DSLRUsers.com

Hi,

came across these rumors on DPReview, so take it with a grain of salt.

Nikon Europe leaked that there were three new lenses coming, 16-85, 60mm micro, 24mm T/S.

Have a look at these threads:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read. ... e=26540830

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read. ... e=26540850

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read. ... e=26540854

With PMA coming at the end of the week, this could be interesting. The 24mm tilt/shift lens looks impressive.

Cheers,

André

is it just me or are those all existing Canon lenses? The 16-85VR is the 17-85IS, the other two are identical to the Canon versions. Hopefully they will stand out in some way other than "me too".

16-85mm is an impressive focal length spread, something that nikon has not previously offered. if the image quality is good and is under $2k from HK, it would be something i'd go for... I have been holding back because 17-55 isn't FF (and I'd like to keep my expensive lenses FF) and the 17-35 is too small a focal length... 24-70 isn't wide enough for me on DX.

i wonder if its a consumer build or pro build lens, though.

i would have thought that something isn't really 'me too' if the focal length isn't availible on a specific mount... you canon boys can't hog it all!

jamesw wrote:16-85mm is an impressive focal length spread, something that nikon has not previously offered. if the image quality is good and is under $2k from HK, it would be something i'd go for...
-snip-
i wonder if its a consumer build or pro build lens, though.

The rumours I have seen indicate it will be a 3.5-5.6 lens, and around $800 US?. Definitely consumer grade judging by the speed.

jamesw wrote:16-85mm is ... something i'd go for... I have been holding back because 17-55 isn't FF .

It's a DX lens, if the rumours are true.

Apparently, it has a close focusing distance of 38cm all the way through to 85 mm. That means it can focus on an object that is something like 30 cms away from the front of the lens!

$800 USD ? hmm...that doesn;t sound right. you can get the 18-200VR for that price.
i think it will have to be half that amount.

moz wrote:is it just me or are those all existing Canon lenses? The 16-85VR is the 17-85IS, the other two are identical to the Canon versions. Hopefully they will stand out in some way other than "me too".

Please: no pissing contest type posts. Moz, you should know better than that.

The 24 is a tilt shift lens. Perspective control, which is quite a bit different from any standard lens. The expected price for this is not cheap; they're mentioning >1800EU, which is likely to be a street price here of around PP2500, I guess.

The announcement also makes mention of another two PC lenses still to come. While the idea of a 45mm PC lens on a D3 is very exciting, the concept of a 24mm TS on that same body is really delicious.

jamesw wrote:i wonder if its a consumer build or pro build lens, though.

Suggested pricing indicates consumer. What I've seen suggests around EU580, which would be around PP800.

You can't compare that pricing with Poon's forum price for the 18-200 though, because you're comparing a suggested retail with a street price.

BH Photo sell the 18-200 for $680USD, so it can;t possibly be more expensive than that. if it was an f2.8-4 like the canon 17-85 then maybe they could get away with it, but the aperture is the same as the 18-200 with far more limited range.

its gonna have to come in at around $450-$500 tops imo otherwise its a dead duck. even then...i mean seriously...thats a crap price for an average consumer lens. the 55-200VR is only $250.

hmmm 800 USD does seem a bit high. I will admit to only plucking that number out of thin air under the guise that I kind of sort of maybe remember seeing something costing about that much in the relatively recent past.

i've read the same thing losfp, so you're not going crazy...but if those price rumours are correct, nikon sure is. lol
still no af-s, SWM primes....

Rooz wrote:BH Photo sell the 18-200 for $680USD, so it can;t possibly be more expensive than that.

Why?

If it's faster (optically and/or mechanically) or better constructed, uses better glass, or has some other desirable features then surely it might be able to command a higher price?

And again, you cannot compare street prices with retail.

Also, the 18-200 has been in production for several years now, so its development cost will be fully - or mostly - amortised, and thus it should be generally cheaper. That will not be the case with any new lens when it's first released.

As noted above, the 24mm TS is not going to be cheap, but it will be slower and probably bulkier than the 24 f/2.8. By your logic, it should be cheaper, but it will walk out of the stores at PP2500, or whatever price Nikon put on it.

gstark wrote:

Rooz wrote:BH Photo sell the 18-200 for $680USD, so it can;t possibly be more expensive than that.

Why?

If it's faster (optically and/or mechanically) or better constructed, uses better glass, or has some other desirable features then surely it might be able to command a higher price?

And again, you cannot compare street prices with retail.

Also, the 18-200 has been in production for several years now, so its development cost will be fully - or mostly - amortised, and thus it should be generally cheaper. That will not be the case with any new lens when it's first released.

As noted above, the 24mm TS is not going to be cheap, but it will be slower and probably bulkier than the 24 f/2.8. By your logic, it should be cheaper, but it will walk out of the stores at PP2500, or whatever price Nikon put on it.

sorry, i disagree. imo, you cant compare a consumer lens like that to a highly specialized TS lens. the target markets for both of these lens' are vastly different in their spending patterns and decision making thoughts.

people who need a TS lens will get one almost regardless of the price. especially if they have already invested in a system and the fact that there are very limited TS choices. not so with zoom lens'. there are plenty of options and all of them are cheaper. how can nikon possibly justify an $800 lens at that focal range with that kind of slow speed ? even if, (which i highly doubt), it is FAR better optically than the 18-200, then so what ? how can you possibly sell res charts to an entry level consumer. most entry level people want "zoom" and if they are a little more clever they want faster apertures and if they are a little more clever than that they want something like the 17-55f2.8.

if the rumours are true and thats the price, its an absolute dog of a deal.

Rooz wrote:if the rumours are true and thats the price, its an absolute dog of a deal.

That is the big IF. Remember that these are only rumors and anything can be right/wrong, that includes price/specs/lens/etc.

The 24mm T/S does look very interesting, out of my price range, but interesting

cheers,

André

I read that this lens will sell for US $300 and will be the kit lens on the new D60. I really think that rumours are just that and really not worth getting concerned about till some confirmation comes through.

All these lenses and the D60 are already confirmed.

From Nikon US site the estimated selling price of each is

16-85 US$649
60/2.8 US$549
24/3.5 US$1929

Thanks Gooseberry and James for correcting me they were confirmed. That had 16-85 had been reaching fever pitch in the rumour department over the last 2 weeks. Will be interesting to see if Nikon has more lenses in store for 2008

Glen wrote:Thanks Gooseberry and James for correcting me they were confirmed. That had 16-85 had been reaching fever pitch in the rumour department over the last 2 weeks. Will be interesting to see if Nikon has more lenses in store for 2008

Glen,

They have two more PC lenses in the pipeline.

gstark wrote:

Glen wrote:Thanks Gooseberry and James for correcting me they were confirmed. That had 16-85 had been reaching fever pitch in the rumour department over the last 2 weeks. Will be interesting to see if Nikon has more lenses in store for 2008

Glen,

They have two more PC lenses in the pipeline.

Could we have a quick topline on the PC system and how it works? Or any TS lenses for that matter?

Benny2707 wrote:

gstark wrote:

Glen wrote:Thanks Gooseberry and James for correcting me they were confirmed. That had 16-85 had been reaching fever pitch in the rumour department over the last 2 weeks. Will be interesting to see if Nikon has more lenses in store for 2008

Glen,

They have two more PC lenses in the pipeline.

Could we have a quick topline on the PC system and how it works? Or any TS lenses for that matter?

Benny, have you ever had a play with a large format camera? 5x4 or larger?

LF (or view) cameras are built in a very modular way, with typically, a lens board and lens, a film back and groundglass, joined by a bellows.

These are mounted on, on modern cameras, a monorail, but where the fun begins is that none of the components have fixed positions: you can, for instance, raise or lower the lens board, or you can shift it from left to right, all relative to the film back, which of course sits on the film plane. As well as those movements - all of which keep the lens plane parallel to the film plane - you can also tilt the lens plane forwards or backwards, or to the left or right. This of course breaks the paradigm that the film and lens planes remain in parallel.

Are you still with me?

Now, all of those movements can also be performed on the film back - at the film plane - too. Basically, you can almost have a camera that turns around and looks at itself, but that's not what it's about.

The purpose of this manifold: you can bring different parts of the image into sharp focus - Scheimpflug Principal, but check the spelling - or you can correct various types of distortion before you actually shoot the image. In this latter instance, you have most certainly seen images looking up at tall buildings, and observed converging verticals as you look up at the building.

By keeping the film and lens planes parallel to one another, bu by raising the lens plane, you change the part of the image circle that is projected onto the film plane, and in so doing, you can now make that same image of the tall building, but by looking straight at it and raising the lens board, rather than pointing the camera upwards, those converging verticals no longer converge.

Still with me?

Nearly there.

The way a TS or PC lens is built is such that it's engineered to permit different parts of the lens to move up or down, or from side to side, relative to the rest of the lens. And the lens mount.

And the focal/film plane.

Thus you have, in a film or DSLR, some of the capabilities of a view camera, but in a much more portable, and much more user friendly, package.

I've not tried to explain the actual usage of a view camera. Suffice to say it's fun, it's expensive, it's time consuming, but it's real photography.

Let me know if you want more info on this. I nearly bought myself a Toyo G when I was in HKG last year. I was very tempted, but as I would rarely use it, good sense (on a very rare occasion) got the better of me.

HTH.

One more link on these:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/news/news_20080129.html

from the well respected Bjørn Rørslett's website.

and the details at Nikon USA:

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1

I guess they are not rumours anymore

Cheers,

André

Thanks for the explanation gary.....

That 24mm PC lens is definitely something that I want! Now all they need to do is maybe update their fast primes and that's it.

I am still tempted by the 16-85mm. The slower aperature doesn't phase me quite as much as the DX spec or price. I practically always shoot at f8 - f11.

And too bad I wasn't at work when this was annouced because for the 450D's annoucement we knew in advance for our great connections at PC.

Let's hope there are more surprises, nothing but the PC-E lens tempt me at the moment...

gstark wrote:you can bring different parts of the image into sharp focus - Scheimpflug Principal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheimpflug_principle

(and Gary, I don't think manifold means what you think it does - there's only one light entry point in a view camera)

moz wrote:(and Gary, I don't think manifold means what you think it does - there's only one light entry point in a view camera)

Yes, but that wasn't my usage: let's remove my sidebar reference to Scheimpflug ...

The purpose of this manifold: you can bring different parts of the image into sharp focus .. or you can correct various types of distortion before you actually shoot the image

... and we can see that I'm describing two (or many) uses for the features referenced. Thus, "manifold".

gstark wrote:

The purpose of this manifold: you can bring different parts of the image into sharp focus .. or you can correct various types of distortion before you actually shoot the image

... and we can see that I'm describing two (or many) uses for the features referenced. Thus, "manifold".

So you meant "is manifold" rather than "of this manifold". That makes sense.

moz wrote:

gstark wrote:

The purpose of this manifold: you can bring different parts of the image into sharp focus .. or you can correct various types of distortion before you actually shoot the image

... and we can see that I'm describing two (or many) uses for the features referenced. Thus, "manifold".

So you meant "is manifold" rather than "of this manifold". That makes sense.

Ah yess ... a missing "is".

Thanx, and sorry for the foncusion.

gstark wrote:

moz wrote:

gstark wrote:

The purpose of this manifold: you can bring different parts of the image into sharp focus .. or you can correct various types of distortion before you actually shoot the image

... and we can see that I'm describing two (or many) uses for the features referenced. Thus, "manifold".

So you meant "is manifold" rather than "of this manifold". That makes sense.

Ah yess ... a missing "is".

Thanx, and sorry for the foncusion.

I got it. Like I mean I geddit. Thanks for the explanation Gary. I think I want one now. Sounds like a bit of fun could be had with one that's for sure. Really appreciate your help.

Cheers

Benny