Take a peek @ the upcoming 70 -200 AF-S VR lens....

[SNAG]

Originally posted by scanner


The 70-200 G AFS VR looks good, but will it optically be better compared with a 80-200 AFS ED len?
Just some thought...

Optically wise- I think it should be on par with the 80 - 200..
The 24 - 85G consumer lens was already quite good - although I haven't taken any shots yet...

 

[SNAG]

Originally posted by erwinx


the 'consumer' 80-400 VR is already 2.4-2.5k, somehow, I think the 70-200 will cost around that or more?

Why much more? :dunno:

I thought it should be around that pricing, since the 70 - 200 is around half the focal length of the 80 - 400, and Nikon has proved that it's not very costly to implement the AF-S servo (eg. 24 - 85G lens)....

Just my 0.000002 cents.

 

[Richard]

Originally posted by SNAG
The 24 - 85G consumer lens was already quite good - although I haven't taken any shots yet...

I'm curious, how did you derive that conclusion?

 

[Jed]

Does no one have a clue?

 

[SNAG]

Originally posted by Richard


I'm curious, how did you derive that conclusion?

There're are quite a no of people who have this lens...
And they've used it, and the comments that they gave were quite good...

 

[SNAG]

Originally posted by Jed
Does no one have a clue?

Just some latest info @ Nikonians.com (darn, I feel like a leech )

"'ve recently handled one of these lenses at a Birdwatchers show/fair at Rutland Water. Nikon had a stand at this show, complete with a number of bodies and lenses, one being the said, 70-200mm VR. I asked for a play, and it was attached to a F100, I can say that the lens is well balanced, very fast and quiet at focussing. As you may know it has no aperture ring. The VR has a three position switch for OFF, ON and ACTIVE. I had the lens at its maximum focal length, with the VR switched on, the viewfinder image was rock steady. I was told it was due on the market around October, ." at a price of £1,800 ish...

omg... Is this true?
Can't be right?

 

[Kit]

Originally posted by SNAG

at a price of £1,800 ish...

If that's right, the lens will be near S$5k.:dent:

 

[megaweb]

Originally posted by SNAG

at a price of £1,800 ish

 

[scanner]

Originally posted by SNAG


There're are quite a no of people who have this lens...
And they've used it, and the comments that they gave were quite good...

Sorry, I've to disagree with you!
I've two G type lens (28-80 mm & 70 -300 mm) and I did a test with my Tamron 24-135 mm len, which suppose to be equivalent or better than (optically) a D type Nikkor len.

The intention of the test was to find out which len/lens is better optically.

The result: Tamron len is the clear winner. It offers sharper images and less distortion as compared to the other G type len.
No doubt, the test conducted might not be ideal, but somehow it reflects the optical quality of a G type len & where it stand.

My 2-cents of inputs.

 

[Almond]

Er..... correct me if i'm wrong....

G types lense simply meant a new series of lenses from nikon that doesn't have the aperture ring. it doesn't reflect the optical quality of the lense.

also, a nikon lense with a D means, it allows distance information to the SLR body, thus allowing their matrix metering to become a more advanced 3D matrix metering.

last of all, G series lense is also provide the function of a D lense. thus, to me, G series lenses is just a D lense without the aperture ring.

So, No matter whether it's a G, or a D, the two letter does not reflect the optical quality of that particular lense.

Just my simple ways of looking at things....... regards

 

[SNAG]

Originally posted by Almond
Er..... correct me if i'm wrong....

G types lense simply meant a new series of lenses from nikon that doesn't have the aperture ring. it doesn't reflect the optical quality of the lense.

also, a nikon lense with a D means, it allows distance information to the SLR body, thus allowing their matrix metering to become a more advanced 3D matrix metering.

last of all, G series lense is also provide the function of a D lense. thus, to me, G series lenses is just a D lense without the aperture ring.

So, No matter whether it's a G, or a D, the two letter does not reflect the optical quality of that particular lense.

Just my simple ways of looking at things....... regards

Yeap Yeap... right on.
But seriously, adding the aperture ring ain't going to cost a lot either.... Can't get what Nikon's trying to do.

 

[SNAG]

Originally posted by Kit


If that's right, the lens will be near S$5k.:dent:

ahhh!!!!
There goes my dream of even trying to get one.......

 

[Kho King]

If that's right, the lens will be near S$5k.:dent:

Can't direct convert the price from pound to S$. The price of US$ is more accurate as a direct traslate into S$. US$ and £ are having similar figure for most Nikon stuff, but not the same "value" if converted directly.

£1800 most probably means US$1800~2000 for the actual price outside UK.

 

[NitroTech]

Originally posted by Kho King


Can't direct convert the price from pound to S$. The price of US$ is more accurate as a direct traslate into S$. US$ and £ are having similar figure for most Nikon stuff, but not the same "value" if converted directly.

£1800 most probably means US$1800~2000 for the actual price outside UK.

Will have to agree with you on that. Take for example, the Sigma 50-500mm lens. It cost £899(saw it somewhere in a mag) in the UK but in S'pore it cost abt S$1550-S$1600. So if I base it on that.... the Lens which cost £1800 would probably cost abt S$3200

 

[scanner]

Originally posted by Almond
Er..... correct me if i'm wrong....

G types lense simply meant a new series of lenses from nikon that doesn't have the aperture ring. it doesn't reflect the optical quality of the lense.

also, a nikon lense with a D means, it allows distance information to the SLR body, thus allowing their matrix metering to become a more advanced 3D matrix metering.

last of all, G series lense is also provide the function of a D lense. thus, to me, G series lenses is just a D lense without the aperture ring.

So, No matter whether it's a G, or a D, the two letter does not reflect the optical quality of that particular lense.

Just my simple ways of looking at things....... regards

Yes, you are right. However my intention is to point out that G type len and ED type len are different! The optical performance of ED is definitely better than G type.
I apologise if my previous statement is miss leading.

 

[SNAG]

Originally posted by scanner



Yes, you are right. However my intention is to point out that G type len and ED type len are different! The optical performance of ED is definitely better than G type.
I apologise if my previous statement is miss leading.

It's all right...

Hey hey, judging from the above posts, that means that the VR lens might be in the 2-3k range right?

That would be my dream lens to get....

 

[Ardis]

Originally posted by scanner



Yes, you are right. However my intention is to point out that G type len and ED type len are different! The optical performance of ED is definitely better than G type.
I apologise if my previous statement is miss leading.

You still made a miss leading.

Agree with your first sentence: G type and ED type are different

Disagree with your second sentence: Because G is not used to describe optical specification but mechanical spec. So there could be a ED-G lens.

 

[scanner]

Originally posted by Ardis


You still made a miss leading.

Agree with your first sentence: G type and ED type are different

Disagree with your second sentence: Because G is not used to describe optical specification but mechanical spec. So there could be a ED-G lens.

Is it? Hmm....thanks for pointing that out.

 

[kongg]

Wah lau so exp!!!!!get sigma 50-500 liao lah.....

 

[Jed]

That source is British? Interesting.