New DSLR lenses from Nikon

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Bruce, Feb 9, 2010.

  1. Bruce

    Bruce Guest


    It isn't the same across all photo products - not even across all
    Nikon products. Take off the tax, and a D700 body sells for much the
    same price in the UK as in the USA. The same applies to the D3X.


    My partner claims to be able to pay for the cost of the trip to NY
    with the saving on the price of clothes. Sounds good, until you
    realise how much you have to spend on clothes to generate that much of
    a saving. Still, what are income tax refunds for? ;-)
     
    Bruce, Feb 10, 2010
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Cite, please?

    Nikon's made lots of lenses faster than f/1.2, just not in Nikon F-mount.

    Offhand, I can think of a 35mm f/0.9 (L39 mount), 50mm f/1.1 (rangefinder),
    85mm f/1.0 (53mm screw-in), and even a 225mm f/1.0 Ultra-Micro-Nikkor.

    It's possible to adapt the 35mm for use on an SLR, but it will only focus
    in the macro and near-macro range, and the resulting effective aperture
    is smaller than f/1.2.

    I've never heard of a 50mm f/1.0 Nikkor, though. Canon made one, but the
    Canon mount has a larger diameter than Nikon.

    Erik Gunst Lund recently "chipped" a Noct, but found that he had to
    grind away part of the rear element to get the chip to fit.
     
    Michael Benveniste, Feb 10, 2010
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Bruce

    Me Guest

    There aren't electronic contacts in the noct.
    Did they make an f1.0 in f-mount?
     
    Me, Feb 10, 2010
    #23
  4. Bruce

    Me Guest

    That's a very bold thing to do for very little advantage with a manual
    focus lens. Did he want to use it on a cheap Nikon dslr body - and use
    TTL metering?
     
    Me, Feb 10, 2010
    #24
  5. I believe he wanted to use different metering modes instead of
    exposure modes, but you'd have to ask him.

    http://nikongear.com/smf/index.php?topic=18631.0

    If I'm reading the patent correctly, a hypothetical new 50mm f/1.2 AF
    lens won't include the current AF-S pins but "talk" to the camera with
    a different channel. So unless it includes an aperture ring as well,
    it effectively won't be usable on any _current_ Nikon camera.
     
    Michael Benveniste, Feb 10, 2010
    #25
  6. Bruce

    Me Guest

    If the drawing on the patent is to scale, then the new lens rear element
    diameter is 40mm. It fits inside the F mount - just.
     
    Me, Feb 10, 2010
    #26
  7. The register distance in the Rangefinder is 11.65mm shorter as well.
    Take a look at the back of any of the Nikon f/1.2 lenses, and you'll
    see the rear element fills the mount.
    Unfortunately, that's not true. If you take a look at where the pins
    "live" in a Nikon AF lens, you'll see that they do take up room inside
    the mount.
    You could, but as with the Noct you'd have to cut away glass to do it.
     
    Michael Benveniste, Feb 10, 2010
    #27
  8. Bruce

    tony cooper Guest

    This is a bit of a drift from the original topic: Nikon lens prices.
    To the best of my knowledge, Nikon products are priced roughly the
    same in all stores - big box or dedicated camera - in this area.

    Stores may offer a package deal that makes the price look different,
    but the difference is in accessories like a bag, tripod, filters, etc.

    An exception is when a retailer offers a "close out" on a particular
    model of camera that has been superseded by a new model, but I've only
    seen this on P&S Nikons.

    Even the on-line retailers seem to roughly in lock-step on Nikon (and
    Canon) dslrs. Exceptions might be gray-market products. The major
    price differences hinge on the package involved, not the basic camera
    and lens(es).

    Some on-line retailers do offer discounts, but good luck actually
    getting the product at a discount. The "Brooklyn" retailers don't
    ship unless over-priced accessories are added to the order.
     
    tony cooper, Feb 10, 2010
    #28
  9. Bruce

    tony cooper Guest

    I purchased a camera from Abe's, and I did receive a "confirmation"
    telephone call before shipment. It was a rather low-key pitch for
    filters, but they didn't persist. I've never received an email from
    them since. I feel slighted.
     
    tony cooper, Feb 11, 2010
    #29
  10. Bruce

    Ray Fischer Guest

    That's the standard California insurance terms. State Farm offers it.
    Is there any other kind of Bay Area home? I live in the South Bay.
    The median price is around $550,000 (still).
    Hmmph.
     
    Ray Fischer, Feb 11, 2010
    #30
  11. Bruce

    Peter Guest


    Almost right. What you call a sales tax is actually a use tax. If a purchase
    is made for resale, or to be shipped outside the taxing jurisdiction, the
    purchase is usually exempt.
     
    Peter, Feb 11, 2010
    #31
  12. Bruce

    Peter Guest


    True, but under most jurisdictions, if you make a purchase in a lower tax
    jurisdiction than where it will be used, technically you may, depending on
    the item, owe the using jurisdiction the difference. There are serious
    enforcement issues. For real dollar differences think automobiles and
    recreational boats.
     
    Peter, Feb 11, 2010
    #32
  13. Bruce

    Peter Guest


    You are even more scary than I thought.
     
    Peter, Feb 11, 2010
    #33
  14. Bruce

    Peter Guest

    It was a stupidity fueled in the name of political correctness. It was, and
    still is, political blasphemy to state that a person should not have
    government funding to purchase a home they cannot afford to live in.
     
    Peter, Feb 11, 2010
    #34
  15. The concept of a VAT was to combine all sales and use taxes, import duties,
    etc into one flat tax. The principal behind it is that it is your money,
    you should be able to spend it on whatever you want.

    That's also why things like food (raw, packaged and take away) are excempt,
    but luxuries, e.g. eating in a restaurant is not.

    At one time the UK had a vary complicated structure of import duties, luxury
    taxes, etc. The VAT was created by calculating the expected income from all
    of them and dividing it by the total amount people were expected to spend.

    It's considered a regressive tax because poor people pay VAT at the same
    rate as rich people, but that's not really true. They pay the same rate,
    but rich people pay much more of it because they are able to afford more
    items that are not excempt.

    So a poor person who spends 90% of their income on excempt items pays
    VAT on 10% of their income, while a rich person who spends 20% of their income
    on excempt items pays VAT on 80% of their income.

    VAT is also popular in countries that do a lot of exports to the US. Tax
    treaties prevent them from charging import duites, but luxury taxes and
    VAT are allowed.

    Sales taxes can be a problem and generally are used to punish the poor.
    When I lived in Philly, the state of PA had a 6% sales tax, the city had
    just added a 1% sales tax. We lived on the edge of the city and could easily
    go out of the city to make major purchases, while someone who lived in a
    less affluent neighborhood or could not afford a car, had to pay the extra
    sales tax.

    I understand that is the same way with most major cities in the U.S.

    Geoff.
     
    Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Feb 11, 2010
    #35
  16. Bruce

    Peter Guest

    I have a similar story. As a result when we sold our home we put 100% of the
    selling price into the bank.

    Question:
    Is it predatory for me to take advantage of your greed?

    Contrast with: if I encourage you to be greedy and then take advantage of
    it.
     
    Peter, Feb 11, 2010
    #36
  17. Bruce

    whisky-dave Guest

    So what are these taxes that USains have to pay ?
     
    whisky-dave, Feb 11, 2010
    #37
  18. Bruce

    whisky-dave Guest

    Doesn't the current president think he's the 44th American president
    when he's actually the 43rd or something like that ?
     
    whisky-dave, Feb 11, 2010
    #38
  19. Bruce

    tony cooper Guest

    I've never heard of any enforcement in that area, and the Florida
    Department of Revenue is the pit bull of tax collectors.

    In Florida, the sales tax on an automobile or boat is based on the
    address of the person registering it. If I register a car at an
    Orange County tax office, I pay the rate based on my Seminole County
    address. The Seminole County rate is 1% higher than Orange County.
    If I buy a new car, and the dealer handles the registration, the rate
    is based on my address and not the dealer's address.
     
    tony cooper, Feb 11, 2010
    #39
  20. Bruce

    Peter Guest


    Let's start with boats.
    If I purchase a boat in Delaware through a Delaware corporation and register
    the boat in Delaware, I will have no sale tax to pay. If I visit FL, with
    the boat I will not pay a use tax in FL. However, If I dock it there
    permanently the Delaware corporation will be subject to he use tax on the
    boat. There is some grace period, but I am not certain what it is.
    A similar rule applies to automobiles.
    At one time our NY Tax department was actually going to marinas and checking
    registrations. Many New York boat dealers were falsely showing delivery in
    Delaware. The case was ultimately settled.
    Technically FL could do the same thing, but the trip from DE to FL is a lot
    longer than the trip from DE to NY. Also, DE has little interest in
    cooperating in a joint investigation.

    As to cars? Are there no out of state cars in FL?

    One area where the enforcement issue has been made workable is with
    racehorses.
     
    Peter, Feb 11, 2010
    #40
    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.