Will Nikon add VR to the 17-55 2.8 dx ever?

Started Apr 9, 2013 | Discussions thread
Guidenet Forum Pro • Posts: 15,748
Re: Will Nikon add VR to the 17-55 2.8 dx ever?

ebsilon wrote:

Guidenet wrote:

jonikon wrote:

For the price Nikon is asking for the 17-55 f/2.8 it shouldalready have VC, but  based on Nikon's behavior in recent years, it is unlikely  we will ever see an improved 17-55 f/2.8 with VC. I have rented the 17-55 f2.8 and although it is a fine performer, it is not worth the exorbitant $1400 price. That price is just nuts!  

- Jon

Have you noticed that just about all professional grade f/2.8 zooms are clearly near $2000?

This mentality you have that they are crazy priced is why Nikon, Canon, Sigma and Tamron just aren't going to be doing much in expensive APS-C crop lenses. The price expectations of most DX shooters limit the market too severely.

That's why you'll continue to see inexpensive kit type zooms and a few inexpensive primes made for DX. The quality, IQ and price expectations are way lower among most DX shooters. Not all, just most.

You see, you think it's not worth the exorbitant $1400. I think that's a bargain for a prograde fast zoom. Look at the 14-24 or 24-70. They aren't really harder to build or much larger. They are more expensive though.

Take care.

-- hide signature --

Cheers, Craig
Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

I think no one should expect more pro grade zooms for DX, but by a reasonable lowering of the build quality (to 16-85 standard rather than 18-55) such a lens could possibly  be offered at a  price closer to 1000$ which might find a market also among DX users, especially now when the D7100 is hitting the market. There is after all a quite huge price gap that can be filled between the 500/700$ Tamron/Sigma versions and the 1400$ Nikon.

-- hide signature --

------- Eirik ----------
Visit my gallery at http://eirikbs.smugmug.com/

I think you're completely right. In fact, they could easily come in at the same price at Sigma and Tamron, but it would do two things, I think. One, it would eat into the current sales of the existing 17-55 f/2.8 and the 16-85 DX. Secondly, Eirik, I think it would set false expectations about the possibility of a D400 in the future, which I doubt. I could be wrong, but I think the future is FX all the way. I really believe it would have to be as inexpensive as the current 3rd party makers to generate new sales. You'd have to take their sales.

I think the key to this is a pro-grade level DX camera from Nikon. If a D400 is not forthcoming, I believe Nikon will not create much in the way of upgraded glass in DX. The interesting thing is, I'm wondering if I'd be a buyer of a D400. I've always said no, but that field of view is interesting as a high speed sports model or a poor man's D4. I'm just not sure there's a whole lot of market for a camera in the exact same price point as the D600 FX. I'd buy a D400 maybe, just for the build, frame rates and control layout to match my other gear. I just don't think there are many like me. I think most would opt for a full frame D600. So would I if I didn't already have a D800, D3S and a D700. This would just be a ungrade for my fairly unused D300. It would really have to be something special.

Take care, my friend.

-- hide signature --

Cheers, Craig
Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

 Guidenet's gear list:Guidenet's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D3S Nikon D800 +31 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow