@mach250 it's about volume. If you can make $20 10 million times, versus $200 20,000 times, which would make more money? Plus, once a consumer buys a Nikon camera body, wouldn't they be inclined later on to look into buying more/better gear like the higher end glass with more margins?
A lot of this money is poured back into R&D to create more of the gear you've come to love. It's not a bad thing. I'm sure they have dedicated teams to work on the high end glass vs consumer glass. Good glass takes time to design, develop, test, and produce regardless of how much money they pour into it. If you think about how much technology goes into making all this stuff happen at such a high quality and consistency, it's pretty amazing.
Better news is the rumor of a ZF.2 1,4/35. (www.photorumors.com)
If we wait for Nikon to release a 35/1.4 AF or correct the issues with the 24/1.4 and make enough that can be found in stock in at least one store in a large US city, we shall be very old men and women indeed.
This year we can count on Nikon popping out 4 or 5 more 1kg+ zooms.
The world needs a new, 1.3kg, 5-500 mm f/4.5-5 zoom with VRIII!!
Improving the most basic kit lens to 24mm equivalent on the wide end would be a substantial differentiation from the rest of the entry level camera field, if it's true, and they can keep the cost at kit lens level, it should be a no brainer.
I'm not sure Nikon would put out another 16-xx for FX so soon on the heels of 16-35 VR. This sounds like a kit lens for their next consumer body. Even all the P&S's are getting wider now so this makes sense.
