Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR coming soon? & More

This is a ridiculous argument. Some people wouldn't notice the difference between a cheap compact and you D700 and 50mm @petert

If you carry on your line of reasoning we would still be painting watercolours instead of taking photos.

There is a good rationale for the new lens anyway, VR is a big add on its own, let alone other improvements that have been made to it.
 
petert said:
It doesn't make the tea but it takes good sharp pictures for £100 is that so funny?:-/
I doubt I'd see £1900 worth of difference in another lens
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's the trouble for me. It's the is it £xxxx better. That being said, if I had all the money in the world I'd buy the best of the best even knowing that it's not good value ;)
 
Last edited:
I think the price tag is a tad high for the new 24-70 though, around £600 more for VR?? I've been using the current model for a few years and TBH I don't think the lack of VR at that focal length is an issue.
 
JYC said:
This is a ridiculous argument. Some people wouldn't notice the difference between a cheap compact and you D700 and 50mm @petert

If you carry on your line of reasoning we would still be painting watercolours instead of taking photos.

There is a good rationale for the new lens anyway, VR is a big add on its own, let alone other improvements that have been made to it.
Click to expand...
Suppose some have to justify spending a fortune somehow
 
JYC said:
Like I said, there are people who would say that about you and your D700 + nifty fifty

"Few hundred quid and it doesn't even zoom!? Mine does 20x!"
Click to expand...
Lol, I've heard those comments before. I just chuckle inside ;)
 
Azaboppa said:
I think the price tag is a tad high for the new 24-70 though, around £600 more for VR?? I've been using the current model for a few years and TBH I don't think the lack of VR at that focal length is an issue.
Click to expand...

I would guess that the VR is less of a reason for the price increase that the improved optics, the MTF's of this new lens looked significant better than the old towards the boarders.

With that and the VR it seems less a pro eventers lens and more a general purpose and landscape lens, the old one and the Tamron weren't bad on the 36 MP sensor but they do have notable weaknesses at the boarders. Weight wise the extra 200g isn't ideal but if that means leaving the tripod and a set of primes at home then I would say the advantage is significant.
 
petert said:
I'm sure you've got many award winning photos :-D
Click to expand...

Have you ever posted an images on here Pete?

"
A picture is worth a thousand words"

a bird image would be good as you gave numerous postings on what was wrong with the section and how it could be improved

post a few images and show us what you mean

You have over 500 postings ... how many of those included your images?
 
Last edited:
Oh bitchy :-P :-D some of you can't take much :'(
 
Last edited:
petert said:
Oh bitchy :p :-D some of you can't take much :crying:
Click to expand...

It is not "taking it Pete" it is respecting a view if it has some merit

I am sure that you have things to say, but they must be based on something sound and have some logical sense
 
Last edited:
petert said:
I'm sure you've got many award winning photos :-D
Click to expand...
What a strange comment, what's that got to do with people comparing a prime on a DSLR to a compact or such with a 20x zoom?
 
snerkler said:
What a strange comment, what's that got to do with people comparing a prime on a DSLR to a compact or such with a 20x zoom?
Click to expand...
What did your comment have anything to.do with it in the first place?x20???
 
Last edited:
Pete post one or two good images that you have taken so at least we can see some merit in what you are saying
 
Pp has more to do with a final product than the camera or lens nowadays
 
petert said:
Pp has more to do with a final product than the camera or lens nowadays
Click to expand...

that's really is not true - if you get your in camera settings "right" there is little pp that needs doing ............. and that is what we all work towards

The more experienced you become and the more practice you get the less pp will be needed.

From the way you are talking you are a really experienced photographer ......... please post some of your images
 
Last edited:
petert said:
Pp has more to do with a final product than the camera or lens nowadays
Click to expand...
I certainly wouldn't say PP has "more" to do with it. Plus better cameras allow you to do more, and recover more in PP.
 
Dave Semmens said:
Nikon probably know what they are doing - why bring a lens out for £1500 when you can bring it out for £2000 and sell your first batch to early adopters then drop the price and mop up the rest of the people.
Click to expand...
That certainly happens on a routine basis in the UK. Interestingly it doesn't happen in other markets like HK and USA. I've never really worked out why.
 
The relevant comparison at the present time are £ and Euro prices ..... with sales tax/VAT being almost the same and free movement of goods across Euro borders there will always be differences as long as there is the £ and the Euro

The US, HK and Japan have different considerations
 
Doesn't look like a replacement for the tamron or sigma if they're correct
 
petert said:
Doesn't look like a replacement for the tamron or sigma if they're correct
Click to expand...

Until we see an actual lens then it's hard to say. At it's RRP it's likely to be comparable to the tamron/sigma. If nikon is going to compete with this lens type it's got to be as good if not better and cheaper. So far the price is good. I fully expect it to be similar/nearer to the sigma/tamron than the nikon 500mm f4. The interesting point is how well it hands the nikon 1.4.teleconverter.
 
rob-nikon said:
Until we see an actual lens then it's hard to say. At it's RRP it's likely to be comparable to the tamron/sigma. If nikon is going to compete with this lens type it's got to be as good if not better and cheaper. So far the price is good. I fully expect it to be similar/nearer to the sigma/tamron than the nikon 500mm f4. The interesting point is how well it hands the nikon 1.4.teleconverter.
Click to expand...
I think Pete just likes to try and be controversial ;) :p From that review there was no indication (as far as I'm concerned) that they said the lens wasn't a match (except for the obvious FL differences). They haven't even tried the lens and were only reading off the MFT charts, and when comparing to the Siggy were comparing with TC ;)
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
I think Pete just likes to try and be controversial ;) :p From that review there was no indication (as far as I'm concerned) that they said the lens wasn't a match (except for the obvious FL differences). They haven't even tried the lens and were only reading off the MFT charts, and when comparing to the Siggy were comparing with TC ;)
Click to expand...
No I wasn't being controversial at all, your very quick to jump on nothing. No one can make a proper judgement until it's been tested, I can only go by what they wrote which didn't suggest it's going to be substantially better but who knows?
 
petert said:
No I wasn't being controversial at all, your very quick to jump on nothing. No one can make a proper judgement until it's been tested, I can only go by what they wrote which didn't suggest it's going to be substantially better but who knows?
Click to expand...
Lol, really? It was all banter tongue in cheek hence the emoticons ;)
 
Last edited:
Have you guys never heard the saying "Don't feed the Troll" ;)

Certainly looking forward to some proper reviews of the 200-500mm though, could be a serious contender to replace my 300m f4
 
:@
rpsmith79 said:
Have you guys never heard the saying "Don't feed the Troll" ;)

Certainly looking forward to some proper reviews of the 200-500mm though, could be a serious contender to replace my 300m f4
Click to expand...
:-? :-*
 
may be some of the know alls and those with a little more sense that are sitting on the fence should have a look at this before you fill the Nikons pockets or is this trolling:p

View: https://youtu.be/afGsNmryClo
 
Last edited:
This is clearly trolling. This guy has never even seen the lens and is slating it because he 'knows' :ROFLMAO::withstupid:
 
The reply I expected, he's actually very knowledgeable far more than those in here. Go spend your money then we'll see who's right
 
How can he be knowledgeable about a lens he has never touched?

I don't even have a Nikon body any more and I can see that you are just trying to goad people :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top