User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 40

Thread: AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Sep 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    126
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G

    New version AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G

    I wanted the old version AF 85mm f1.4D IF and this new one looks like it'll be twice the price

    Saw a estimated UK price 1600 Pounds

    Can only hope the Nikon AF 85mm f1.4D IF version - $1200 at the moment grey market gets cheaper?

    Also a AF-S 55-300 f/4.5-5.6G ED VR less than $1000 I hope
    Chris

    - Constructive Feedback Appreciated

    My stuff: Nikon D90: 35mm f1.8, 55-200mm f4-5.6G
    Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and a growing collection of other stuff.

  2. #2
    Account Closed Wayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Dec 2009
    Location
    Eastside
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I can't imagine that the new 85 will be double that of the old, and if it is I think it will be tough to sell them because it probably is the same lens, just gelded and with AF-S motor.

    It would be hard to improve the optical formula over the current one, and AF-S is really a gimmick because it is probably the most popular portrait lens not an often used sports lens that doesn't require lightning fast AF, and on top level bodies it will AF quite quick anyway. The only benefit is for poverty model bodies that have no inbuilt screw motor to drive the current AF model.

    I have seen alot of people dumping for sale the old model in the past 1-2 weeks, with what is perhaps an attempt to sell before the new is released to avoid the re-sale hit. If the new is priced not too far from the old, expect the price on the old to drop as it will of course be a discontinued model, and of course the market will flood with sellers looking to update.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Mar 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    338
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisbevan4 View Post
    I wanted the old version AF 85mm f1.4D IF and this new one looks like it'll be twice the price
    I have the now "old one" and let me tell you there's no chance I'll be upgrading just for nano coating, a new optical design and AFS. Nobody could really flaw the old one, it's title of "cream machine" and one of Nikon's best was well deserved. Unless Nikon plan on removing the focus motors from their prosumer -> pro bodies I can't see the point of this upgrade.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wayne View Post
    I have seen alot of people dumping for sale the old model in the past 1-2 weeks, with what is perhaps an attempt to sell before the new is released to avoid the re-sale hit.
    It will be interesting to see just how many people update now that they find out there's no VR. Of course we'll get the "if i get the latest lens my pictures will be instantaneously better" upgraders, but those of us who use the old lens every weekend are going to find it hard to justify an update of an almost flawless lens.

    The only "issue" I have with the old lens is the lack of VR. The 16-35 gets VR and the 85 doesn't? last time i checked VR is more useful on long lenses, not wide ones...What is nikon thinking?

  4. #4
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by campo View Post
    The only "issue" I have with the old lens is the lack of VR. The 16-35 gets VR and the 85 doesn't? last time i checked VR is more useful on long lenses, not wide ones...What is nikon thinking?
    The only explanation that I have heard is summed up at http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...33&postcount=8
    Andrew
    Nikon, Fuji, Nikkor, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and too many other bits and pieces to list.



  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Mar 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    338
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by I @ M View Post
    The only explanation that I have heard is summed up at http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...33&postcount=8
    very interesting

    And in another post here at AP - another reason to upgrade would be for the bayonet hood rather then the old lenses screw-in hood...one of it's more annoying features when you're in a hurry!

  6. #6
    Account Closed Wayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Dec 2009
    Location
    Eastside
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, announced today by B&H = USD$1699 which is not too much more than the retail of the old lens, and that is pre-order price. I think a few people will be trying to sell their old one for what they were selling at yesterday, but they may have to drop their prices a bit now.

    I don't own one, and would consider one (old because I agree with Campo) if the used price dropped a bit.

  7. #7
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    27 Nov 2008
    Location
    Wunghnu Victoria
    Posts
    1,436
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Here's some samples with the new lenses including the 85 1.4. Gotta say I don't like the bokeh on a couple of those 85 samples. Looks pretty rough to me.

    http://www.moosepeterson.com/blog/?p=16729

    Cheers
    Leigh
    Nikon D600, 24-70, 300 VR1 2.8, Tamron 60 f2 macro + Kenko tubes. SB800.



    My Nikonians Gallery

  8. #8
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That sample image from Moose Peterson(of the painters easel) is reason enough not to update to this lens.

    not particularly inspiring bokeh in that image!

    ..... maybe VR was accidentally left ON!

    LOL!.... you can always turn VR off when not required... if it was a feature of the lens.
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  9. #9
    Member kaiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Dec 2008
    Location
    Laidley
    Posts
    900
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    $2141 for the new lens! When the D version is still available for HALF THE PRICE - there is no way I'd go for the new version. The samples posted do not impress me at all.
    Nikon D750
    Olympus m/43
    Rolleicord IV


    My SmugMug

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2008
    Location
    River Murray
    Posts
    727
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    buy the old one secondhand, and you'll get good optics, and better handling - it's got an aperture ring

  11. #11
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TOM View Post
    and better handling - it's got an aperture ring
    Tom, could you ( or anyone for that matter ) please tell me why an aperture ring is such a valuable addition / deletion from a lens.

    I rather like being able to simply dial in aperture adjustment ( in 1/3 stops ) via a convenient dial on the camera body.

    Am I missing the point of something?

  12. #12
    Who let the rabble in? Lance B's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,054
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by I @ M View Post
    Tom, could you ( or anyone for that matter ) please tell me why an aperture ring is such a valuable addition / deletion from a lens.

    I rather like being able to simply dial in aperture adjustment ( in 1/3 stops ) via a convenient dial on the camera body.

    Am I missing the point of something?
    You got me, too. I see no real advantage in an aperture ring.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2008
    Location
    River Murray
    Posts
    727
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    canon glass is arguably better (more variety and faster glass) than nikon, but the thing that nikon fans have always held their hat on is their backwards compatibility with their mount. as we know, canon changed their mount in the 80's, meaning that older lenses were no longer compatible. but try mounting a g mount lens on an f4. okay, so you may not want to shoot with an f4, but maybe you want to use some your g lens with some of the new mirrorless cameras....no can't do that. if nikon were going to make the backwards compatibility of their lenses obsolete, then they should have just changed the mount like canon did.....then they would have a more versatile mount. the only reason they don't include the ring, is to cut costs. hey i've bought a couple of g lenses, the 24-70, and the 70-200, and they work fine on new cameras, but i prefer the more tactile feel of a ring, I find it quicker to use, and i wouldn't have thought that it would cost nikon alot to implement. give me a physical dial on camera over a command wheel any day.

  14. #14
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Dunno about that theory Tom, the 'g' lenses work fine on all of the new DSLRs as well as the F6 and my F65.
    Coincidentally, the 'd' lenses and some of the ai / ais lenses work equally as well, if that isn't backwards compatibility I'm not sure what is. OK, so a couple of bodies missed out on the dual usage capability along the way but I guess Nikon figured that by delivering optical refinement at a lesser cost by the deletion of an aperture ring that they would only be inconveniencing a very minor part of their customer base.

    They are after all a company that requires profit to stay in operation and not a philanthropic organisation beholden to photographers that want to keep old gear going rather than spend $$ on new equipment.

    And I still can't see why a command dial doesn't offer a much more user friendly and accurate metering method at a finger tip control than the 'old' lens barrel ring way.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    And I still can't see why a command dial doesn't offer a much more user friendly and accurate metering method at a finger tip control than the 'old' lens barrel ring way.
    damn straight

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2008
    Location
    River Murray
    Posts
    727
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    optical refinement at a lesser cost by the deletion of an aperture ring that they would only be inconveniencing a very minor part of their customer base.
    that'd be great if they actually charged less for their lenses, and it's more than a few bodies that miss out. it's every body before the f5/f100. sure they work well without the ring, i just find them slower to use, less intuitive. but that is true of the shutter dial aswell. i'm not really that disturbed by it, and i can fully appreciate why nikon have done it, just given the choice, i'd have the ring.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Mar 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    338
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JM Tran View Post
    damn straight
    same here...i have full aperture control under one finger and full shutter control under the another...not sure how that's a disability

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2008
    Location
    River Murray
    Posts
    727
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    and I'm certainly enjoying using all of my lenses from my different camera systems on my Oly EP1 for hi res video and images.

    i guess what i'm trying to say is, if it doesn't cost more, what is the advantage of NOT having the ring?

  19. #19
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TOM View Post
    that'd be great if they actually charged less for their lenses, and it's more than a few bodies that miss out. it's every body before the f5/f100.
    I suppose in real terms one must have to wonder how much MORE we would be paying for their latest offerings if they had left the aperture rings on the lenses. Nobody ever said that Nikon lenses were ever cheap / affordable or even the ultimate in value but it is purely a simple economic decision to suit their business model. Once again, it may be any film body before the F5/F100 that can't use a 'g' lens but looking at it from a business perspective (Nikon's) how many people are still using F5/F100 bodies? The ones that are using them are probably quite happy with the glass they already own and not likely to update lenses without buying a new body anyway so they rank on the minus scale in Nikon's business decision making process when it comes to the retention of an aperture ring.

    Quote Originally Posted by TOM View Post

    i guess what i'm trying to say is, if it doesn't cost more, what is the advantage of NOT having the ring?
    The advantage of not having an aperture ring is that one only has to move a finger 10mm or so from the shutter button to change apertures by 1/3 stops instead of having to reach further and be only able to change apertures by 1/2 stops as I see it.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2008
    Location
    River Murray
    Posts
    727
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The advantage of not having an aperture ring is that one only has to move a finger 10mm or so from the shutter button to change apertures by 1/3 stops instead of having to reach further and be only able to change apertures by 1/2 stops as I see it.
    yeah sure, but I have used my 17-35 on my d3 alot, and have the choice between the ring, and the finger dials. choice is good, and there's no harm in having it there if you are one who wants to use the finger dials. i still have stepless exposures with some older lenses put into Ap priority.

    anyway, it really doesn't effect the final image, i'm just a little disappointed that canon/nikon are going this way. given the choice between the two lenses new, even if they were the same price, the versatility of the older lens would win everytime.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •