p.3 #2 · I'm curious which three lenses would make Nikon more competitive overnight?
An update of the 80-400 to present standards would be enough for me.
Feb 20, 2013 at 04:43 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · I'm curious which three lenses would make Nikon more competitive overnight?
As I've been thinking about the list of 10 lenses I gave below,it occured to me that the three that would do the most to help Nikon plug the holes are:
Andre Labonte wrote:
First, it's not 3 lenses, it is 10. Given that 95% of Nikon's DSLR customers shoot DX, Nikon needs to flesh the DX lineup out; and for that, it needs 5 NEW lenses and one update. FX needs 4 lenses to be updated.
p.3 #6 · I'm curious which three lenses would make Nikon more competitive overnight?
davidnholtjr wrote:
Nikon's biggest hole IMO is in the medium cost telephoto lenses. Not everyone can buy the big guns, so something in the $1500-$3500 range is needed.
What is needed,
300/4 VR
80-400 AF-S VR or 120-500 VR
500/5.6 VR maybe.
If Nikon released these they would sell tons. But Nikon seems to have no clue these days.
Amen, brother, Amen!! Clueless? Sometimes it seems so. They can be so brilliant one day and look so foolish the next.
I don't have a clue as to what would really help them. All I know is that I would instantly buy the 300 f/4 and 80-400 updates, assuming that they were much better than the current versions.
I just picked up a new 28 f/1.8, which is a sweet little lens, IMO. Given that Sigma has finally decided to play in the big leagues, at minor league prices, I'm going to be watching what they do in the future.
Unless they come out with a killer d400, I'm not planning to buy anything else with a Nikon brand on it. The lack of a modern, pro DX camera is one of the things making them look foolish in my eyes. I'd be ecstatic if they'd tweak the 16mp d7k sensor for better high ISO and then stuff it into the d800 body with all of the d800 features, except 8fps and a big buffer.
p.3 #7 · I'm curious which three lenses would make Nikon more competitive overnight?
The Canon 24-70mm and 70-200MM II seems to be the sharpest zoom lenses just about ever.
Nikon has better current cheap primes ( the 50mm 1.8G is better than the 1.8 nifty fifity(but is almost double), the 85mm G is sharper than the canon counterpart. )
It seems ultra wide nikon wins with the 14-24 and the 17-35 that seem to be better thant he 16-35mm II and the 17-40.
Canon seems to have more telephoto choices over 200mm.
Lenses that they both need to update.
the 135mm ish with IS make it F1.8 or F2
a great 50mm 1.4 canon rumor is the IS version which is going to be cool but not worth a grand
80-400 and the 100-400mm. They both need some updates.
Canon is starting to do IS In primes..I dont' think Nikon has one yet.
So in mind it's all an wash....one suits one need a small amount better than the other. Canon has blazing sharp zooms, but less sensor resolution.
I have had owned both systems and love them both. You have to take the good with the bad.
p.3 #8 · I'm curious which three lenses would make Nikon more competitive overnight?
Mine would be a 500 f5.6 The 300 f4 with 1.4 tc is probably sharper then any 400 5.6 and you are at 420mm. and it would have to be under $2000 for my wild life lens
As my walk around I wish there would be an 18-120 f4. the 24-120 on my crop d7000 is a bit long indoors at 24mm.
A 300 f4 vr would sell a gazzilion lens also
