It's expensive, but what did you expect? It IS a 1.2 lens. Let's first wait for tests before take it down.
Like all photographic items, it will come down after a few months with at least 10% and probably 20%.
As always the early adopters pay the premium.
I was going to do the math and see how this compares with a 50 1.8g on an entry level DX camera as far as price and equivalent DOF, FL, etc... then I remembered I could care less about Nikon 1...
At what price would you be interested in this lens? The 1 system is not something I use to make money with, it is my family camera, that said maybe 500. - even 500 seems high for a Nikon 1 lens though.
david debalko wrote:
At what price would you be interested in this lens? The 1 system is not something I use to make money with, it is my family camera, that said maybe 500. - even 500 seems high for a Nikon 1 lens though.
Same with me -- Nikon 1 for the grandkids, vacations, friends who have a band and so on. It's not something I make money with.
I was thinking this lens would be about 600 and I wondered if I'd get it then. But 900 is really too much.
I'll have to wait for rebates and maybe a discount if bought with a V3. Something like that.
Yes it is a 1.2 lens but it's for 2.7x crop... I wouldn't spend the same money of 24-70 2.8 on a 6-24mm f1.8-2.5 (i.e. Olympus XZ-2), I think lens price/cost is somewhat related to the mass (amount of glass and number of elements). Do a simple math and you would realize it 's just equivalent to a 85mm f3.2 on FX. At this price, it doesn't even has VR.
As a Coolpix P7xxx shooter I was very interested in the Nikon 1 when it came out. The IQ of the smaller sensored P7700 and P7000 before it where good enough for me so a larger 1 sensor would be awesome.
If Nikon can make a V3 that melds the P7700's controls/features with the V2's speed and interchangeable lenses I am sold.
I just hope this lens shows true commitment to Nikon 1. Because this might be another 17-55mm which is like the only DX pro-lens.
Now they to push out revamped f/1.2 lenses, maybe a new 300mm f/1.4 or 200mm f/1.0
ytwong it doesn't matter that it is for small sensor, it still is a f/1.2 lens and designing it is way more difficult and demands more corrections of optical flaws etc.
I just can't figure out who Nikon is trying to cater too with the Nikon 1. It's not pro's. Who is going to buy a $900 Nikon 1 lens? At $500-$600 it would worth considering.
The alternative is a FT-1 and a Nikon 35mm or 50mm 1.8G which would only be $400ish.
Unfortunately, the FT-1 limits what you can do with the auto-focus. Only center point and no tracking. And the focusing system is the one thing that Nikon 1 does very well.
Nathan Padgett wrote:
I just can't figure out who Nikon is trying to cater too with the Nikon 1. It's not pro's. Who is going to buy a $900 Nikon 1 lens? At $500-$600 it would worth considering.
The alternative is a FT-1 and a Nikon 35mm or 50mm 1.8G which would only be $400ish.
Unfortunately, the FT-1 limits what you can do with the auto-focus. Only center point and no tracking. And the focusing system is the one thing that Nikon 1 does very well.
So for about twice the price you have a 2/3 stop faster lens, half the size and weight and fully working AF.
Not so bad I would say (but it's still a lot of money).
If they could do that with a FX lens everybody would rave about it.
