How long do you think it wil be before Nikon starts introducing reasonably priced FF zooms to the market? There are already 3 FF models, with a 4th due soon.

I wouldn't hate something comparable to the 16-85mm VR DX (the 24-120mm doesnt count as the IQ isn't up to par with the 16-85mm).

Nikon has been making FF zooms for decades, in various flavors. There's a great used market out there for high quality (and relatively cheap) glass.

The 18-35mm and 35-70mm are candidates in the range you suggest, though it means an extra lens in your bag.

~Ted

How do you define "reasonably priced?" Only lenses that are stamped DX are designed for 1.5 cropped bodies.

Why would Nikon introduce "reasonably priced" FX lenses when it's most "reasonably priced" FX DSLR body is still over $2000? Look at the used market... there you will find what you seek.

Look into the classic 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D. It's comparable to the DX 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 AFS in range, light intake, build quality, etc and it IS acceptably sharp.

Also, consider the 24-85 f/2.8-4 AF-D and the 24-85 AFS. They're both also very good lenses.

Remember, glass > body... if you've got a DX body and GOOD DX glass, stick with it until your glass can keep up with an FX sensor!

jasoncallen wrote:
Why would Nikon introduce "reasonably priced" FX lenses when it's most "reasonably priced" FX DSLR body is still over $2000?

Exactly! Prices are reasonable IMO. Sure it might be nice to have a nice 70-200/4 VR or a fresh, sharp 24-85/4, but they would not exactly be free either.

EBH

I know that it is, and has been, the popular song to slag the 24-120vr, but seriously, for a cheap walkaround lens, it works fine for me and lots of other folks. I used it a lot in the 6 months that I spent walking around DC. In another 24-120 thread, it was mentioned that one of nikon's pros used the 24-120 for an assignment in Asia somewhere, IIRC.

To be honest, if I really wanted cheap and light to carry around, I'd use my d70s or maybe even buy a d90 or d5000 or something, and any of the new DX zooms.

James R wrote:
How do you define "reasonably priced?" Only lenses that are stamped DX are designed for 1.5 cropped bodies.


For a new lens, anywhere between $500-$900. I consider that a reasonable expenditure for a new lens.

You know, I bought a 24-135mm Tamron some years back that gave me great results on my film cameras. I guess with the 24-70 and 70-200 (or 80-200) I struggle with a good reason to use that lens now, but for a light-weight quality lens, this one does a great job.

I've heard others that have used the 24-120 comment on it being a great lens for the money. If it wasn't for the 24-135 Tamron I might consider it. If Nikon updates this lens I probably will look harder at it, particularly if they do a good job on it.

David