Now just give me the 24MP FF sensor in a D7000 body and I'll start saving pennies.
Frankly the 28/1.8G is a lot more interesting than the D3200. That completes Nikon's f1.8 trio at 28/50/85, which is pretty much all I need for most shooting.
That would be interesting, I remember reading better sensor covers actually cost a significant amount. I think TheSuede pointed out that accounts partially for the performance delta between the D3x and A900.
mawz wrote:
Now just give me the 24MP FF sensor in a D7000 body and I'll start saving pennies.
Frankly the 28/1.8G is a lot more interesting than the D3200. That completes Nikon's f1.8 trio at 28/50/85, which is pretty much all I need for most shooting.
Yeah, I could not resist that 28/1.8 so I pre-ordered one this morning. Nikon is really coming on strong lately with both lenses and bodies.
Of course, the main issue with this "trio" from Nikon is the same issue with the D800 - Nikon has major issues with availability. The 85 1.8G and the 50 1.8G are both impossible to come by.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Yeah, I could not resist that 28/1.8 so I pre-ordered one this morning. Nikon is really coming on strong lately with both lenses and bodies.
Same here. It's exactly what I was hoping for. Nikon does seem to be on a roll. This lens seems much more desirable than the new Canon 28mm, and it's cheaper in the US.
itai195 wrote:
Same here. It's exactly what I was hoping for. Nikon does seem to be on a roll. This lens seems much more desirable than the new Canon 28mm, and it's cheaper in the US.
Frankly it's making me suspect I might get rid of my A mount kit in favour of a D700+28/50/85 for those rare times my NEX-7 can't handle my needs. I'm not using my A mount lenses all that much and the current Nikon lens line is great. Aside from my 16-50 there's nothing in the A mount lineup right now that I both own and can't live without (As much as I like my 85/2.8 and 35/1.8 they're matched well by Nikkor options).
nikon should add a 24, 35 & 135 to their f/1.8 line. maybe 20, 100 & 200 too.
There's already a 105/2, 135/2 and 200/2 VRII. The last is quite new (a revision of the already excellent 200/2G VR), but the 105 and 135 could use updates (in fact a 135/1.8 VR is already rumoured).
I see no need for a 24, Nikon makes a 24/2.8 and 24/1.4 already, although the f2.8D is due for an update. A fast 20 would be nice, but makes more sense as a DX lens. As to a 35, Nikon makes an f2, a DX f1.8 and two different 1.4's (AI-S and G), they seem to have 35mm sorted, although a FF update of the 35/2D would also be nice but I don't think it will happen, there's already a ton of choice at 35mm between the Nikkors and the four good 3rd party options (ZF 35/2, ZF 35/1.4, Samyang 35/1.4 and Tokina DX 35/2.8 Macro).
Nikon appears to be concentrating on filling the weak points in their lineup (28mm has been a real problem in AF since the beginning, with the only good option being the 28/1.4D, which is long discontinued and commands Leica-esque prices). The only stumble seems to be the DX 35/1.8, which really should have been FX. But even then it's VERY successful with DX shooters and I know a few FX shooters who use it as a portrait lens (it covers 35mm wide open and/or close in, has issues stopped down at infinity)
itfwc wrote:
I know that those exist, but sometimes people want to autofocus.
Which is notoriously problematic with the Canon 50L's (the 85L seems to lack the focus shift problems that plague the 50L). I'm pretty sure people would like AF with the Canons as well ;-)
Nikon needs to fill in the 70-200 F4VR/ 100-400 VRF4/5.6/ 400mm F4.6...they would sell a lot of these. I already have a 17-35mm/24-70G F2.8 lesses.....please
I've been looking at dozens of samples from that camera to see if it could be an alternative to m4/3 for travel, but no. I can't pinpoint what's lacking, but it's as if the images aren't "coming out". They tend to look dull and lifeless, particularly when compared to what I've seen from the OM-D, not to speak about the other 24MP Nikon camera, the "slightly" more expensive D3X.
