AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/3.5G ED VR announced!!!

insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
edited October 16, 2009 in Cameras
Ok let's start the jokes... :cry

I for some reason feel a little depressed.:cry

Comments

  • gecko0gecko0 Registered Users Posts: 383 Major grins
    edited October 14, 2009
    insanefred wrote:
    Ok let's start the jokes... :cry

    I for some reason feel a little depressed.:cry

    I am holding out for the AF-S DX XYZ HyperV Uber f/1.1 ED VR-TypeR 1-1000mm!!!!! rolleyes1.gif
    Canon 7D and some stuff that sticks on the end of it.
  • insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
    edited October 14, 2009
    gecko0 wrote:
    I am holding out for the AF-S DX XYZ HyperV Uber f/1.1 ED VR-TypeR 1-1000mm!!!!! rolleyes1.gif

    You for thegot Nano coating!
  • QarikQarik Registered Users Posts: 4,959 Major grins
    edited October 14, 2009
    insanefred wrote:
    Ok let's start the jokes... :cry

    I for some reason feel a little depressed.:cry
    A bit underwhelming since they have macro lens at 60mm and 105mm. I don;t really see this lens filling in any major gaps. If this were a 1.4 lens then hooray.
    D700, D600
    14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
    85 and 50 1.4
    45 PC and sb910 x2
    http://www.danielkimphotography.com
  • rookieshooterrookieshooter Registered Users Posts: 539 Major grins
    edited October 14, 2009
    Why would they announce an FX body and a DX lens? headscratch.gif

    Need new FX glass!!
  • PindyPindy Registered Users Posts: 1,089 Major grins
    edited October 15, 2009
    rookieshooter wrote:
    Why would they announce an FX body and a DX lens? headscratch.gif

    Need new FX glass!!

    Yeah, it's getting silly now.
  • jthomasjthomas Registered Users Posts: 454 Major grins
    edited October 15, 2009
    I like it. It is very light (lighter than the Tamron 90) and has VR, which reduces the need for a tripod. Perfect light hiking carry-along for those wildflowers and other nature shots.

    The 105 has VR, but is large, heavy, and costs $900.

    I think I'll sell my Tamron 90 and get one of these.
  • catspawcatspaw Registered Users Posts: 1,292 Major grins
    edited October 15, 2009
    Pindy wrote:
    Yeah, it's getting silly now.

    agreed. the number of increasingly useless DX lenses is just ..... eek7.gif
    //Leah
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,132 moderator
    edited October 15, 2009
    Folks, Nikon DX cameras still far outsell Nikon FX cameras. Nikon is just supporting an existing market and proving that they intend to continue production and support for the smaller format.

    FX lenses will continue to be developed as well, and the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S is evidence that Nikon will bow to no one. The Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S is also new, and the Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S is good as is.

    If I were a Nikon FX shooter, I would be very happy to have those zoom lenses. Basic primes are already there as are the PC lenses.

    I suspect Nikon will develop some FX f4 "ED" zooms now that the high ISO cameras have been developed.

    Maybe some more exotic primes could be designed, for a very limited market, but what else is really needed?
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • rookieshooterrookieshooter Registered Users Posts: 539 Major grins
    edited October 15, 2009
    ziggy53 wrote:
    Folks, Nikon DX cameras still far outsell Nikon FX cameras. Nikon is just supporting an existing market and proving that they intend to continue production and support for the smaller format.

    FX lenses will continue to be developed as well, and the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S is evidence that Nikon will bow to no one. The Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S is also new, and the Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S is good as is.

    If I were a Nikon FX shooter, I would be very happy to have those zoom lenses. Basic primes are already there as are the PC lenses.

    I suspect Nikon will develop some FX f4 "ED" zooms now that the high ISO cameras have been developed.

    Maybe some more exotic primes could be designed, for a very limited market, but what else is really needed?

    I agree they have a very good setup, no doubt. If I was rich I'd buy:

    14-24mm
    24-70mm
    70-200mm
    200-400mm

    and I'd be set, but that's $12K worth of glass. It'd be nice to have a 17-55 that wasn't DX or an equivalent to the Canon 24-105 F4 as well as some less expensive but slower ED glass. There are rumors of a 100-500mm ED F4-6.3 and I'd buy that in a heartbeat.
  • insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
    edited October 16, 2009
    rookieshooter wrote:
    I agree they have a very good setup, no doubt. If I was rich I'd buy:


    Ultra telephotos
    85mm pc
    24mm pc
    60mm macro
    105mm macro
    14-24mm
    24-70mm
    70-200mm
    200-400mm
    and etc...

    and I'd be set, but that's $12K worth of glass. It'd be nice to have a 17-55 that wasn't DX or an equivalent to the Canon 24-105 F4 as well as some less expensive but slower ED glass. There are rumors of a 100-500mm ED F4-6.3 and I'd buy that in a heartbeat.


    Fixed
  • rookieshooterrookieshooter Registered Users Posts: 539 Major grins
    edited October 16, 2009
    insanefred wrote:
    Fixed

    There is a 105mm ED VR macro lens. It will probably be the first lens I actually buy because it is *just* $900 but oh so sweet.
Sign In or Register to comment.