[Brightcolours]

http://petapixel.com/2015/07/29/nikon-le...ore-174031

 

24-70mm f2.8 VR

24mm f1.8

200-500mm f5.6 VR

 

The last one has a very nice price according to that article, which seems a little odd?

[davidmanze]

http://petapixel.com/2015/07/29/nikon-le...ore-174031

 

24-70mm f2.8 VR

24mm f1.8

200-500mm f5.6 VR

 

The last one has a very nice price according to that article, which seems a little odd?

I does seem a very decent price, perhaps they are trying to compete with the Sigma/Tamron 150-600s!

[JJ_SO]

Over at Nikon rumors the telezoom makes the biggest impact according to post numbers. So, there's a demand and an interest in that lens. Nikon's strategy of putting a 2.5×* zoom against 3 Tamron / Sigmas 4× zooms will please the "strictly Nikon and nothing else" group. I don't reckon a better performance than the 3rd party lenses, but I also was amazed about the price - because the 24-70/2.8E VR follows the current trend of bringing lenses with less resolution but lightweight design / fluorite coating / fresnel elements / electronic aperture and VR for a huge bite more bucks. A 24-70/2.8 for app. 2200 $? Good luck with that, Nikon.  ^_^

 

* if 2.5× at all. I guess, in closer distances it will be less FL-range because of it's fixed length barrel design.

 

I welcome those choices, we really can choose more excellent glass than we could use at a time. So, Nikon does it's traditional marketing thing and leaves the more exotic stuff like 18-35/1.8 or 24-35/2 or 15-30/4 to others, manufactures most new lenses in China (I still remember the agony when we learnt, a batch of Zeiss lenses will be made by Yashica in Japan, but "up to Zeiss standards" and not many people believed that).

 

Since I just start collecting experience with long lenses, I learnt it can be a good thing carrying a very lightweight 300/4 and a very less lightweight 150-600/5-6.3 (except the carrying bit  ) but I'm afraid it won't happen very often. So, I'm curious about the weight of this 200-500. To me, it appears to be another lightweight lens.

 

And the 24/1.8? Another piece for the "only Nikon glass in front of a Nikon body" -at the same price I can get a Sigma 24/1.4 Art I don't see much reason not going for an extra ½ f-stop. But they will love it and I'm sure it's at least as good as the 24/1.4 G Nikkor, if not better.

[Klaus]

http://petapixel.com/2015/07/29/nikon-le...ore-174031

 

24-70mm f2.8 VR

24mm f1.8

200-500mm f5.6 VR

 

The last one has a very nice price according to that article, which seems a little odd?

 

Wow ...

[Rover]

Markus! Wake up!!

[mst]

I'm here... and as excited about these lenses as you are

 

-- Markus

[mst]

A 24-70/2.8 for app. 2200 $? Good luck with that, Nikon.

Well, to be fair: that's not far away from the EF 24-70L II initial MSRP, which was $2299... now down to $1899. And it seems they sold a few of that one... even though it doesn't have IS

But I agree with you... in general Nikkor prices increased a bit too muc for my taste, too. That's why my expectations regarding the 200-500VR, given its rather low price in comparison, aren't too high, yet.

-- Markus

[mst]

Oh, and one more thing: I'm quite relieved that obviously Nikon didn't change the zoom design on the 24-70 VR. Unlike the EF 24-70 II, the Nikkor's inner tube still moves within the hood (at least it seems to me from the images published so far).

Personally, I always preferred this over the "Hood on front lens" design (which the 24-70 II now has).

-- Markus

[Rover]

Markus is with us again! Care to share some of your plans with us? (if any)

[mst]

Lots of plans, actually

Lots of things have turned upside down for me, but at least regarding photozone I'm on track to return to where I left quite a while ago.

-- Markus