Part II: Nikon wasting time & resources on a BS retro camera

Started Oct 29, 2013 | Discussions thread
yray
Contributing MemberPosts: 923
Like?
Re: Seems clear to me.
In reply to Stacey_K, Oct 31, 2013

Stacey_K wrote:

DezM wrote:

DezM wrote:

If a D610 works for you, I wonder why the D7100 does not, which is way closer to a theoretical D400 than the D610. (AF, DX sensor)

-- hide signature --

hobby aviation photographer

I don't know if a D610 works for me. I'm saying that after trying it, I could get the hang of it and IF Nikon is getting away from DX at least I'm going in the same direction as well. Just wish Nikon would announce their plans so that I know what to do with my $.

I'm not clueless about what I want, I'm clueless as to Nikon's direction.
--
Dez

It seems pretty clear to me. They have only released consumer type slow zooms for DX. All the high end fast glass both zoom and prime have been for FX. That right there is better than a road map for me pointing which direction they are headed.

Also makes the release of a D400 even less likely. They would have to engineer and design several new lenses to make it worth owning for a pro. The FX glass is already being made.

-- hide signature --

Stacey

Glad it's clear to you.

Whatever dude, was just pointing out the obvious. If Nikon felt pro users wanted to use DX, I would have expected them to make at least one pro level DX wide prime etc. They have released nor announced anything of the sort. All the good DX lenses were released a LONG time ago.The 18-140 rather than a 16-85 f4 update shows exactly where DX is going.

-- hide signature --

Stacey

Nikon must be quite content to let third party manufacturers make top level wide angle DX lenses. Clearly, Nikon's focus is on FX now. However, most people who want pro DX want it for telephoto use -- not for wide angle, and, to state the obvious, any FX telephoto lens will work just fine on DX. Of course they are bigger, heavier, and more expensive, but they afford the flexibility of being able to be used on both formats. If I were to plunk down way over $1K for a lens, I would definitely prefer to get a lens which would work on any of my bodies, present or future. So, to use your example, I would much rather spend on an FX 24-120/4 than on DX 16-85/4, assuming equivalent optical quality, or perhaps on the newly released Sigma 24-105/4 which, based on the latest Sigma record and the mixed reviews Nikon's 24-120/4 has received, I actually expect to be optically superior to Nikkor, and most likely quite a bit less expensive too.

The bottom line, I think third party manufacturers have achieved the level of quality which makes Nikon's own lenses in many cases easily replaceable in any focal length range, except for some exotics and signature pieces. I probably would have no trouble using entirely Sigma at this point if I had to, my loyalty is to F-mount, not to Nikon, and my sentimental attachment is to some of the old MF Nikkors, not anything they make today, regardless of what DxO measurements may tell us.

So, there are two issues here. If someone wants a high quality wide angle for DX, they can probably find a third party one which would meet all the benchmarks, and a wide angle DX prime from Nikon wouldn't be a game changer here. The other issue is that the neglect of DX lenses does indeed point at the direction Nikon has been going, and I wouldn't argue with that.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
D610New
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow