12-15-2016, 10:34 PM
A surprise visitor in the test lab today :)
12-15-2016, 10:34 PM
12-16-2016, 03:36 AM
One thing i am sure of, it will be hard sending this lens back once testing is over.
12-16-2016, 05:26 AM
Ah...did it just roll in blown by the wind?
It's made quite a few waves already, expensive, big, cited as a bit plasticy in finish and made in China!
Initial changed images from the lens on Flickr were controversial...
Roger Cicala of Lens Rentals did a strip down after finding dust in the lens, Nikon's advertising blurb stated it had a "direct-drive ring motor with no gears".
Roger found a small ceramic HF motor driving white nylon gears and published his report....Nikon's blurb department retracted that publicity within 24 hours!!
The images published on DPreview's Nikon lens page showed beautiful punchy sharp images with melting blurring, although it does have a tendency to bubble bokeh against background foliage!
So it got off to a shaky start...but it's one hell of a lens!
12-16-2016, 06:25 AM
"hell of a lens..." not all say that
By coincidence I was sneaking in the good old Nikon retirement rumors forum, a lot of men thinking in older dimensions than their grandfathers could think in. One new / old member, former PitchBlack, now PeachBlack was very cheerful about his new Sigma 85/1.4 Art which in his eyes is one heller of a lens.
Interesting points: 105 only 3Â° FoV different to 85, but for the price of the 105 you get the Sigma and a 35/1.4 Art for free. (+150 gram extra weight only by the 85...) :lol: Being the 85 still a better lens than the 105. I hear already the people who were telling the 58 had the better bokeh than the Sigma 50 Art, they will come out of their caves and have a comeback soon if they are not already throwing their blend grenades.
Hell, why not, hell as place can mean a lot of things. I waited 2 years for the Sigma and to my surprise, I'm really done with buying big bricks of glass. Yes the 85/1.4 G is under certain circumstances delivering only mediocre performance and the Sigma is not that much cheaper, so it has to be way better, optically. I just don't want to waste another half day to adjust focus
12-16-2016, 07:53 AM
Quote:And all are irrelevant because it has the wrong mountattention read that the adapter to Sony can cause serious damage tom your camera when using this lens, I think they will find a solution of this very soon
12-16-2016, 08:57 AM
I don't really like using Nikon lenses to begin with. Everything is backwards compared to almost everything I have. How you mount them is backwards, focus ring turns backwards, zoom ring turns backwards. Aperture ring turns backwards...
I'm surprised how they managed to get everything so wrong :p
12-16-2016, 09:14 AM
This lens has no aperture ring... B)
And being surprised "how they managed to get everything so wrong" - come on, doing it exactly differently will attract all people who see Canon cameras as piece of loveless formed plastic chunk. Obviously there must be enough people who like ugly cameras.
Quote:This lens has no aperture ring... B)
I know it has no aperture ring, that's also wrong if you are still using Nikon's old film cameras (I mean one of three people who still use them).
The high point of opposite-of-whatever-Canon-does* behavior was probably D70, where you had to press up/down to scroll images because Canon was using left/right.
All jokes aside, only thing Nikon objectively does wrong is product naming. It's a huge mess and they won't be able to get themselves out of it unless they begin from scratch.
*Actually it's not only bizarro-Canon, it's almost bizarro-everything. Sony/Minolta AF, Sony E, Minolta MD/MC, almost all m42, Hasselblad, Mamiya, Canon FD, Canon EF, Leica m39, Leica M, Pentax 67, Pentax K... and many more have the same focus ring direction. Aperture ring direction varies a bit more but most of them are the same as old Canon FD. Even lens mounting technique is mostly the same (Alight at top and twist right. Except for Fuji. They agree with Nikon on mostly everything.
12-16-2016, 10:46 AM
Quote:All jokes aside, only thing Nikon objectively does wrong is product naming. It's a huge mess and they won't be able to get themselves out of it unless they begin from scratch.Well, I know some classmates the "name-manager" of them was in with ^_^
Yo mean, because they run out of numbers for professional APS-C bodies? No prob, in time they need to do the research if it could be already the time to dip a (less useful) toe into the mirrorless pond, they will not throw out a D510. So, they don't need to think about before the next, say, 5 years or so <_<
Using (self-explaining) numbers to qualify a product will sooner or later lead into dead-end
|Users browsing this thread:|