24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 … 7 8 9 … 14 15 end

Archive 2010 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

Shutterslam
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #1 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

Did you guys see the examples on[FLICKR]?

24mm 1.4
This image is copyrighted by the owner

16-35

Feb 09, 2010 at 05:24 PM

lou f
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #2 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

the 24 is fab, but the distortion on at 16 is a bit much for my liking, or has the base actually have the slope on the bottom bricks?

Feb 09, 2010 at 05:27 PM

Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #3 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

4x4Dragon wrote:
More overpriced stuff from nikon.....

And unfortunately there are those out there that obviously have too much money and that will jump immediately on the 'lists' for these, thereby giving Nikon the nod to keep it up.

How much is "too much money"? What would you say to the two or three billion people who will think that you have too much money and too easy a life? And if those with more money than you happen to have earned it, don't they deserve to spend it as they wish to do, just as you do? Lastly, if those who find the price appealing make some or all of their money from photography, do you object to that as a business investment too?

Gee, maybe you're missing something here...

Feb 09, 2010 at 05:29 PM

Steve Perry
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #4 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

Wow, can't believe all the whining about the VR on the 16-35. Had it NOT had VR, there would have been post after post complaining about that...

I know when I'm out shooting landscapes, my least favorite prospective is tripod at eye level. Because of these, there are times I get into a position where there's simply no way to use a tripod (think side of a rock face). So VR is always a welcome addition to any lens - it can help you pull off a shot that you otherwise couldn't have got. And isn't that the point of new equipment? Why buy it if it's not helping you in some way?

Plus, with Nikon putting video into all their cameras now, my guess is that any zoom lens they produce from here on out will incorporate VR. So, might just want to get used to it

Feb 09, 2010 at 05:43 PM

LuMax
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #5 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

Jammy Straub wrote:
LuMax wrote:
So, where are the new TC-1.4E III and TC-1.7E III Teleconverters?

I was really expecting more than just two lenses especially after the Nikon page slip-ups (1.4 and 1.7 courtesy of NR).

Probably PMA, along with another fast prime. That's my guess.

Yeah that sounds about right. Get the buzz going ~2 weeks prior to PMA with these two and then put out the other items at PMA.

Has LR3 been in beta long enough that we might see the release announced at PMA? I know there was a $150 sale on LR2 last week, so it might make sense.

Feb 09, 2010 at 05:53 PM

Mike Mohrmann
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #6 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

Steve Perry wrote:
Plus, with Nikon putting video into all their cameras now, my guess is that any zoom lens they produce from here on out will incorporate VR. So, might just want to get used to it

I had thought about being able to handhold landscape shots with VR, but I had completely forgotten about video. Good call.

Feb 09, 2010 at 05:58 PM

Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #7 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

Mike Mohrmann wrote:I had completely forgotten about video.

Most of us still do.

Feb 09, 2010 at 06:09 PM

Two23
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #8 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

LuMax wrote:
So, where are the new TC-1.4E III and TC-1.7E III Teleconverters?

Not sure how high a priority those are. The current ones are actually pretty decent. It was the TC-20E that was not so hot. If I start seeing reports that the new TC-20E III works great on a 70-200mm VR, I will probably dumpt the TC-17E and buy one of those.

As for a 24-105mm f4 VR type lens, possibility Nikon is going to release that as a "kit" lens for a D800 type body perhaps? That would make a lot more sense than sticking old 24-120mm lenses on one,

.

Kent in SD

Feb 09, 2010 at 06:10 PM

Mocca
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #9 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

24mm is app. 2900 $ in Denmark - hahaha (cries)

Feb 09, 2010 at 06:11 PM

passthegravy
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #10 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

Ok, let's see what we have here. These new lenses meet some people's needs, but not others'. Some people think they cost too much; others are willing to pay the price. Some like the features; others don't. Some think they're too bulky or heavy; others don't.

So how is this different from any other equipment in Nikon's (or Canon's for that matter) catalog?

Life is all about options, and I'm glad Nikon just gave us two more options.

Feb 09, 2010 at 06:20 PM

ISO1600
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #11 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

Andre Labonte wrote:
Actually, the closer you get to 44mm or slightly above, the easier it is to make an FX lens. Remember that the 50 f/1.4 AFS is only $500. I would expect a 35 f/1.4 to be in the $1000 range (give or take a few hundred).

Remember that the recently discontinued (right?) 35/1.4 AIS was $750.
I do agree with you that a 35/1.4 AF-S will probably be closer to $1000 than $2000, but it probably won't be by much

Feb 09, 2010 at 06:37 PM

RalphJ
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #12 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

louis fusco wrote:
the 24 is fab, but the distortion on at 16 is a bit much for my liking, or has the base of the Statue of Liberty actually have the slope on the bottom bricks?

The slope is in the bricks, not the lens, as you can see here:

http://www.johnfranksdesign.com/images/liberty04.jp

(add a "g" to the end of URL; not my photo, and not my website; just a Google find)

Feb 09, 2010 at 06:46 PM

eSchwab
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #13 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

I'm sure they put a ton of R&D into the 24. Just like they did with the 24-70, 14-24, and new 70-200mm. They cost a lot but they are amazing lenses. I'm sure if they had settled on an earlier, inferior design the lens would be cheaper, but then people would be complaining about the performance. Damned if you do... Just don't buy it. I probably won't, but I will get a 35mm 1.4 in a heartbeat.

Feb 09, 2010 at 06:57 PM

LuMax
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #14 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

Of course then there is always stealing!

Feb 09, 2010 at 07:16 PM

Gregory.Rotter
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #15 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

For which? The 24 or the 16-35? There's no way the 16-35 will be prices the same as the 14-24.

Feb 09, 2010 at 07:49 PM

Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #16 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

No, it's not. The 16-35 is about $400-and-change less expensive than the 14-24, roughly 30%.

Feb 09, 2010 at 07:52 PM

euua
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #17 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

just got home and reading up on all news

16-35 good news for lots of people since not many want to have 14-24. If you have 17-35 I would not be so much enthusiastic about it. 1mm does not make that much difference and lost of 1 f stop on top of it.

24mm f1.4 is good news for pros but price tag for it 2200 WOW. good luck getting on of those. I have 24mm f2.8 and very much happy with it. Dont see why should I spend 2200 on half of stop less.

I agree with comments that Buy and Sell will be full of 14-24

Personally I have both 14-24 and 17-35 - i will be selling 17-35 shortly since not having filter on 14-24 does not bother me much.

If you want one let me know - will trade for 300mm f4 AFS as well

just my 0.02

Feb 09, 2010 at 07:53 PM

Mike Yamin
Online
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #18 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

Since you guys mentioned it, I'd love to see a 35mm f/1.4 since it'd be significantly cheaper and still semi-wide on an FX body.

Feb 09, 2010 at 07:55 PM

HerbChong
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #19 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

don't say i didn't tell you so. they came in a bit cheaper than i thought they would at that but anyone who thought under $2K was dreaming.

Herb...

ISO1600 wrote:
hahhahaahhaha $2200

Feb 09, 2010 at 07:58 PM

Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.8 #20 · 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL!

euua wrote:
If you have 17-35 I would not be so much enthusiastic about it. 1mm does not make that much difference and lost of 1 f stop on top of it.

Remember that focal length and aperture are not the only things that matter. Distortion, color rendition, chromatic aberration, flare, contrast, sharpness, build quality, weather-sealing, AF speed and accuracy, focus ring motion and damping, and a ton of other factors matter when choosing a lens. It's never as simple as "Xmm and Y f-stops".

euua wrote:
24mm f1.4 is good news for pros but price tag for it 2200 WOW. good luck getting on of those. I have 24mm f2.8 and very much happy with it. Dont see why should I spend 2200 on half of stop less.

The actual outlay and the fair comparison would be the difference in price between the two, not the full $2,200. Also, the speed difference from f/2.8 to f/1.4 is not half a stop, but two full stops. When you're in a situation where that means either 1/60 @ f/1.4 or 1/15 @ f/2.8, then it matters a great deal and will certainly affect your perception of the two lenses' relative value. If you rarely or never find yourself in that kind of situation, then it won't matter much. But if you do, then it does.

Feb 09, 2010 at 08:00 PM

1 2 3 … 7 8 9 … 14 15 end
FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 7 8 9 … 14 15 end