Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Nikon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Nikon Cameras 
Thread started 05 Feb 2010 (Friday) 20:14
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Got a Nikon? Share your thoughts and photos here or ask a question! (II)

 
this thread is locked
woos
Goldmember
Avatar
2,224 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2008
Location: a giant bucket
     
Nov 05, 2012 15:21 |  #9301

dgrPhotos wrote in post #15210394 (external link)
Not many f/2 IS lenses out there.

It's true, but the price is still insane if that $850 figure is correct.

I mean, look at the amount of elements and mechanical complexity. The profit margin has to be absolutely sick. Same on the 28mm 2.8 IS. Might be an amazingly sharp lens and that's great, but still the price is a bit nutso. Compare with some zooms that have way more elements, way more special elements, and a much more complex cam design with much more mechanical complexity. Obviously they can get away with it, or they won't sell, but the quest for driving margins higher and higher has seen some really crazy Canon pricing lately.


amanathia.zenfolio.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
woos
Goldmember
Avatar
2,224 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2008
Location: a giant bucket
     
Nov 05, 2012 15:22 |  #9302

SUB1IM388 wrote in post #15210523 (external link)
Well it is going to be an "L" lens where Nikons isn't the top of the line G so.... I would think its going to be around 1200-1400 compared to the nikons 600 for the 24-85

Yeah, the Nikkor had some crappy corners when I tried it out at the store.


amanathia.zenfolio.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,642 posts
Likes: 134
Joined Dec 2010
     
Nov 05, 2012 15:22 |  #9303

Tony_Stark wrote in post #15210449 (external link)
Just took a look at some figures, it would cost me more to add the 24-70L II to my lineup than it would to switch to a D800 and 24-70G :confused:

Numbers don't lie...that is astounding tony




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony_Stark
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 348
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Nov 05, 2012 15:35 |  #9304

SUB1IM388 wrote in post #15210530 (external link)
Then you know what you must do!

But for the same cost as the 24-70 II or Nikon switch, I am considering adding: 17-40L, Rig, 135L, and 40 Pancake.

So it comes down between those ^ and a switch to Nikon.


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
woos
Goldmember
Avatar
2,224 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2008
Location: a giant bucket
     
Nov 05, 2012 15:49 |  #9305

Tony_Stark wrote in post #15210609 (external link)
But for the same cost as the 24-70 II or Nikon switch, I am considering adding: 17-40L, Rig, 135L, and 40 Pancake.

So it comes down between those ^ and a switch to Nikon.

Hehe, yea.... I like Canon...I'd consider switching back, to a 5d3, if I can't get the qpcard to work easily for me to get the color to look right to my eyes.... But wide angle is kind of issue...(for non tilt shift, for affordable wide angle). Think if you go to Nikon, you could get a 16-35mm VR. ;-)a Mucho bettah than the 17-40, imho!


amanathia.zenfolio.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony_Stark
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 348
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Nov 05, 2012 16:47 |  #9306

woos wrote in post #15210670 (external link)
Hehe, yea.... I like Canon...I'd consider switching back, to a 5d3, if I can't get the qpcard to work easily for me to get the color to look right to my eyes.... But wide angle is kind of issue...(for non tilt shift, for affordable wide angle). Think if you go to Nikon, you could get a 16-35mm VR. ;-)a Mucho bettah than the 17-40, imho!

Actually, Ive been hearing a lot of complaints with the WB settings on the D800. Is it really that bad? I tend to shoot 99% of the time with AWB on my 5D2 and color is pretty spot on every time for me. Rarely do much color correcting.

As for the 16-35 from Nikon, it is quite a bit more expensive than the 17-40L from Canon. Its very difficult situation as what Canon has that I like, Nikon doesn't. And vice versa. I am in no way decided yet what I would do, nor do I even have the funds now to buy anything. Merely looking at everything from a numbers stand point. Nikon has really done well in the last weeks/months with its new releases, especially in terms of technology and price point. Canon seems to be on some good stuff right now with its pricing ideas.

I guess another thing to keep in mind is the cost of staying with a system down the road. If Canon will keep releasing new editions of older lenses, and with current pricing ideas, it will be very hard to stomach such costs. Where as most popular/common pro Nikon lenses are really recent models (2008 and forward) so there won't be any upgrades in the near future. One of the first lenses to even have me thinking Nikon is the 14-24, and no Canon UWA lens touches this. Its been proven to keep its own against the new $3000 Zeiss 15mm, at half the cost!

I guess I will keep thinking about this over time, and eventually when I have enough saved up to make a move, I will decide then. But it doesnt ever become easier to decide ;)


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,388 posts
Gallery: 572 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Nov 05, 2012 16:52 |  #9307

dgrPhotos wrote in post #15210394 (external link)
Not many f/2 IS lenses out there.

True, But if it ends up anything more than $800 its still getting uncomfortably close to the 35mm f/1.4L (Which was around $1300 last time i looked at it)

The issue here isnt the price so much as what Canon is not giving you at that price, No weather seal, No hood, No case, No Pro Build, You're getting a cheap consumer-grade lens and nothing more...

Optically i expect it to be a great lens, No bones about it, the 24 and 28 are great too, but they're also REDICULOUSLY overpriced for what they are...

Thats my chief complaint with Canon, Anything I'd like to actually purchase is priced so nutsy I roll my eyes at it, Im sure Nikon will have an AF-S 35mm f/2 for like..$400 shortly..

-edit-

On Nikon, I like the 16-35 f/4 but I'd rather have f/2.8, The 14-24 isnt for me however (I love how wide it is, but not how heavy and big it is.. I want to put this lens in my messanger bag and carry it around with me guys.. lol) The Canon 16-35 f/2.8L II weighs less than both lenses...I know theres the 17-35 its just a case of getting a used copy in good shape at a decent price...

They finally gave me a 70-200 f/4 VR and i love it to pieces... So this isnt a complaint anymore

Nikon has the 28mm f/1.8 which looks awesome, Nikon has a 50mm f/1.8 which I'd be perfectly happy with, The 105 VR Micro-Nikkors a little outdated and the VR isnt quite as good as the Hybrid IS but the lens itself is a cracker so none of these are issues....

As said above the problem with staying Canon is simply I do want to go full frame, and going full frame means i will need some new lenses, With the way Canon is, I'm dissatisfied with some of their older glass but yet if they replace it they seem to be charging 3 times as much for the replacement...

Now the good news is i can sit on the fence, my gear can only go up in value slightly right now because of the price increases and such, but i will have to choose eventually...

I mean lets look at it another way, I can get a D800 refurb and a used 17-35 for the price of a 5D Mark III right now...


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hardcore
Goldmember
Avatar
2,668 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2008
     
Nov 05, 2012 17:00 |  #9308

I find the last 2 lenses by canon to be a bid odd. None of them have any sort of appeal to me. That doesn't mean that some people won't want it, but a 24-70mm f4L IS? Really? There is a need for that niche with the already 24-105mm?

If the 35mm was an f1.4 with IS then I'd be interested!


Name: Corey
GEAR
Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,388 posts
Gallery: 572 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Nov 05, 2012 17:05 |  #9309

Hardcore wrote in post #15210932 (external link)
I find the last 2 lenses by canon to be a bid odd. None of them have any sort of appeal to me. That doesn't mean that some people won't want it, but a 24-70mm f4L IS? Really? There is a need for that niche with the already 24-105mm?

If the 35mm was an f1.4 with IS then I'd be interested!

The way I see it is the 24-70 f/4L IS is supposed to be their answer to the 24-85 VR, But its up in the air if it will be priced like that.. The way I see it, its supposed to be the kit lens for the 6D and give the kit a price of $2800 with the lens to go head to head with the Nikon 24-85/D600 kit

Now looking at it from THAT perspective i get it... for that kind of money ($600 over the 6D alone) it will be a good little lens

But at $1400 or $1800 like some rumors are speculating? Canon, WTF


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dgrPhotos
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,501 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 51
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Illinois
     
Nov 05, 2012 17:20 |  #9310

KenjiS wrote in post #15210967 (external link)
The way I see it is the 24-70 f/4L IS is supposed to be their answer to the 24-85 VR, But its up in the air if it will be priced like that.. The way I see it, its supposed to be the kit lens for the 6D and give the kit a price of $2800 with the lens to go head to head with the Nikon 24-85/D600 kit

Now looking at it from THAT perspective i get it... for that kind of money ($600 over the 6D alone) it will be a good little lens

But at $1400 or $1800 like some rumors are speculating? Canon, WTF

Its going to be the kit lens for the 6D so it wont be anymore than the 24-105.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hardcore
Goldmember
Avatar
2,668 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2008
     
Nov 05, 2012 17:24 |  #9311

Ya, good perspective. Pricing rumours must be way off! No way anybody will pay that much for a f4 lens!


Name: Corey
GEAR
Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Yohan ­ Pamudji
Goldmember
Avatar
2,994 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Mississippi
     
Nov 05, 2012 17:28 |  #9312

Hardcore wrote in post #15211045 (external link)
Ya, good perspective. Pricing rumours must be way off! No way anybody will pay that much for a f4 lens!

I don't know, the Nikon 200-400mm f/4 is pretty pricy ;) But yeah, I expect the 24-70 f/4 IS to be a lot cheaper than the rumored Japanese price.

.7x magnification + hybrid IS = macro lens in disguise!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gqtuazon
Senior Member
Avatar
756 posts
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Japan
     
Nov 05, 2012 18:09 |  #9313

I'm not sure why so many of you are complaining about the prices; neither company is twisting your arm to buy their lenses or cameras.

If you think the products are too expensive, then don't buy them or wait a little longer for a "used" copy at a lower price that you can afford or willing to pay. If every product is priced cheap, I will have everything that I wanted; this also explains why I don't have a Rolex watch. ;)


Regards,
Glenn
My Gear
Flickr (external link)
My website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,388 posts
Gallery: 572 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Nov 05, 2012 18:33 |  #9314

gqtuazon wrote in post #15211235 (external link)
I'm not sure why so many of you are complaining about the prices; neither company is twisting your arm to buy their lenses or cameras.

If you think the products are too expensive, then don't buy them or wait a little longer for a "used" copy at a lower price that you can afford or willing to pay. If every product is priced cheap, I will have everything that I wanted; this also explains why I don't have a Rolex watch. ;)

For me, I'm complaining because I really do not feel like switching and yet Canon's decisions and pricing keep pushing me towards doing just that... As pointed out, a few of Canon's lenses could use updates, but Canon isnt updating them, or when they do update them, they're doing so and slapping a huge price increase on them...

I feel I can easily get more for less on the Nikon side of things at this point, Im still sitting on the fence because I know how these things go and I dislike being rash, but every person really hits their breaking point and right now the stars are starting to align in a manner that makes it very enticing to switch... Before I stopped myself because I simply gained nothing from a switch, but now I'd gain full frame which is a pretty large gain... so yeah

-edit- its also venting my frustrations, and theres security knowing you're not the only one


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony_Stark
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 348
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Nov 05, 2012 19:38 |  #9315

gqtuazon wrote in post #15211235 (external link)
I'm not sure why so many of you are complaining about the prices; neither company is twisting your arm to buy their lenses or cameras.

If you think the products are too expensive, then don't buy them or wait a little longer for a "used" copy at a lower price that you can afford or willing to pay. If every product is priced cheap, I will have everything that I wanted; this also explains why I don't have a Rolex watch. ;)

Because how much things cost is a huge driving factor for everyday life decisions. Not just cameras but everything. All we're doing here is discussing things pertinent and relevant to cameras, hence the photography forums. Go on car forums and people will be discussing MPG and what gas they use, or what car to get to be more efficient with gas.

Frankly when people save up hard earned money and want to spend that on photography equipment, you really have to take a step back and analyze all options. Hence my input on the 24-70 II costing the same as upgrading to a D800 + 24-70G combo, or buying a plethora of other equipment. Its all relevant to this thread, forum etc. :rolleyes:


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

835,866 views & 0 likes for this thread
Got a Nikon? Share your thoughts and photos here or ask a question! (II)
FORUMS Nikon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Nikon Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is RDH500
835 guests, 255 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.