Nikon 24-85 3.5-4.5 VR - why not 67mm filter size?

Started Jun 14, 2012 | Discussions thread
PepsiCan Contributing Member • Posts: 739
Because...

whoosh1 wrote:

Its good to have one more lens option but now that Nikon was going toward a common 67mm filter size in many affordable lenses (28mm f/1.8g, 85mm f/1.8g, 70-300 VR - and of course DX lenses 16-85 VR, 18-105 VR, 18-70) and of course - why not complete the affordable set for FX with a 67mm filter size? Ideal would have been all 4 with same filter size - affordable wide-normal zoom 24-85, affordable telephoto zoom 70-300 VR, affordable wide 28mm f/1.8g and affordable short telephoto 85mm f/1.8g.

I don't know the details, but how wide the front element has to be is not just an asthetic choice. From what I understand, it is actually the outcome of the design decisions around the lens, such as the focal length, aperture, focal length multiplication factor, and then some. So, if this lens would have had a 67mm filter size, perhaps there would have been something else you would not have had.

 PepsiCan's gear list:PepsiCan's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G +5 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow