New 50mm Lens From Nikon

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Manzoorul Hassan, Jan 17, 2008.

  1. Manzoorul  Hassan

    Boskey Guest

    Let's expand that a bit, hands up everyone that have never taken a blurred
    shot, with or without VR/IS/SR? I believe the field of hands will narrow
    significantly. Isn't the whole point of image stabilization to improve the
    shooter's odds of getting a good shot?
    Boskey, Jan 19, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. You just hit on the key word, "marketing" that is what is driving this. We
    have SUVs on American roads that have 16 airbags, 14 cup holders, heated
    seats, 3 DVD players, etc... That will fall apart if you tried to get any
    "utility" out of them or take them off road. I'm not saying VR/IS doesn't
    work, I'm saying it has limitations that many people have yet to recognize
    or want to admit to.

    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 19, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. I have no problem with anyone swallowing sugar pills as long as it makes
    them feel better.
    You got it! If VR/IS had any benefits, or fool the pros into believing
    there is, in these focal ranges they would have put it in there. And I'm
    glad to see Nikon not strapping the miraculous 14-24/2.8 and 24-70/2.8 with

    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 19, 2008
  4. BINGO! And on lenses of 50mm and wider it gets tougher to engineer a VR/IS
    system that actually works. The performance curve takes a nosedive at 50mm.

    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 19, 2008
  5. LOL!

    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 19, 2008
  6. Rita Berkowitz wrote:
    But those of us who prefer the lower cost, weight and bulk of the f/5.6
    zoom lenses may appreciate the IS/VR rather more.

    David J Taylor, Jan 19, 2008
  7. Manzoorul  Hassan

    N Guest

    I can't comment on cars as I only look at what's inside them when I need to
    buy a new one. My Mazda 3 is in the garage all week as I catch a bus to and
    from work daily.

    However, I have the nifty 18-200VR on my D80 most of the time and sure don't
    turn VR off when hand holding, not even when at 18mm. I'm happy to have VR
    working and I do shoot wide and slower than I'm really capable of handling.
    N, Jan 19, 2008
  8. I suppose you could consider the 85mm f/2 AI a Mark I. After all, every
    one embraced that lens over the older f/1.8 version so enthusiastically,
    right :)? Seriously, I think the poster meant to say that it would
    use the newer "II" version of VR.

    Draw your own conclusion of the logic of introducing an 85mm f/2 AF-S VR
    without upgrading the flagship 85mm f/1.4D, but it wouldn't be the
    weirdest choice Nikon's marketing department has ever made.

    There are photos out of Thailand of an "escaped" 16-85mm f/3.5~5.6 VR,
    but usually these "insider" lists are rarely any more than a compliation
    of wish-lists and previously published prediction articles. Nikon's
    fairly strict about enforcing NDA's, and Nikon sales reps aren't on
    the "need to know" list until very late in the game.

    For example, compare the list given here with this one.
    Michael Benveniste, Jan 19, 2008
  9. Manzoorul  Hassan

    user Guest

    Not true, and you know it, if you need a shallow depth of
    field for compositional purposes.

    So you don't ever worry about composition? Gotcha.

    Doug McDonald
    user, Jan 19, 2008
  10. Manzoorul  Hassan

    user Guest

    I'm not arguing for the utility of IS with a 12 mm fl lens.
    But I've actually done the experiments and it is
    of use down to 30 mm. The subject motion argument is moot
    for many if not most semi-wide angle uses, which
    are are architectural, landscape, or at least semi-posed
    interior shots where possible motion is covered up by
    the short focal length. I have a Canon 24-100 f/4L IS
    and it really does help even below 50 mm. I just leave it
    on even for panoramas shot on my flimsy tripod (not for
    shots on the rock solid one, however.)

    Doug McDonald
    user, Jan 19, 2008
  11. Manzoorul  Hassan

    user Guest

    In many lens designs (not "normal lens" Gaussian) no extra
    element is needed. This has been discussed before ad nauseum.

    Doug McDonald
    user, Jan 19, 2008
  12. Manzoorul  Hassan

    ____ Guest

    Maybe its cheaper to make Vr lenses then to design them at a working
    aperture :)
    ____, Jan 19, 2008
  13. Yipe! . . . It's about $320 from Adorama, or $300 grey market.

    Neil Harrington, Jan 19, 2008
  14. Manzoorul  Hassan

    TH O Guest

    Absolutely no interest. This is nothing more that a Canon marketing clone
    since VR doesn't add any benefit to lenses of 50mm and wider. Bad move

    Sounds like a great, mid-level lens here. Something consumers will buy.
    Again, mid-level. They'll sell many more of these than a pro-level lens.
    TH O, Jan 19, 2008
  15. Manzoorul  Hassan

    Paul Furman Guest

    Oops, there is an f/3.5 & f/4, no f/2.8. The older f/4 is said to be a
    little better.
    Paul Furman, Jan 19, 2008
  16. Manzoorul  Hassan

    Pete D Guest

    Of course, but you missed my point. VR will help sometimes but only
    sometimes and is not usually a substitute for good technique.


    Pete D, Jan 19, 2008
  17. Manzoorul  Hassan

    frederick Guest

    Do you mean a deep DOF perhaps?
    frederick, Jan 19, 2008
  18. Manzoorul  Hassan

    user Guest

    indeed I do
    user, Jan 19, 2008
  19. Manzoorul  Hassan

    N Guest

    That's a statement born out of ignorance. Try taking a shot of 12 people
    sitting at a long dining table with a wide open aperture.
    N, Jan 19, 2008
  20. Manzoorul  Hassan

    N Guest

    DCW is an Australian online supplier.
    N, Jan 19, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.