Reading mode: Light Dark

Nikon did what I hoped Canon would do...

Go to last post
JCDoss said:
jwilliams said:
Member said:
In addition, no one has stated that this is going to be an
affordable lens....
Click to expand...
My bet is it is no more than $500
Click to expand...
Hahahaha... You don't know Nikon very well, do you? If that new
lens has an MSRP of less than $1K, I will eat my hat.
Click to expand...
I was talking street price not the meaningless MSRP. I only care what I pay for an item. Some made up number that does not affect me is meaningless.

I think you would get a lot of takers betting its under 1K! Too bad you can't do polls like on some forums we could all pitch in our $02 worth.
Member said:
--
JCDoss
D30/BiG-ED
17-35L, 28-135IS, 50/1.4
Click to expand...
--
Jonathan
 
Nikkor 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED AF-S is $369~
Nikkor 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D ED-IF is $499~

Or within $20 of these prices on B&H. I do not see a lens built almost exactly like the current Nikkor 24-85G AF-S lens above being 3 times as much. Especially if the optics are a little smaller. They are basically mating the 2 lens above.

--
Dayton http://www.pbase.com/daytontp/
Nikon N80 w/ MB-16 Grip
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D
Some other lenses.....
 
Just compare the 1D to the D1H, or the 1Ds to the D1X - Canon is way ahead. So unless Nikon do something soon, Canon is ready to start killing Nikon at the high-end.

If you accept that, then the most obvious thing for Nikon to do is, as you say, release a D2, or at least announce one to stop the faithful from jumping ship. But instead they release a lens optimized for the D1x series, and a RAM upgrade for the D1X, both of which address severe weaknesses in the D1X compared to the 1Ds. Add to that the new firmware and Nikon Capture upgrades, and absolutely EVERYTHING points to the conclusion (yes, still speculation) that there is no D2 coming anytime soon.

Or let's put it another way: if there's going to be a D2 released in the near future, why wouldn't they have announced it by now? They have announced this lens 4-6 months ahead of availability, why not announce the D2 and just say it will be available "real soon now"?

I dream that Nikon announces a $5k full-frame D2 AND a $2k full-frame D200 tomorrow - that would put the pressure back onto Canon. But I just don't see it happening.
daytontp said:
hyslopc1 said:
I agree with everything you wrote. Nikon has recognized that they
cannot fight the 1Ds, so they have given up the high ground and are
throwing everything they have at the prosumer category, which is a
wise move.
Click to expand...
Have you seen a Nikon press release stating that a new D2 is going
to have a 1.5x focal crop? It may be likely that it will, but
unless you work for Nikon's R&D, I believe your comment is just
specualtion.

I do not see why you can expect a company (Canon in this example)
to launch a product and then have another comapny (Nikon in this
example) not to launch their competeing product at the same exact
time. Just look at the ATI and Nvidia battle right now. ATI is
currently killing Nvidia in the AGP Graphics Card market, but
Nvidia has a product coming out next spring. New products need a
development time frame or garbage just get put on the market.

--
Dayton http://www.pbase.com/daytontp/
Nikon N80 w/ MB-16 Grip
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D
Some other lenses.....
Click to expand...
 
This would make the S2 Pro with the new Nikon lens an attractive package. Faster focus than the D60, quiet lens like USM, good low light, high ISO, and finally a true wide angle with correct perspective (a 18mm perspective looks like an 18mm).

Nikon lens costs can be spread over Fuji, Nikon, and Kodak sales. On the other hand, Canon has an excellent user interface. This all reminds me of Wintel vs. Apple market strategies.

-f
D60, EOS 3, Elan, 550 EX
+ lenses
 
The 70-200 F2.8
The 300 F4.0
The 400 F5.6
The 400 F2.8

All have a front lens elements that are extremely close (within a couple %) of what simple math says they should be. I suspect the 300 F2.8 is the same.

I do not suspect there will be a quality 300 F2.8 1.5 lb lens for $1000 any time soon.

The current small size of the 35mm lenses compared to MF come mostly from R/D and volume. A 300mm F4 MF lens is on par with the Canon 300mm F4 IS lens. In fact the Canon lens is sometimes slightly larger than the MF lens.

Steven
jwilliams said:
I agree on the front element. Basic physics. I also wonder if the
front element on a 300/2.8 is bigger than 107mm? I don't know but
would be curious.

There undoubtably has to be some size weight savings for a smaller
image circle. I go back to the 300/2.8 for MF. It was a beast.
If I remember right it weighed over 10lbs and I will bet the front
element was much larger than 107mm. Its simply more difficult to
cover a larger area with a similar line/mm resolution. Look at LF
lenses. On a line/mm basis they are terrible. The quality comes
from the image size and the fact it has to be enlarged a lot less
than 35mm or MF.

Remember at one time people scoffed at getting quality images from
an image the size of 35mm. History has a way of repeating itself.

--
Jonathan
Click to expand...
--
---
My really bad latest Gallery:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/tempephoenix
 
jwilliams said:
DavidP said:
Actually, there's a free program / plug-in (mentioned above) that
can be used to get rid of the CA. Much better than using film
grain to hide the CA that occurs.

Yes, CA occurs even on 20mm primes. It's hard to completely get
rid of on really wide-angle lenses.
Click to expand...
Just curious if anybody has really tested the same exact lens on
digital and film to look at CA. I have noticed that even some of
my tele lenses like my 200/2.8L and 70-200/4L produce CA on scenes
such as tree branches against a cloudy sky. Never seen anything
like this with film.
Click to expand...
This isn't the CA we're talking about. This is a mixture of CA caused with blooming. This doesn't really occur with film. However, we're talking about real yellow/blue green/red etc. type CA that you do see with film. Here's an example of the CA, look at the sidewalk:



Jason
jwilliams said:
My suspician is that CA is largely caused by the algorithms used to
convert a color mask to full color information. I think wide
angles make this worse for some reason, but I have seen CA in
places I never would have seen with film with lenses other than
wide angle.
Click to expand...
 
jwilliams said:
Absolutely. People are idiots if they think Nikon is stopping at
their current sensor size. They are going to aim the full size
sensor at the pros and give the consumer some decent glass for the
smaller sensors.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that they're just pacing themselves, giving Canon enough of a lead to make it a challenge?
jwilliams said:
jwilliams said:
So when you sell your D1, D1X, D1H and D100, what then, do you sell
your DX Nikkor lenses as well?
Click to expand...
Same thing I did with my FD lenses - sell them along with the
camera. Somebody will have a really nice setup.
Click to expand...
Apparently you're sold on Nikon's strategy, so here's a serious question for you: are you going to sell your EF lenses, get a D100 and start with Nikon DX?
 
Yes, a while back I started a thread asking whether Canon EF was a losing proposition. At the time I thought that the right strategy was exactly what Nikon has done today, or maybe even smaller. In fact it was the very well thought-out counter-arguments from that thread that made me change my mind, and realize that the real goal should be a full-frame 35mm sensor, not a new set of lenses. It's a cheaper, more elegant, and technically superior solution, I don't think anyone can argue that. There's only one drawback that I can see: the lenses will be a bit heavier, especially at wide-angle.
Andre Lam said:
Hi hyslopc1

I think we had this discussion 6 months ago but back then I thought
Sigma or some other independent lens maker would exploit this
market niche since they could sell to both camps. I know its only
good for cameras with 1.5 or 1.6x FOV crop but it makes sense
because there is a sizeable number of users since the D30 and D1x
that could possible find this new lens very useful.

Canon leapt forward with the 1.0x sensor, kudos but the
price...brickbats! With the 1Ds committed on the market, it would
be bad marketing to now cannabalise 1Ds sales by selling a special
12-24mm Canon lens for the D60.

Well too bad, this game of chess is indeed interesting because I
can see why Nikon did it because they haven't got a 1.0x sensor
yet. This makes a lot of sense but they are also preempting their
own relaese of their 1.0x sensor DSLR and the DCS14n.

However I believe that Canon's hand has now been forced...they must
soon release a similar lens in order not to lose conquest sales to
the D100. That is good news to us except I have just got a 14mm
lens! Damn.....

AL
Click to expand...
 
Whatever it is it screws up my pictures and is definitely the fault of the camera. Does the aforementioned SW also fix this?
Jason Hutchinson said:
jwilliams said:
DavidP said:
Actually, there's a free program / plug-in (mentioned above) that
can be used to get rid of the CA. Much better than using film
grain to hide the CA that occurs.

Yes, CA occurs even on 20mm primes. It's hard to completely get
rid of on really wide-angle lenses.
Click to expand...
Just curious if anybody has really tested the same exact lens on
digital and film to look at CA. I have noticed that even some of
my tele lenses like my 200/2.8L and 70-200/4L produce CA on scenes
such as tree branches against a cloudy sky. Never seen anything
like this with film.
Click to expand...
This isn't the CA we're talking about. This is a mixture of CA
caused with blooming. This doesn't really occur with film.
However, we're talking about real yellow/blue green/red etc. type
CA that you do see with film. Here's an example of the CA, look at
the sidewalk:



Jason
Jason Hutchinson said:
My suspician is that CA is largely caused by the algorithms used to
convert a color mask to full color information. I think wide
angles make this worse for some reason, but I have seen CA in
places I never would have seen with film with lenses other than
wide angle.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Jonathan
 
hyslopc1 said:
Andre Lam said:
Hi hyslopc1

I think we had this discussion 6 months ago but back then I thought
Sigma or some other independent lens maker would exploit this
market niche since they could sell to both camps. I know its only
good for cameras with 1.5 or 1.6x FOV crop but it makes sense
because there is a sizeable number of users since the D30 and D1x
that could possible find this new lens very useful.

Canon leapt forward with the 1.0x sensor, kudos but the
price...brickbats! With the 1Ds committed on the market, it would
be bad marketing to now cannabalise 1Ds sales by selling a special
12-24mm Canon lens for the D60.

Well too bad, this game of chess is indeed interesting because I
can see why Nikon did it because they haven't got a 1.0x sensor
yet. This makes a lot of sense but they are also preempting their
own relaese of their 1.0x sensor DSLR and the DCS14n.

However I believe that Canon's hand has now been forced...they must
soon release a similar lens in order not to lose conquest sales to
the D100. That is good news to us except I have just got a 14mm
lens! Damn.....

AL
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
hyslopc1 said:
Are you saying that they're just pacing themselves, giving Canon
enough of a lead to make it a challenge?
Click to expand...
No. They are definitely behind in sensor technology.
hyslopc1 said:
Apparently you're sold on Nikon's strategy, so here's a serious
question for you: are you going to sell your EF lenses, get a D100
and start with Nikon DX?
Click to expand...
I am keeping my Canon gear (for now) because I have a big investment in it. Not everybody does. Does that fact make Canon smart for not supplying a lens to match the camera they sell. No! Do you think that is smart?

Lets face it count up all the DSLRs in the market right now. What percentage are full frame? Way less than 1% (probably about 0.001%). Nikon is giving people what they need right NOW. They are also setting up for a 2 tiered camera system.

Seems smart. Don't irritate your current customers (yes I am mad I have to spend $1500 for a half decent wide angle on my D60) and set yourself up for both amateurs and pros in the future.

If Nikon had this lens available when I bought my D60 I may have made a different decision.

The lens can only be viewed as a plus my anyone contemplating anything other than the very expensive full frame DSLRs now available.

Fuji should send Nikon a big thanks also.

--
Jonathan
 
That is just a really really bad lens. I have never gotten anything
close to that even as wide as 16 mm (on a 1D).

Steven
jwilliams said:
Jason Hutchinson said:
jwilliams said:
DavidP said:
Actually, there's a free program / plug-in (mentioned above) that
can be used to get rid of the CA. Much better than using film
grain to hide the CA that occurs.

Yes, CA occurs even on 20mm primes. It's hard to completely get
rid of on really wide-angle lenses.
Click to expand...
Just curious if anybody has really tested the same exact lens on
digital and film to look at CA. I have noticed that even some of
my tele lenses like my 200/2.8L and 70-200/4L produce CA on scenes
such as tree branches against a cloudy sky. Never seen anything
like this with film.
Click to expand...
This isn't the CA we're talking about. This is a mixture of CA
caused with blooming. This doesn't really occur with film.
However, we're talking about real yellow/blue green/red etc. type
CA that you do see with film. Here's an example of the CA, look at
the sidewalk:



Jason
jwilliams said:
My suspician is that CA is largely caused by the algorithms used to
convert a color mask to full color information. I think wide
angles make this worse for some reason, but I have seen CA in
places I never would have seen with film with lenses other than
wide angle.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Jonathan
Click to expand...
--
---
My really bad latest Gallery:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/tempephoenix
 
Sheesh - that looks like it was taken with a really bad copy of the 14mm Sigma prime on a full frame body!

--
Olympus C2100UZI +B300 +A28, Canon D60, EOS7

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

 
I don't think it especially hard to understand . . . but the entire concept is totally disinteresting to me personally.

The market is ALREADY ABSOLUTELY SATURATED with more P&S digitals than ANYBODY can possibly keep up with!!! With MORE flooding onto the market on a daily basis from every maker under the sun.

Now Nikon seems to think that blurring the line between this plethora of P&S cameras with trashy zoom lenses and DSLR bodies with trashy zoom lenses is somehow worth while.

Time will tell but I know I just don't care.
jwilliams said:
Can't anybody figure tht Nikon is
going to make 2 types of cameras? Small sensor -
Amataeur/Prosumer. Full Frame - Pro/Prosumer with deep pockets.
Is that so hard to understand?
Click to expand...
--
Terry Danks
Nature & Wildlife (Hummingbirds!) Photography
http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/n1dcmc78/home.htm
 
Yeah the 1.0x sensor is the final realization of the full potential of the current 35mm system, too bad its(1Ds) so damned expensive.

I wonder though if there is a real market for an APS sized DSLR camera. Its neat but as long as it cannot be pocketable and has to be slung, whats the difference(between a D60), only is its a bit smaller and lighter, just as inconvenient plus the huge investment by the manufacturer on a new system of lenses. Hmmm gotta wonder.

But there IS a "potential" market there between the entry level DSLR at $2,000 and the top line P+S types like the G3 or F717 at around $800-1000. But a body plus lens at $1800 to $2000? Well thankfully its not a question we need to answer, but the marketing chaps at Canon or Nikon do. Problem is the F717 and G3 are pretty good already and does this new format offer anything else that those cams can't or the D60/D100 can't?

I reckon history will repeat itself as with the APS style SLRs. Canon might understandably be reluctant to invest....

AL
 
Andy Biggs said:
Although the Nikon announcement seems to be a white flag, perhaps
we should sit back and enjoy more competition. This could be a good
thing, actually.
Click to expand...
The only thing that Nikon is admitting by this is that it doesn't want to continue the ritual wallet abuse of their loyal, hardworking system using pros with continuous and expensive 'upgrades'.

D30 no 1D no D60 no 1Ds

That's $12,000 worth of camera bodies in 2 years. Not all pros can afford or want, to spend that many hard earned duckets so fast. Especially Nikon pros, remember that 'F' modles have 10 year life spans. I am actually quite glad. The image quality is there with the D1x and D100, why not slow down an upgrade or 2?
 
jwilliams said:
And we are all pros who can afford $8,000 cameras with $10,000
worth of lenses to go along with it.
Click to expand...
Maybe not. Yet the comparison serves well to demonstrate which company provides the most technologically advanced products.
jwilliams said:
Tell me who makes more money
making cars Honda of Ferrari? No doubt that the Ferrari is faster,
but Honda is making a car for the average man and way more money
for their shareholders.
Click to expand...
Although I think I see your point, you are not entirely correct in comparing the two product systems to Honda and Ferrari as the price difference is not tenfold or anywhere near that like with the cars.
jwilliams said:
Canon needs to wake up and fire most if
not all of their marketing dept.
Click to expand...
For what? For being first to introduce a digital camera of quality comparable to film bodies? Or for the immensely successful medium-priced products such as D60 (representing the Hondas in your example)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top