zoeica images Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Nikon has yet again pushed back shipping on both of their new lenses. A Nikon rep confirmed this today. What gives Nikon? I've heard of the VR problem with the 24-120, but why announce a new digital only 12-24/f4 DX lens if you can't get it working? Anyone know of a good alternative to the Nikon 14/2.8 AF lens on digital SLR's? Seems like this will have to be the way to go for wide shots until Nikon gets the 12-24 working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_ Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 The Christmas season is good for corporate sales, so until then.... Sigma makes a AF 14mm, but if you want a inexpensive lens, there is nothing to suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Bjorn Rorslett has already written a review of the 12-24, so I guess all you need is better connections to get one. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougs Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 i am interested in the 24-120, my preference would be to let Nikon work the bugs out, before they start delivering them.....microsoft has been sending us half finsihed products for years, then charging us to complete it.ie: 95,98,98se,millinium. lets not expect the same of Nikon....i hate sending equipment back once i have it. Doug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Microsoft sells software, which can be upgraded by the user, and they are almost the only game in town. That is why Microsoft can use their final users as beta test site. Nikon mainly sells hardware. If there is something wrong with their new lenses, that means a massive shipping back to Nikon for repair. I would much rather wait a little longer so that Nikon get it right. And recall will be a major hassle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmanthree Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Shun, I agree, but Nikon simply can't get it right lately. How can they announce a product with a ship date when they haven't even released the product to manufacturing? This is another embarassment for Nikon, and something they didn't need. They announce a key lens for their digital camera users, and then can't deliver!? Don't they realize they have competition? Nikon needs to get their act together, and quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ni-conartist Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 uh oh, i smell the "im switching to canon" stink arising. haha. ...one of the many reasons im not going digital. i dont wanna have to buy all new lenses just to get the focal lengths i have already. i do agree in id really like to give the 24-120 a whirl. then agin for you digi users its not really 24 anymore. more like a 35-135...how annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_hennessy Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Isn't the 12-24 a G lens? Designed for Digital. For Nikon digital...meaning small chip? One of the advantages of designing a lens with a small image circle is supposed to be higher resolution. Could've been more difficult than simply scaling down a full frame design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_gifford Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 The 24-120 VR lens will be a 36-180 on Nikon's digital bodies. As for the delivery date, if you ship a good new product a few months late everyone will forget the delay pretty soon. If you decide instead to keep to a schedule even by releasing a flawed product, everyone will remember THAT for a long, long time. It's easy for me to say "be patient" because I don't have any bodies that can take advantage of VR, and two of my three bodies would balk at any G-series lens. If I had a D100 in hand and was champing at the bit for a nice all-purpose zoom, maybe I could summon up some serious grumbling to add to this thread. Have fun, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoeica images Posted May 31, 2003 Author Share Posted May 31, 2003 Not that I know anything about production, but it seems to me that Nikon has pushed the 12-24DX lens for months and not being able to deliver is a let down for Nikon digital users. Same aplies to the 24-120 VR lens with film users. Enough complaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmanthree Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 No, a switch to Canon isn't a possibility right now, but unless Nikon makes their digital future clear, and relatively soon, the who knows? I have a bit invested in Nikon gear, and would like to know if Nikon will ever produce a digital body that can fully utilize that glass. Right now, if I switched to anything, it would be something MF. In the meantime, I won't spend another dime on Nikon gear until I know where they're going, and they prove they can do a better job on their ship dates. As it stands, their history of inability to predict ship dates can lead you to only two conclusions: 1. They're incompetent, and simply can't get the job done. 2. They're preannouncing and lying on purpose in order to prevent users from jumping ship. Either way, it's not very impressive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ky2 Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 <p><i>"Nikon 14/2.8 AF lens on digital SLR's?"</i></p> <p>Yes. It's called the FM3A+Nikkor 20 ;)<br> Seriously now-- I've been reluctant to purchase the 14 for many reasons; for the time being I'm having a ball with my 16/2.8 fisheye, and with my FM3A. When the 12-24 ships, I'll give it a try.</p> <p>I don't really think that Nikon is crapping about ship dates, or that they suck compared to Canon. Marketing always plays a major role. Nobody is forcing you to use Nikon, you can go ahead an purchase a Canon 10D right now, with a fabulous 17-40/4L to boot. But Canon hasn't even announced a similar 12-24, or have they?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astcell Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 Sigma has a 15-30mm which I was considering, if the 12-24 is any more delayed I may have to go that route. Anyone ever used or handled the 15-30 and can report on it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael erlich Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 I use the Sigma 15-30 on my D100 for newspaper work. It's big and heavy but it handles well and it's well-built (for a Sigma). The vignetting reported in full-frame 35's isn't a problem with the smaller digital chip, and the image quality is very good throughout the zoom range. You can't use filters on the front, only gels in a rear slot, but if you shoot in RAW mode white balance is corrected later and at any rate, polarizers are not too useful with extreme wide angle lenses. It's the lens I use most, along with a Nikon 28-105. I'm happy I bought it instead of waiting forever for Nikon's 12-24. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 According to some messages in the DPReview Nikon Forum, both of these lenses are already available in Hong Kong. So hopefully they will soon be available around the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted June 5, 2003 Share Posted June 5, 2003 What is going on with you guys? This thread was initiated merely 5 days ago and there has been so many complaints about Nikon delaying the introduction of these lens. Now it turns out that they are already available in certain parts of Asia and Europe. I have already seen a number of initial reviews in other forums. However, all of a sudden we are so quiet here. Has anybody here seen and used these lenses yet? For what I have read so far, the new 24-120 VR has pretty serious barrel distortion on the wide end, similar to its predecessor. That is not too surprising for a 5x zoom from wide to medium tele at $500 or so. With added AF-S and VR, this new lens is not a bad deal, but the 24-85 G AF-S seems to be a better bargain if you don't need VR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoeica images Posted June 5, 2003 Author Share Posted June 5, 2003 The 24-120 VR is supposed to have a price of $799 when it comes out. I'm happy with the 24-85mm G for now. My only complaint is the Nikon rep says it's shipping, then it's not, then it's shipping, then it's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 From what I have read in other forums, in Asian cities such as Hong Kong and Singapore, people are paying below US$1000 for the 12-24 DX and around US$500 for the 24-120 VR. These are "street prices"; i.e. prices people actually pay, not list prices. I suppose mail order prices in the US from stores such as B&H should be similar. In Europe, it may be a very different story. In other words, the VR version of the 24-120 probably won't cost that much more than the earlier version but you also get AF-S and VR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 "won't cost that much more than the earlier version but you also get AF-S and VR."<p> But you loss the aperture ring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 Chuck, you forgot that I hate that aperture ring. Or maybe you didn't forget, but in any case, to me not having the aperture ring is a plus. Your mileage may vary, of course. :-) 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