Nikon D90 and 18-105mm/f3.5-5.6 AF-S VR DX Announced

[phillip_garland]

I agree that the 50 is an outlier, especially the 1.8. It's a shame Nikon hasn't release an AFS one for

D40(x)/D60 users who want autofocus.

 

I see 85s about an order of magnitude less than 50s- and they're always on Canon bodies. I've never seen a

180f/2.8 in the wild- it's probably my inexperience, but I'm a little hard-pressed to think of what it's useful

for- it seems like it would be too long, too short, or too slow for many uses. Maybe some sports photography?

 

I think wider primes are a tough sell on APS-sized sensors- if you're using DX and want to shoot wide, there's a

good chance that 24mm isn't wide enough. It would be interesting to know if Canon's sales of their 24mm f/1.4

increased after they released the 5D.

 

I rarely see anyone with the Sigma 30, although I suspect sales of it have suffered because of a reputation,

deserved or not, for a large number of quality control issues. I've never used it, but it seems like almost every

online discussion of it includes a subthread on the likelihood of getting a bad copy.

 

The presumably difficult choice for Nikon to finesse in investing in lens R&D and manufacturing is that lenses

like a 24 or 35mm f/1.4 or a 50 or 85 f/1.2 are going to be expensive, niche items, but many of the people who

want them, really, really want them.

 

~Phillip

[tri-x1]

Lenses like the 85m f1.4 are wonderful for the D3 user. And if you can afford the D3 you might be able to afford an 85mm f1.4. The problem is there aren't enough shootter who need or can afford that lens so the prices stays out of reach of the majority.

 

As to the F1.8 24mm DX suggestion--I specid=fically said DX because that lens would be considerably smaller and lighter than a 24mm f1.8 FX. That's one of the selling points of DX.

[waltflanagan]

Last year a friend of mine bought a D80 w/ 18-135 f3.5-5.6 kit lens. He complained that my indoor pics looked so much better than his. I told him to spend $200 on a 50 f1.8 and SB-400 and bounce it. He says it's the best $200 he's ever spent and wondered why the 50 f1.8 and SB-400 weren't "part of the kit" since they're essential for indoor/low light pics he wants to take. The lesson I learned is that new photographers don't even know what a prime lens is but if you explain and show the benefits they're willing to buy and use them.

 

Ilkka is right though. Nikon introduced 3 PC/tilt lenses and updated the 400, 500, 600mm lenses with VR. The only prime lens I really wanted was a 60mm f1.4 DX "portrait" lens with good bokeh but FX allows me to go back to my 85 f1.4. A new 28 f1.4 and AF-s updates of the 35f2, 50f1.4/1.2, 85f1.4 would be nice but I've never complained about the speed of AF on these lenses. I usually don't need the MF override and I don't need to AF on a D40/D60 since I don't have one.

[photo5]

The jump from the D70s to the D80 was far bigger than the jump from the D80 to the D90, and even when the D80 was announced many people were saying it wasn't worth the upgrade from the D70s. I wouldn't recommend the D90 to any D80 users, it's just not a big enough improvement. But to D40/D40x/D60 users it may be, which seems to be a pretty small market. The Canon 50D, despite the higher price, does seem to have more to offer in this situation and may be a better bet. I know a couple D40 users at work who are looking at both cameras, and I think the 50D may be the better bet at this point.

[ilkka_nissila]

<i>GPS and video? For what?</i>

<p>

The GPS allows your images to be searched in databases (e.g. in your own, or in microstock libraries) without having to

laboriously document where they were taken. And for research it's invaluable as a support for documentation.

<p>

The video ... well if you can pay $17000 for the other APS-sized video camera with interchangeable lenses, by all means get the Red.

But I

do some theatrical and music

photography and would love a low-light capable video camera. The consumer video cameras in this price class are ok for

outdoors in good light but they are not good for a lot of indoor stuff - for that you need a camera with a bigger sensor -

eh, like ... the name escapes me ... the D90. And I can't tell you how much I appreciate the compatibility with Nikkors

though I will most likely wait for a model that also supports metering with manual lenses, at least if the video mode

doesn't work without CPU in the lens at the moment.

<p>

I have no doubt that the D90 video mode has many limitations which would be annoying to the user. But it's a beginning

and I am sure the camera will be popular and other manufacturers will follow. One of the reasons I can't get useful people

images out of the 70-300 VR even on the D3 is simply that it creates images with too cluttered backgrounds. I am used

to things like the 85/1.4 and the 180/2.8 and compose with the assumption that the background will be out of focus. I am

sure this will help with video work also.

<p>

What is the 180/2.8 useful for? I use it for concert photography, portraits, landscapes, some sports etc. It is very

compact for the FL and speed (half the size of the 70-200 basically). It has incredibly good image quality, especially

compared with the f/2.8 zooms at this FL setting. It produces high contrast images without flare, unlike ... eh, the 70-

200. It has no corner vignetting problems like the 70-200. And it's very sharp even wide open. One of the best lenses I

have. It's a bargain with great characteristics, just as the 50/1.8 is. Its only major drawback is that it doesn't have AF-S

so it takes a bit more skill to use it in some situations.

<p>

As for the standard range f/2.8 zooms and their characteristics. The 24-70 is optimized for shooting at wide apertures and I get

pronounced field curvature problems at f/8 at the wide end - where it is easily beaten by the 25mm Zeiss. I have never been able to get

the 24-70 to show a single ghost - even when shot directly into the sun, but the images in such a situation are low contrast due to flare.

Again, the best primes show high contrast, good image quality in such situations. There are many such situations where these PJ-

optimized lenses are not quite up there. Whether you care about this is another matter, but there are people that do care.

[Peter_in_PA]

I like the D90 (I'm a D50 user), it might be my next body... but that lens... another plastic mount slow standard zoom? I

agree, I was hoping for something more like the 18-70 than the 18-135...

[summitar]

Does anyone know what software will be bundled with the D90?

[steve_hovland]

Image is not the hard part with video. Sound is the hard part, so video means very little on a camera that doesn't have a jack for a microphone.

[steve_hovland]

If I need another body next year I'm likely to go D90 rather than D300 for the same reason I went D80 rather than D200: weight.

 

And I will also doubt that paying twice as much will give me pictures that are twice as good :-)

[cliff_gallup]

One puzzle here is the seeming redundancy between the 16-85mm VR and the new 18-105mm VR, given the closeness of their focal lengths and max apertures and the fact that they each have VR. The 16-85mm is more expensive by about $200.

[photo_dark]

I see the D90 as a prosumer camera with the consumer in mind. Contrast that with the 50D.... which I see as a prosumer camera with the professional in mind.... maybe it's just me, but ergonomics aside, the 450D is the D90 competition, not the 50D... which I think is a direct knock on Nikon's D300 door...

 

...That being said, the D700 was more like a molotov cocktail through Canon's living room window.

 

I guess it's just the marketing road that Nikon chose to follow, but i'm surprised they don't have another model between the D300 and the D90 that also works to fill the 'starving student' niche as well as the 50D does. Remember... that starving student will likely someday be a (maybe) thriving professional... likely to stick with the brand they started with.

[robin_barnes]

I thought that CA correction was a feature of Expeed Image Processing. If so then the D90 will have it.

 

It looks like a very interesting camera and one, once the price starts to drop, I may decide to upgrade to from my D40x. However I am

very disappointed that it will not meter with my elderly, but excellent, manual primes.

[eric_arnold]

"I guess it's just the marketing road that Nikon chose to follow, but i'm surprised they don't have another model

between the D300 and the D90 that also works to fill the 'starving student' niche as well as the 50D does"

 

that would have been a break in company philosophy, david.

the d80 followed the d70 just as the d300 followed the d200. so the d90 is right in line. the good news is that the

body doesn't cost more, as it easily could have. that's aggressive marketing strategy, whereas introducing a new mid-

point advanced amateur line doesn't make a whole lot of sense if you think about it logically. also nikon doesnt

always compete directly with canon -- if you look at the respective product lines, they're more or less staggered at

intervals, except at entry-level. plus, for nikon to directly target the 50d, they would have had to have had advance

knowledge, which is a bit unlikely. quite possibly they were still grinning at the d700's assault on affordable FF

territory.

 

considering that the d90 has some hand-me-down features from the d300, some gimmicks from the d60 and some

new fangles of its own, i think it'll be fine for starving students (many of whom are ok now with their

d40/d60/d70/d50s). that $300 they'll save on the cost of a body buys a lot of Top Ramen.

[samoksner]

I'm so disappointed, why can't Nikon come out with some new lens' that aren't just more kit lens'. The 18-xx

arena is already so filled, another lens is pointless, however, they have holes in the lineup that make no sense.

 

18-55 I

 

18-55 II

 

18-55 VR

 

18-70

 

18-135

 

18-200

 

16-85 <b>

 

18-105</b>

 

Where people really waiting for THIS lens, another kit lens that has so many lens' to compete with. Nikon is

confused, we need more lens' of the likes of the Canon primes:

 

24mm f1.4

 

28mm f1.8

 

35mm f1.4

 

50mm f1.2

 

<B>85mm f1.2</B>

 

100mm f2

 

The 85mm f1.4 AF is long overdue for an update, if not just an AF-S motor, I mean, Manual override, in a fast

portrait lens is not too much to ask

[sprouty]

Put me on the list for a few of the primes if they release them.

 

I had a D200 with the 17-55mm/2.8 and the Sigma 30mm/1.4, both great lenses, but the 30mm was on the camera 95%

of the time. The Nikon zoom was nice but it was a beast by comparison, especially with the great big hood.

 

When I picked up my D700 I bought a 50mm/1.4 and am reasonably happy with it. The image quality is fine but it's

not the quickest focusing lens, nor the quietest. And Ilkka is absolutely right, the 2-stops makes a difference

with how a lot of people shoot.

 

So if Nikon brings out a high-end prime I'd pick the 50 and something wider. And if they don't I'll

buy the Sigma 50mm/1.4 when it gets released in the Nikon mount and hope for more.

[somak_ray]

Will it be able to meter with all Ai-S lenses?

[edward chen]

I am happy nikon announced 18-105 VR. If I am guessing correctly it should cost less then 18-200 VR.

 

I am in need of walk-around VR lens. 18-200 VR costs too much. I seldom use focal length more than 120 mm. 16-85 VR costs as much as 18-200 and is lacking in long end zoom for me.

 

So what else do I have? None....so this lens is perfect fit for me.

 

I am still waiting for 50-150/2.8. For DX, this is a perfect range.

[tom_burke3]

I've been reading this thread with interest. (Incidentally, I think it's a good thread, with many helpful comments.) My

position is that I'm a 'keen-ish amateur', with a D80, 18-70, 55-200, Tokina 12-24 and Nikon 35mm f2 AFD; having

previously had an original D70.

 

I think the D90 is a good camera that will appeal to its target market a great deal, just as the D80 has to its market, in

fact. The D80 has never garnered many headlines but I think it's been selling steadily, at least until the last few months:

when first released it was perceived as '3/4 of a D200 for just over half the money'. Certainly I felt that I didn't need the

features that the D200 had that the D80 didn't, so 18 months ago I was happy to go for D80. I don't whether or not the

D90 actually is '3/4 of a D300 for just over half the money', but I'm sure many people will make decide that it is and buy

it.

 

However I won't be one of them. It doesn't seem to be a compelling upgrade from a D80. I appreciate the things in it that

have improved compared with the D80, and of course there are significant new things,e.g not only the vidoe mode but

also live view. But none of these are enough to make me think that I want to put down a significant amount of money to

upgrade. After all, my D80 hasn't got worse overnight! I'm probably more tempted by a D300 than a D90, but that's even

more money. My decision is that I will skip the '12 Mpixel DX' generation altogether, and I shall take another look at

what's new in a couple of years' time. In the meantime I shall continue to take pictures with the D80.

[ilkka_nissila]

<i>My decision is that I will skip the '12 Mpixel DX' generation altogethe</i>

<p>

Ah, but Nikon seems to have stopped at 12 MP, they now have 4 DSLR models with that number of pixels and none above. Maybe they've decided that 12 is just right. ;-) Good for you though, will save a lot of money ;-)

[tri-x1]

"Will it be able to meter with all Ai-S lenses?

 

No, that's why there is a D200 and D300.

[larry_kincaid2]

Fast primes: "I notice that a surprisingly large subet of the other 20-somethings I see walking around with DSLRs have a 50mm lens attached. Most of my friends who have DSLRs also have 50mm lenses."

 

I checked B&H a couple of days ago and was surprised to see both the import and US 50mm f1.4 lenses were "out of stock." Demand or lack of supply? I traded in my only Nikon zoom for fixed lenses when I realized that I always seemed to set the zoom around 50mm most of the time, or as wide as possible or as long as possible, and the 300mm long was never quite long enough. Too many people on the web are praising the benefits and price of the 50mm 1.8 and 1.4 lenes for younger zoom only digital photographers not to notice and give it a try for the price. For certain types of photography--esp. portraits, street scenes, and even landscapes--I cannot see why anyone would want to use a clumsy zoom lens with lower resolution and quality. How long does it take for younger photographers to figure out the qualityis better with fixed primes and you can use you feet most of the time to zoom in or out? Switching just two lenses--say a 24mm and 50mm--when the need arises is not much of a problem.