Wish-list.

[BelaMolnar]

<p>I like to have a Nikon12mm prim, rectilinear, and even don't bothering me, if it id f5.6 only. I used, a very short time, to have the 14-24/2.8 zoom. amd it was a monster to cary, and I don't having a personal slev whom Kerri for me.. A chipper, would Sufic. I don't need a SSW /2.8 Zoom lens. The would be 12mm f/5.6 prime, and 16-35nm/2.5 Zoom would be a wonderful muych.<br>

Happy Dreaming.</p>

[kohanmike]

<p>Having a little trouble deciphering your English. Can you have a friend do the translating and/or typing?</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>Bela, your english is even worst than mine! Ouch! :D</p>

<p>Don`t expect to have exotic items like a new 12/5.6, or the 16-35 to be one-third of a stop faster than the 17-35. Maybe one day in f2.8, but not so likely...</p>

<p>The 14-24 is not that huge (it is big, but I think feels smaller than e.g. a 24-70), and is two stops faster than your f5.6 lens. A good Nikkor 12/5.6 prime could be big. Look at the older 13 and 15mm primes.<br /> Better to complain about the 14-24 because it doesn`t have a filter thread. <a href="http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/shop-by-brand/lee-filters.html">Or not even.</a></p>

<p>And if you -really- want a small, compact 12mm prime, just buy a Voigtlander UW Heliar 12mm, with a Bessa RF as a rear cap. You can get them both for 300-400, and they cannot be smaller. It is even ridiculously small.</p>

<p>There is also the Samyang 14/2.8 prime lens, which is also dirty cheap for its performance.</p>

<p>So, I`d say, don`t dream, just go out shooting! :)</p>

[Rene11664880918]

<blockquote>I would like to have a Nikon 12 mm prime, rectilinear. It wouldn't bother me if it was only a f/5.6I used to have for a very short time the 14-24/2.8 zoom but it was a monster to carry and I don't have a personal slave to carry it for me. I don't need a SFS/2.8 zoom lens. To have a 12 f/5.6 and 16-35 f/2.8 zoom would be a wonderful match.Happy dreaming.</blockquote>

<p>PS. It wasn't that hard..... Anyone who speaks English would be able to understand what he is saying. And I am sure his English is better than many of our second languages.</p>

[Rene11664880918]

<p>Also before anyone else criticises his English again, take a few seconds and look at his portfolio. Also notice the POW icon. Maybe English is not his stronger field but look what else he can do..... If you don't understand his English, just keep quiet and don't reply! </p>

[jose_angel]

<p>No pun intended... just kidding :) We have read many hundred posts from him...<br /> And right, Bela`s portfolio speaks by itself!</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Bela - since I don't believe the Voigtlander is going to be very helpful for an SLR (it's a rangefinder lens, unless I'm confused), I'd suggest a look at the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6. It's appreciably smaller than the 14-24 (although obviously it's dimmer to look through), and - while not in the class of the 14-24 - reasonably well-regarded. Or there's a range of DX options, but if you started with the 14-24 I'm assuming you're looking at full frame.<br />

<br />

Nobody makes zooms faster than f/2.8, at least for larger formats. The 17-35 f/2.8 is as close as you'll get to a 16-35 f/2.5, and it's <i>pretty</i> close - having something like this that's appreciably lighter than the 14-24 seems unlikely to me, since all the retrofocal fast lenses are pretty monstrous (see the 6mm f/2.8). The 16-35 loses out on aperture partly by being a (relatively) consumer zoom and partly through having VR. Do you want f/2.5 for light gathering (in which case a generation or two of sensors might make up the fractional stop) or for depth of field control? I assume the 24mm, 28mm and 35mm primes don't cut it? (The 20mm Sigma f/1.8 seemed pretty awful when I tried one, so I'm not counting it...)<br />

<br />

Still, I think you're dreaming conservatively. Why not let's have a new 6mm?</p>

[steve_torelli]

<p>"Also before anyone else criticises his English again, take a few seconds and look at his portfolio. Also notice the POW icon. Maybe English is not his stronger field but look what else he can do..... If you don't understand his English, just keep quiet and don't reply!"<br>

What do language skills have to do with one's portfolio ? Are you saying that Michael's post was somehow inappropriate because he couldn't understand Bela's post and he should therefore "keep quiet and not reply "?</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>My wish list is for a faster midrange VR zoom for the Nikon 1 series, maybe a 10-30mm f/2.8-4 VR, to keep it reasonably small and affordable. And maybe a 13mm f/1.4 prime.</p>

<p>And a revised V1. The basic chassis is just fine. If Nikon modified it slightly to include a standard SPAM mode dial and front mounted fingertip dial to serve double duty as aperture/EV control, it'd be just dandy. The existing rear toggle is oh-kay I guess for shutter speed control in manual and S modes. And a more programmable Fn button. But overall, the more I use this thing the better I like it, including the size and shape.</p>

<p>Also, a TTL flash adapter so I can use my SB-800 and SC-29 cord with the V1. C'mon, Nikon, seriously.</p>

[fhmillard]

<p>i want a live view angle viewer-- it is hard to lake that moon shot in live view, if moon is directly above one's head, and i don't want to carry around computer for tethered view.</p>

[thomas_k.]

<p>I wish my mind to be as sharp as my lenses, my thoughts as complex as my cameras and my work as successful as Nikon's marketing campaign. </p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>i want a live view angle viewer</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You may want to take a look at the D5200 and its predecessors.</p>

<p>Since I carry super teles on a regular basis, I don't find the 14-24mm/f2.8 AF-S all that big. What I don't particularly like is the bulging front element, mainly because it is prone to damages. Any retrofocus super wides for DSLRs, especially FX, will likely have that same issue.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"...as successful as Nikon's marketing campaign."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Heck, it'd be easy to be as successful as Nikon's marketing campaign. Even when Nikon has a terrific new product they never seem to fully grasp the concept of effective marketing. The best they can do is Ashton Kutcher and a few strategically leaked rumors.</p>

<p>Nikon manages to hold a niche despite an almost total inability to grasp effective internet marketing, not because of any particularly effective or innovative marketing. They make a solid product and occasionally surprise us with nifty toys outside their usual conservative position - the Nikon 1 series, the Coolpix A - but they never really do anything interesting in terms of marketing. The <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8dVE9gu96A">recent Coolpix A promo video</a> from Nikon is better than most of their efforts, but doesn't really grab me.</p>

<p>Remember how great the <a href="

Olympus Pen promo video</a> was? (Even tho' the concept <a href="

stolen from this guy</a>.)</p>

<p>That's what Nikon is missing. Not products - those are terrific. But their marketing is mostly a big yawn.</p>

<p> </p>

[BelaMolnar]

<p>I really laughing laud, when I read this posting of me, in the morning. The slipping pill and the Tylenol No.3 has a disturbing effect on my mind, before bed. Please excuse the garbled, lines and try to figure out what I really wanted to say. Thank you for your passion. And for the sensitive kind, forgive me for chopping up the english.</p>

[thomas_k.]

<p>Lex:<br>

If not from successful marketing, then where the yearning for new gear expressed by many in this forum and beyond is coming from?</p>

[Matt Laur]

<blockquote>

<p>If not from successful marketing, then where the yearning for new gear expressed by many in this forum and beyond is coming from?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Perhaps some photographers actually have things about their gear they'd like to improve? If you want to shoot wildlife at a certain level of quality, the fact that you need a lens that's longer and/or faster than a typical kit zoom isn't a triumph of Nikon's marketing - it's recognition that a producing a certain level of results means wrestling with the laws of physics. If it's photons you want to manipulate and capture, better hardware gives you more options. Not because Nikon's sales people say it's so, but because ... it's actually <em>so</em>. <br /><br /><br /></p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"If not from successful marketing, then where the yearning for new gear expressed by many in this forum and beyond is coming from?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p><em>(Bear with me here because I will get back to the point - marketing.)</em></p>

<p>For many of us it's based on experience and knowing what we need to accomplish a certain task, and learning from other well informed users whether a particular bit of gear will accomplish that task.</p>

<p>My specific preferences are for a camera that is:</p>

<ul>

<li>Compact and lightweight that I can carry everywhere.</li>

<li>Very quiet, preferably absolutely silent, for occasions when I wish to photograph live performances in theaters.</li>

<li>Very quick - AF and shutter response, preferably with quick frame rates.</li>

<li>Good in dim available light.</li>

</ul>

<p>This wish list ruled out any SLR. So I considered only mirrorless system cameras and a few P&S models.</p>

<p>I considered the Nikon 1 system. There was plenty of chatter, most of it negative and, as it turned out, mostly ill-informed. If you paid attention only to Nikon's glossy but superficial promo videos and to most web pundits back in the fall of 2011 when the J1 and V1 were introduced you'd probably come away with the dismissive notion that it was a newbie's camera for soccer moms and birthday parties.</p>

<p>I didn't seriously reconsider the V1 until the summer of 2012, when I read a brief comment from professional photojournalist John Densky that he was using a V1 kit on assignments, after having tried the Fuji X100 (and, if I'm recalling correctly, finding the X100 AF too slow). I exchanged a couple of emails with John and was persuaded that the V1 was a far more capable camera than it had been given credit for by the interweb's Conventional Wisdom.</p>

<p>The recent winter holiday discount cinched the decision. At $300 the V1 and 10-30 kit zoom suddenly became a no-brainer. Three months later, it is every bit as good as the best informed pundits say (quick, quiet, very good IQ), and every bit as annoying (dumb mode dial design). But overall it's the best value *ever* in a high end P&S camera, bar none. The next best in the class, the Sony RX100, was nearly double the price (although the V1 was *not* a good value at the original MSRP).</p>

<p>And it is most certainly *not* a camera for a newbie or "soccer mom" (whatever that means). This camera would drive most newbies absolutely bonkers with frustration. Getting back on the point we were discussing, <strong><em>that's where Nikon's marketing completely failed</em></strong>. If Nikon intended to make this a newbie-friendly camera for anyone to pick up and get great results with, they made a huge mistake with that dumb mode dial design and menu-intensive operation. This has been cussed and discussed widely online.</p>

<p>But many of us who are very experienced photographers found it... acceptable. Sure, it's a bit annoying. But with a little practice I've found it easy to zip through the menu to access the most needed adjustments. Other experienced photographers who've adapted to the V1 have said the same thing. It's really more of an expert's camera. Where it really counts -- the excellent two-stage shutter release feel and quick access to video -- it's among the best designs I've ever seen. Image quality is very good, AF and shutter response are outstanding.</p>

<p>So, long story short, it turned out the V1 was nearly perfect for my needs and I learned that only from very experienced *and* well informed photographers. <em>I didn't learn it from Nikon's marketing</em>, which was completely useless. And I certainly didn't learn it from reading most web pundits and forum mobs who can't take any camera seriously unless it's a dSLR.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, Nikon so far is showing the same lack of web-savvy marketing with the V2 and Coolpix A.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>I'm carrying my V1 with me. (Well, okay, my D800 is with me, but the V1 is <i>usually</i> with me, buried in a rucksack.) It's used almost exclusively for high speed video, partly because I can analyze some product behaviour with it and partly because 400fps is cool even in a weird aspect ratio (when there's enough light), though it's occasionally been dragged out for an image.<br />

<br />

The user interface is <i>horrible</i>, at least for most things I might want to do with it. Fortunately I found manual mode and auto-ISO, and even how to move the autofocus point, after a bit of messing around, and I can vaguely get it to work. I have to assume that a lot of soccer mums (metaphorical, not a suggestion that actual mothers of football players can't read a manual) might leave it in some form of automatic mode, and the fact that doing anything else is a bit messy is therefore not a problem. To be honest, I find the ability to switch modes quickly to be mostly overrated - one reason I like the high-end Nikon "mode" button rather than wasting a dial on it.<br />

<br />

Still, knowing that it would be frustrating, I bought it, because it dropped to less than the price of a macro lens and that was cheap enough for me to consider it as a special-purpose high-speed system. To be fair, it would frustrate me less if I used it more, but nothing's going to make it fit the hand properly. The V2 looks much better (an actual dial instead of the flippy lever!) but the price is an absolute no-go for me. The main marketing problem I have with them is that Nikon is trying to charge mid-range DSLR prices for something with a (large) compact sensor and a slow and limited zoom. Could be worse, could be a Pentax Q. Nikon's gall in this pricing made me want to hide the "Nikon 1" bag I was given when I bought a 50mm f/1.8 AF-S for my D800; I'd pretty much ignored the rest of their marketing, but to be honest I don't think I've ever seen an advert for a camera that's knowingly made me take an interest in it (possibly because I've usually read the specs and made my mind up before the adverts appear).<br />

<br />

The best bit of marketing that Nikon ever did for me was to make it possible to download the manual before purchase. There was a time when they didn't allow this (if you didn't have the serial number for a device, at least); I've no idea why, because one thing I do before any expensive purchase of a bit of electronics with a user interface is <i>read the manual</i>, because this is generally a more accurate and less biased source of information than the advertising brochure. It'll also tell me how the thing handles (to an extent), which no brochure will do. It's also useful for helping answer questions from others in this forum, of course.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"...but nothing's going to make it fit the hand properly."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Try the <a href="/photo/16952436">Flipbac G4 stick-on grip</a>, $10.99 shipped from Adorama, via Amazon. Made all the difference for me, especially with one-handed use.</p>

[mihai_ciuca]

<p>Coming back to Bela's dream... I'm even more conservative dreamin' for a compact 20/3.5 or 20/4 AF-S lens, sharp across the whole frame and with good control of distortions... On the old good times of film... Nikon's lineup included AI(S) 20 at f2.8 f3.5 and f4 and as well the AF-D 20/2.8. I think we deserve a little bit more attention from Nikon at this focal length on the D800 36MP sensor era.</p>

[mark_sirota1]

<p>Bela, it's rare and expensive, but Nikon did produce a 13/5.6 in pre-Ai, Ai, and Ai-S trim. http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/ultrawides/13mm.htm</p>

[Rene11664880918]

<p>My wish would be...... A D400....... But it's not for me but for all you guys waiting for it..... <br>

@STEVE TORELLi..... I speak several languages and understand a few more. I know how hard it is to learn a new language and I wouldn't appreciate if someone tells me to look for someone to translate for me or to type for me. His response had nothing to do with the thread. So if he had nothing to say concerning the thread, it if it was I, I would just keep quiet instead of putting someone down. This is an international forum where many of us speak different languages. The only language we have in common is PHOTOGRAPHY and that is why I brought up his portfolio. Now if you wanna tell him to go look for a translator, just go for it..... show what is in your heart.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Rene, let it go, man. Everybody else had already moved on from the typo thing. You're the one bringing it up again.</p>

[Rene11664880918]

<p>Lex... I just finished work and I came back here and read Steve's reply to me.... so I replied to it...</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Thanks, Lex, but it's more that all the controls sit on the only place on the back of the camera where the base of my thumb can hold it. I can live with it, but my D800 actually has enough area to have a <i>grip</i> there. That's not a criticism of Nikon, just a law of physics (or possibly geometry).<br />

<br />

And the 12-24 Sigma is an awful lot cheaper and smaller than that 13mm f/5.6, and slightly faster at the short end. Or you could just get a fish-eye (I have the 8mm Sigma) and de-fish it.</p>