Dieter Schaefer Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 <blockquote> <p>wasn't the AF-D 18-35 $350-400US</p> </blockquote> <p>$468 in March 2001 when I purchased mine; a little over $600 currently at B&H. At $750, I consider the new one a bargain in comparison.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 After a while the 800mm Nikkor will probably cost about the same as the Canon does now, give or take a bit. Typical ratio of street price vs. Nikon's suggested price is 7/9 for this type of lenses at least in many European stores, which would suggest a street price of $14k plus tax after the dust has settled i.e. 1-2 years from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaymondC Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 <p>The newer lens is a bargain these days when compared to others I guess that got upgraded to AF-S.</p> <p>Had a check. That lens I actually got in HKG when someone went back. My 18-35 AF-D was $390US equiv back in the day. At point of sale was given 14% discount which reduced $390 by somewhat. I purchased a few other items too. It was also in 2005, January. Not import. Came with HKG warranty card.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crowe Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 <p>There is something just not right having the letters "FL" on a Nikon lens. Canon "FL" mount lenses predate the "FD" mount lenses, and when Canon first used flourite glass elements, in the late 60's early 70's, those lenses had an "FL" suffix. Canon quickly dropped the "FL" suffix and began the "L" series. </p> <p>So, for someone who grew up with Canon, and has both Nikon and Canon lenses in the same camera bag, that "FL" looks really odd! More to the point, it is blasphemy! Quite a lens by the looks of it though.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaymondC Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 <p>The 18-35 at least the old/current one (as of now at the stores), is the classic Galen Rowell setup. F100 + 18-35 + Velvia+Gitzo1228+KirksBH3. Have it all. Still shoot film too. Probably use it on FX digital if I get that far.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francisco_salaquanda Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 <p>I had the AFD version of this lens. It was light weight and pretty sharp too. You can buy the AFD for $300. This AFS will be the same optics but with an internal motor, and undoubtedly it will be heavier.<br> The focus speed with the AFD on a D300 or D700 (as i had), was very fast.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_hinkey Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 <blockquote> <p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=7150947">Francisco Salaquanda</a>, Jan 30, 2013; 12:43 a.m.</p> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>I had the AFD version of this lens. It was light weight and pretty sharp too. You can buy the AFD for $300. This AFS will be the same optics but with an internal motor, and undoubtedly it will be heavier.<br /> The focus speed with the AFD on a D300 or D700 (as i had), was very fast.</p> </blockquote> <p>No Francisco, the new AFS will NOT have the same optics - it is a substantially different optical design with 3 aspherics and 2 ED elements (vs. 1 each for the old). The MTF curves are substantially different and I expect the performance to be much much better (as it should be).</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Garrard Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 <p>Belatedly, I'm going to second Ilkka's comment: I'm surprised Nikon didn't go "E" earlier, especially given the move to AF-S-only bodies. I really think Canon got it right by going all-electrical, although I appreciate Nikon's backward-compatibility. E gives the lens designer more choice of where to put the aperture (and how to operate it), just as AF-S and AF-I lenses avoid the need to design a lens with a mechanical screwdriver linkage. It helps tilt-shifts, obviously, but it also makes teleconverters less rattly. Fond though I am of my F5 and 1970s vintage lens (and my Voigtlander and my 1949 Leica 90mm), electronics are the future. All hail our technological overlords and the absence of a little flappy bit of metal that I worry about breaking off when I put a lens cap on wrongly.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_phillipps Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 <p>Seems like Nikon are even later than usual to the party - experimenting with fluorite in telephotos - wow, 40 years after Canon!<br> Even the idea of an 800 f5.6 is 5 years after Canon and they made a bit of a big deal out of its revolutionary introduction. It's a shame, in the good ole days the 2 companies were neck and neck, but now Nikon is light years behind.<br> And that price tag - crazy.<br> Steve (a Nikon user and fan, always have been)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now