That you deride it as a \"G\" lens tells me that nothing Nikon does is going to satisfy you, because you know well that all of Nikon\'s lenses will be G lenses. You expected them to come out with an aperture ring-lens out of the blue? Please get real.
It\'s about complexity of design. Nikon began their G line as lenses that were more affordable than the traditional ones with the aperture ring. They saved money on production costs and passed the savings on to their clients. Not anymore! The lens is now easier/less expensive to produce, yet they are charging 100% more than if it would have been the old \"complicated\" aperture ring lenses.
Again, it\'s about the principle. I know Nkion will never make another new lens with an aperture ring. I don\'t plan on using my old F3HP for much longer, so it doesn\'t really matter to me. I just have a problem with a company that charges an absurd amount of money for something that is not so technologically advanced (norexpensive to make) and could have been produced a decade ago.
That you deride it as a \"G\" lens tells me that nothing Nikon does is going to satisfy you, because you know well that all of Nikon\'s lenses will be G lenses. You expected them to come out with an aperture ring-lens out of the blue? Please get real.
It\'s about complexity of design. Nikon began their G line as lenses that were more affordable than the traditional ones with the aperture ring. They saved money on production costs and passed the savings on to their clients. Not anymore! The lens is now easier/less expensive to produce, yet they are charging 100% more than if it would have been the old \"complicated\" aperture ring lenses.
Feb 10, 2010 at 09:24 PM
Previous versions of snegron's message #8117956 « 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL! »
