could make a nice addition to a travel setup.
It could even be part of the "Cheapskate's Trinity" 10-20, 18-55 and 70-300 AF-P VR Zooms... (I already own and am quite impressed by the other two)
Jun 1, 2017 10:41:52 #
Jun 1, 2017 12:21:07 #
mikeroetex wrote:
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?
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?
I'm always at f16 or higher for landscapes.
The advantages of this lens compared to my AF-S 10-20 are VR and pulse motor focus. The VR would be helpful because for landscape you need low ISO and high f-stop. You can avoid hauling a tripod.
But I usually now use my D800 and 16-35 VR for landscape.
Jun 1, 2017 16:24:52 #
Jun 1, 2017 16:35:43 #
camerapapi wrote:
Something tells me Nikon is working on a new mirrorless camera.
They (Nikon) will need to do this in order to compete with the new FF Sony mirrorless.
Jun 1, 2017 16:38:35 #
camerapapi wrote:
Something tells me Nikon is working on a new mirrorless camera.
I'm hoping for a mirror less D5xxx...APS-C, 24 MP, articulated screen plus EVF, and uses my existing lenses.
Jun 1, 2017 17:22:56 #
Pegasus wrote:
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.
I contacted Nikon support directly and they finally replied just now that since I had updated the firmware to 1.03 (which I did last year) the AF-P lenses would be compatible with my D5200 and there would be no limitations.
Now comes the tricky part, should I believe them? The answer is yes and I will order the lens when it becomes available.
Jun 1, 2017 18:19:51 #
Pegasus wrote:
I was surprised to see that this lens is priced at only $310.
Jun 1, 2017 18:29:58 #
It's a DX lens, most of them are fairly inexpensive. They are made in China and are not the best lenses NIKKOR makes. There are very few Pro-quality DX lenses from Nikon.
Jun 1, 2017 22:14:39 #
f16 to f22 or bigger number is lower not higher. The number is larger but the opening is smaller. Hench close down the aperture to smaller opening or open up to larger opening smaller number.
Jun 2, 2017 05:23:08 #
Pegasus wrote:
It's a DX lens, most of them are fairly inexpensive. They are made in China and are not the best lenses NIKKOR makes. There are very few Pro-quality DX lenses from Nikon.
Good point. I looked at all the lenses that Nikon makes and many of the DX lenses are under $300. My new DX 55-300 was only $240 and the 40mm prime was $275 back in 2012.
Jun 2, 2017 18:57:23 #
jerryc41 wrote:
For $2,000, at least the 70-200mm is BIG! 
To right jerry , at least you get more mm' s for ya money
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.