New DX zoom lens (what would you like to see)

sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
edited July 2013 in Nikon Lenses
The main blog suggests Nikon may be bring out a new DX zoom lens
what would you like and how much would you pay for it ?


and as a separate question , what do you expect ?

Post edited by sevencrossing on
«1

Comments

  • KnockKnockKnockKnock Posts: 370Member
    Hmmmm.

    16-70mm f/4.0 AF-S DX ED VRIII, 67mm filter, ≤16oz., ≤12" min focus, $750.

    To match the 24+mp sensors, could trade some reach for something with super optics and fast, quiet focus. Hopefully we'll find out soon!
    D7100, D60, 35mm f/1.8 DX, 50mm f/1.4, 18-105mm DX, 18-55mm VR II, Sony RX-100 ii
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    As the blog says, it's for the phantomic D400, I could imagine they would replace the 17-55. Although I agree with the data @KnockKnock has in mind, I'm afraid the Nikon price to be around 1200-1400$

    Except they ask Sigma to do it :))
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited July 2013

    Except they ask Sigma to do it :))
    not if they want VRIII

    Post edited by sevencrossing on
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    They would just make it 2 f-stops faster ;)
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,030Moderator
    edited July 2013
    I recently bought the 16-85 and now find it . My 18-105 was at least as good but lacked the important (for me) 2mm at the wide end.

    I would like to see an F4 VRIII version that has really good IQ. Price? Max $850 (£550). ;)

    That might stop me going FX for another year or so.....maybe.....if they fix the D600.....
    Post edited by spraynpray on
    Always learning.
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    I recently bought the 16-85 and now find it <meh>. ...
    Meh? I'm still curious about Sigmas 17-35/1.8 which has that price tag.

  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,172Member
    edited July 2013
    The old 17-55 and 16-85 needs an update and if sigma can come out with a 17-35 F1.8. why not a merge of the 3 of them? say a nikkor 16-60 F2-F2.8?
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited July 2013
    I would like a 16 -105 f4 VRIII
    that might temp me to get a D7100
    Post edited by sevencrossing on
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,030Moderator
    edited July 2013
    That is a dream lens - that and a D400 - what a combo - Gaaaaaaa!

    No wait - my 11-16, the D400, that 16-105 F4 VRIII and the new 80-400 - Double Gaaaaaaa!

    @JJ_SO: That range is too restricted for me. I have problems with only 16-85 after the 18-105.
    Post edited by spraynpray on
    Always learning.
  • ElvisheferElvishefer Posts: 329Member
    18-500mm

    It's time for Nikon to own superzooms once and for all!

    ;)
    D700, 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII, 24-70mm f/2.8, 14-24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4G, 200mm f/4 Micro, 105mm f/2.8 VRII Micro, 35mm f/1.8, 2xSB900, 1xSB910, R1C1, RRS Support...

    ... And no time to use them.
  • PostmanPostman Posts: 59Member
    I remember a while back a patent for an updated 16-35mm with a constant f/4 aperture.

    A constant f/4 aperture though? As a kit with the D400? No sure, you normally get the cheaper variable aperture lenses appearing in kits.

    Did the D300 or D300s ever come as a kit? Officially that is.
  • shawninoshawnino Posts: 453Member
    With third party going a good job on 11-16 (Tokina) and 18-35 (Sigma), and lots of DX users having a 35 or 50 prime in the bag,

    70-200 DX 2.8 at less than the price of the FX f/4
    or
    100ish-400ish DX fixed ap (4? 5.6?) at the same price as FX 70-200 f/4

    would likely be the most useful?
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 880Member
    Logically for Nikon to do this now it is planned as a kit lens. Couple a fairly high initial price (which has been a pattern of late) with an expensive high end kit lens and it would not work to have a decent sales volume. The 18-55 kit lens coming on the D3200, etc., seems to be very unpopular with owners I know. Maybe you know people who are happy with the 18-55 kit lens but EVERYONE I know things it is not appropriate. Also I would not expect it to have the range the 18-200VR has. I own a 18-200VR and it is a very decent lens. I also WOULD NOT buy another. And as to a kit lens to come at a discount with the D400 I believe it should have a very good kit lens but not one at an big price. A 16-85VR lens would be a nice kit lens if it had the quality of the present one and some kind of a price tag that would move it in volume.I actually think the 18-105VR is a pretty decent lens. A lot depends on what other lens someone owns. Since I have a 12-24DX Nikkor I don't have the great urge to buy another lens with a wide end that just basically gives me something like I already have and use a lot. I also have no problem with variable aperture lens as I own plenty of both and find myself using the variable aperture lens MORE.
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,144Member
    I am looking forward to trying the new Sigma 18-35 f1.8 zoom for its speed and depth of field. If that Sigma lens turns out well, I would like to see Nikon build a similar lens.
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited July 2013
    Postman
    Did the D300 or D300s ever come as a kit? Officially that is

    I think it was offered with the 18-200mm


    Nikon already have 3 Dx "Kit" lenses

    so if they are going to temp professions to down size to DX they need a quality professional DX lens, not a Kit one



    Post edited by sevencrossing on
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,030Moderator
    @sevencrossing: Are Nikon trying to tempt professionals down to DX? I haven't seen that anywhere - I would say the D300s is a professional grade camera for DX shooters personally. If anything, I would say that Nikon Tempt professionals up to FX.

    I saw the D300s offered as a kit with the 16-85VR towards the end of its life. So is the 16-85 the 3rd kit lens you were talking about?
    Always learning.
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited July 2013
    spraynpray
    If Nikon are going to produce a professional grade camera it would seem sensible, that it would be attractive to professional photographers. I have only one issues with my D800 - combine with a 24 -120 it is quite big a heavy. If Nikon's latest technology, can give me D800 quality, with a lighter smaller camera, then I am a potential customer

    ( This what I would like, but as we know "I want don't get" )
    Post edited by sevencrossing on
  • brownie314brownie314 Posts: 72Member
    The main blog suggests Nikon may be bring out a new DX zoom lens
    what would you like and how much would you pay for it ?


    and as a separate question , what do you expect ?

    I would like to see a 16-85 f/4. If it had sweet optics and a little environmental sealing, I would be very tempted. It would be a very nice walk around lens in good light. Or even in not so good light - most modern dslr's have crazy good high iso.

    I can see this happening, as Nikon has not made a high quality, professional DX zoom lens in a very long time. And with the very high quality sensors now going in the DX cameras, they can't let third party makers steal the lens show from them. Especially if they announce the D400 - a high quality DX lens is a must. They can't expect everyone to slap FX lenses on DX bodies all the time.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,030Moderator
    @sevencroosing: Check your PM's.
    Always learning.
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,396Moderator
    Problem solved...
    Msmoto, mod
  • ggweciggweci Posts: 1Member
    I agree with the suggestions for a 16-85 f4 VRIII. That would be a great walk around kit.

    And if Nikon was serious about DX and this upcoming D400, they should make two key DX primes that they are lacking: 23mm 1.4 and 56mm 1.4 primes.

    I'd but all three of above and be set.
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member


    They should make two key DX primes that they are lacking: 23mm 1.4 and 56mm 1.4 primes.

    .
    and a affordable 16mm ( 24mm equiiverlent ) f 1.4 while they are at it

  • MeinradMeinrad Posts: 20Member
    @ shawnino: (100ish-400ish DX fixed ap (4?) at the same price as FX 70-200 f/4)

    That lens would be bigger than the FX 200-400, and likely more expensive, too!
  • shawninoshawnino Posts: 453Member
    Meinrad: thanks for the selective quote. *smh* Nice job, Son.

    C*n*n 4.5-5.6 100-400 is listed as an an FX lens and weighs 3lb:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_100–400mm_lens
    $1700 at B&H.
    DX that bad boy at fixed 4 or 5.6 as I actually wrote.
Sign In or Register to comment.