If Canon can do xyz why cant Nikon?"

Msmoto

Maybe this thread should be "Too lazy to start a new thread"…or… "Guess what goes on in the heads of the CEO's of Canon and Nikon".

Godless

Nikon 20-35mm f/2.8 D AF

Yes they are zooms not primes

but is that big issue?

Yes, it is a big issue, especially with the 20-35, which is a pig to haul compared to a 20mm f/2.8 prime..

And secondly, it is an issue, because I rarely use zooms for anything. It just ain´t my thing.

And thirdly, this was about what Canon has and what Nikon has not.

And there really should be a G series 20mm prime.

sevencrossing

Godless And there really should be a G series 20mm prime


they have probably been taking to KR who seems hate Gelded lenses

>.

TaoTeJared

Godless does point to a similar thought process I have - Where are the prime lens updates? 14, 16 fish eye, 18, 20, 24, 45, 105 f2.5, 105DC, 135DC, 180 2.8, 180macro, 300 F4, 400mm f/5.6. Add VR to a hand full of those. (I agree with the 400mm 5.6 - it is just dumb why Nikon has never made one.)

Really this falls into DX prime land as well - 18=28dx, 20=30dx, 24=36dx. Sure they land into big FX land, but at least they could be used on the 3xxx/5xxx line.

@sevencrossing - the old primes and especially zooms just don't stand up to the new systems real well. My Tokina 16-28 is sharper than the 18,20,24 primes. Actually my old AFD 17mm F3.5 Tokina is better than either the 18 or 20mm primes I have tried. (I will add a disclaimer they were used lenses and not sure of the kind of use.)

BrucePhotography

Usually I'm on the Canon forum asking if Nikon can have a great 36MP and no alias filter, why can't Canon?