I love Nikon I really do. Their 24-70, 70-200 and my newly acquired 45mm T/S are remarkable, BUT the price for the new 24 1.4 is just outrageous! $2199? I'm sorry, but that's just insane! Now the 16-35 f/4 VR, seems a bit more reasonable. If I decide I need wider then my 24-70, that's what I'd go for.
It's really a shame that Nikon is raising their prices so high. I just can't imagine this lens being much better if at all better then the Canon 24L. I guess we'll find out. Thank god I'm not a wide shooter
I just saw the sticker price
So nikon shooters have an option.
Option 1: Outfit yourself with all the neeto nikon gadgets D3, d3s, 24 1.4, 14-24, 70-200, etc. and ride your bike to the weddings
or
Option 2: Outfit yourself with fine Canon equipment and have enough left over to buy a lightly used BMW to ride in style to the weddings in!
Remember, $2200 is just MSRP. It'll see less than that at reputable online vendors.
And my personal opinion is that these will be great additions to the Nikon lineup. They have been sorely needing a 24/1.4 for a long time. Now if they would just add a 35/1.4, a revised 85/1.4 and a revised 135/2, Nikon could more or less dissolve Canon's prime advantage.
deepbluejh wrote:
Remember, $2200 is just MSRP. It'll see less than that at reputable online vendors.
And my personal opinion is that these will be great additions to the Nikon lineup. They have been sorely needing a 24/1.4 for a long time. Now if they would just add a 35/1.4, a revised 85/1.4 and a revised 135/2, Nikon could more or less dissolve Canon's prime advantage.
Don't worry I think they're coming. Nikon spent a while updating it's zooms but they're all done and now it's prime season.
Tony Hoffer wrote:
Even at $2200, it's still a much better investment than any camera body, car, or lots of other essentials.
You could probably own this lens for 5-10 years and then sell it for 75% of it's original value.
I won't disagree with that Tony! And if one is a wide shooter, I'm sure it will be an amazing lens to own. I just see Nikon prices sky rocketing past everyone else. Like I said I love Nikon gear and will continue to, I'm just shocked. Maybe it will be the greatest 24 photographers have ever seen
Yes - a hefty price tag, but still something I've been waiting for. Its more than just the 24 mm FL, the prime and super wide aperture make shooting with this lens more than just another lens in your bag. Can't wait to see more images coming off this lens.
I still dont understand why anyone would buy a 16-35 f/4 when nikon's 14-24 2.8 is so amazing... well worth the extra $500 or so for the optical quality of the 12-24 imo
swim_r wrote:
I still dont understand why anyone would buy a 16-35 f/4 when nikon's 14-24 2.8 is so amazing... well worth the extra $500 or so for the optical quality of the 12-24 imo
Expect the actual price difference to be larger than that. The MSRP of the 14-24 is almost *twice* that of the 16-35 (2400 vs 1250)
Between my 14 - 24 and my 24 - 70, I really don't see why I would buy a 24 prime. I get the whole blurry background/low light thing, but for $2200, I don't think I care for a 3rd 24mm lens.
The price difference between Canon and Nikon isn't something that should be looked at in a black and white manner (no pun intended). First look at what system provides the features, ergonomics, and design that fits your way of working. Nikon fits me better, so even if I switched back to Canon for its lower priced lenses, I wouldn't be a fit with the system and thus unhappy.
Also, when considering prices between the two companies, realize that they might use different coatings, optical designs, and construction materials.
Moreover, like Tony said - it's an investment that holds its value (far better than computers, cars, etc.)
