If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Inexplicably, Nikon, known for rapacious lens prices releases acheap 200-500mm f/5.6
On 04/08/2015 17:06, RichA wrote:
$1400? How? If it turns out to be good, it'll be the biggest bargain they've offered. Rumour is Tamron might have built it. I sure hope not. If they release a 24mp D400 and this lens, it would be a wildlife shooter's dream. Compact and powerful. Fantastic and about time. Isn't the Nikkor 10-24 DX lens made by Tamron? Perhaps Tamron (& Sigma) proved another point - that optically very good long "consumer" zooms can be made at a much lower price point than anybody expected. Nikon were really pushing it with their 80-400 AFS - with pro-level pricing for something quite ordinary. I'd be surprised if the 200-500 is any worse in build quality, weather sealing etc. It's a great time for Nikon DSLR owners. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Inexplicably, Nikon, known for rapacious lens prices releasesa cheap 200-500mm f/5.6
On 8/4/2015 8:28 PM, RichA wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 August 2015 16:58:36 UTC-4, Me wrote: On 04/08/2015 17:06, RichA wrote: $1400? How? If it turns out to be good, it'll be the biggest bargain they've offered. Rumour is Tamron might have built it. I sure hope not. If they release a 24mp D400 and this lens, it would be a wildlife shooter's dream. Compact and powerful. Fantastic and about time. Isn't the Nikkor 10-24 DX lens made by Tamron? Perhaps Tamron (& Sigma) proved another point - that optically very good long "consumer" zooms can be made at a much lower price point than anybody expected. I can't say it's good, because I've never used a Tamron or Sigma long-range zoom. I tested Sigma and Tamron. Spent about two hours with each, and was not satisfied with either. Some folks have been very happy with them. But since I have the Nikon 80-499 and a 500 mirror. It was not worthwhile for me to change. YMMV Nikon were really pushing it with their 80-400 AFS - with pro-level pricing for something quite ordinary. It was ridiculous. Most people made the point you just did. I'd be surprised if the 200-500 is any worse in build quality, weather sealing etc. It's a great time for Nikon DSLR owners. No weather sealing, but the thing doesn't look like a 70-300mm either. -- PeterN |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Inexplicably, Nikon, known for rapacious lens prices releases a cheap 200-500mm f/5.6
"RichA" wrote in message
... On Tuesday, 4 August 2015 16:58:36 UTC-4, Me wrote: On 04/08/2015 17:06, RichA wrote: $1400? How? If it turns out to be good, it'll be the biggest bargain they've offered. Rumour is Tamron might have built it. I sure hope not. If they release a 24mp D400 and this lens, it would be a wildlife shooter's dream. Compact and powerful. Fantastic and about time. Isn't the Nikkor 10-24 DX lens made by Tamron? Perhaps Tamron (& Sigma) proved another point - that optically very good long "consumer" zooms can be made at a much lower price point than anybody expected. I can't say it's good, because I've never used a Tamron or Sigma long-range zoom. Really! I've never used a D810 but I know it's a darn good camera. You don't necessarily have to use something to know how good it is or isn't. As someone who likes to quote dpreview at times, do a little reading in the forums there and see how the vast majority of users are happy with their Sigma and Tamron 150-600mm lenses. You can read some reviews too. Nikon were really pushing it with their 80-400 AFS - with pro-level pricing for something quite ordinary. It was ridiculous. Most people made the point you just did. I'd be surprised if the 200-500 is any worse in build quality, weather sealing etc. It's a great time for Nikon DSLR owners. No weather sealing, but the thing doesn't look like a 70-300mm either. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Inexplicably, Nikon, known for rapacious lens prices releases a cheap 200-500mm f/5.6
In article , PAS
wrote: I can't say it's good, because I've never used a Tamron or Sigma long-range zoom. Really! I've never used a D810 but I know it's a darn good camera. You don't necessarily have to use something to know how good it is or isn't. nice contradiction. you've previously said the only way to know if sigma/foveon cameras are any good is to use one. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Inexplicably, Nikon, known for rapacious lens prices releases a cheap 200-500mm f/5.6
"nospam" wrote in message
... In article , PAS wrote: I can't say it's good, because I've never used a Tamron or Sigma long-range zoom. Really! I've never used a D810 but I know it's a darn good camera. You don't necessarily have to use something to know how good it is or isn't. nice contradiction. you've previously said the only way to know if sigma/foveon cameras are any good is to use one. Never said that. I suggested that you use one. Nice try but in typical fashion you twist people's words. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Inexplicably, Nikon, known for rapacious lens prices releases a cheap 200-500mm f/5.6
In article , PAS
wrote: I can't say it's good, because I've never used a Tamron or Sigma long-range zoom. Really! I've never used a D810 but I know it's a darn good camera. You don't necessarily have to use something to know how good it is or isn't. nice contradiction. you've previously said the only way to know if sigma/foveon cameras are any good is to use one. Never said that. I suggested that you use one. Nice try but in typical fashion you twist people's words. i'm not twisting anything. why would someone need to use one to know if it's any good? either you can tell without using or you can't. you can't have it both ways. the *reason* why sigma's market share is 1% is because they're garbage. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Inexplicably, Nikon, known for rapacious lens prices releases a cheap 200-500mm f/5.6
"nospam" wrote in message
... In article , PAS wrote: I can't say it's good, because I've never used a Tamron or Sigma long-range zoom. Really! I've never used a D810 but I know it's a darn good camera. You don't necessarily have to use something to know how good it is or isn't. nice contradiction. you've previously said the only way to know if sigma/foveon cameras are any good is to use one. Never said that. I suggested that you use one. Nice try but in typical fashion you twist people's words. i'm not twisting anything. why would someone need to use one to know if it's any good? either you can tell without using or you can't. you can't have it both ways. the *reason* why sigma's market share is 1% is because they're garbage. You lie. Your changing the subject. Off with you. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Inexplicably, Nikon, known for rapacious lens prices releases acheap 200-500mm f/5.6
On 06/08/2015 01:49, PAS wrote:
"RichA" wrote in message ... On Tuesday, 4 August 2015 16:58:36 UTC-4, Me wrote: On 04/08/2015 17:06, RichA wrote: $1400? How? If it turns out to be good, it'll be the biggest bargain they've offered. Rumour is Tamron might have built it. I sure hope not. If they release a 24mp D400 and this lens, it would be a wildlife shooter's dream. Compact and powerful. Fantastic and about time. Isn't the Nikkor 10-24 DX lens made by Tamron? Perhaps Tamron (& Sigma) proved another point - that optically very good long "consumer" zooms can be made at a much lower price point than anybody expected. I can't say it's good, because I've never used a Tamron or Sigma long-range zoom. Really! I've never used a D810 but I know it's a darn good camera. You don't necessarily have to use something to know how good it is or isn't. As someone who likes to quote dpreview at times, do a little reading in the forums there and see how the vast majority of users are happy with their Sigma and Tamron 150-600mm lenses. You can read some reviews too. Nikon were really pushing it with their 80-400 AFS - with pro-level pricing for something quite ordinary. It was ridiculous. Most people made the point you just did. I'd be surprised if the 200-500 is any worse in build quality, weather sealing etc. It's a great time for Nikon DSLR owners. No weather sealing, but the thing doesn't look like a 70-300mm either. There's an obvious issue with weather sealing and build quality with these extending zooms, firstly that they're like bicycle pumps, air has to get in and out, the hope is that some of the crap in the air is filtered out by seals around the extending barrel. The other issue is a tradeoff between general build quality and weight. I tried using a Sigma 150-600 "S" model, and it's very heavy. I could use it hand-held - but not for very long. I've tried the Nikkor 80-400D a couple of times, and found them to be unacceptably soft at the long end which bothers me even more than the slow focusing. I've tried the Nikkor 80-400 AFS which is much much better than the old model, but they are very very expensive and are not well sealed - plenty of information out there from people who have used them in dusty environments and had them fill up with enough dust behind the front element for it to become a problem for optical performance. I doubt the Nikkor 200-500 will be worse. The Tamron 150-600 also sucks dust in - fortunately the front element assembly is very easily removed for internal cleaning. Next time I do it, I'll post photos/instructions to DPreview or Youtube. There is a risk to stuff things up as shims are retained by friction only from screws holding the element assembly to the barrel, and if they all fell out at the same time and got mixed up on your bench, you'd have a problem. With mine, the combined shim thickness was identical in each of the 3 positions, but that might not be the case with other samples of the lens where the shims may be used for centering the front elements rather than just setting infinity focus. It's a 10-15 minute job, only special tool needed is a torx T2 screwdriver. It's a very plastic lens, about what I'd have expected for the price, but feels well-enough made. If it was dropped though - I don't think the result would be very good. I'll try out the Nikkor 200-500 when it arrives at my local camera store. The Tamron is extremely good up to 500mm, but at 500-600mm, then practically achieving what it's optically capable of is a real challenge. One issue is that at 600mm, with continuous AF-C, it will tend to make micro focus adjustments on a static subject, enough so that accurate focus is a lottery unless you switch to AF-S. Nikon's dumb placement of the AF mode switch on the D8*0 makes switching between AF-S and AF-C a hassle with a large lens used hand-held, so if you're focus-tracking a subject, then want to zoom in when the subject stops moving, it's less than ideal. Manual focus at the 600mm end is an impossibility hand-held, the focus ring action is too highly geared to make any accurate adjustment overriding AF. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Inexplicably, Nikon, known for rapacious lens prices releases a cheap 200-500mm f/5.6
In article , PAS wrote:
"nospam" wrote in message ... nospam: In article , PAS RichA: I can't say it's good, because I've never used a Tamron or Sigma long-range zoom. PAS: Really! I've never used a D810 but I know it's a darn good camera. You don't necessarily have to use something to know how good it is or isn't. nospam: nice contradiction. you've previously said the only way to know if sigma/foveon cameras are any good is to use one. PAS: Never said that. I suggested that you use one. Nice try but in typical fashion you twist people's words. nospam: i'm not twisting anything. why would someone need to use one to know if it's any good? either you can tell without using or you can't. you can't have it both ways. the *reason* why sigma's market share is 1% is because they're garbage. You lie. Your changing the subject. Off with you. For the record, my 28mm/f1.8 Sigma is one of my favorite wide angle lenses, really sharp and really quick focusing. Wrote about it earlier: http://jonaseklundh.se/pages/webblog...kor_85mm_F14g? lang=en -- Sandman |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Inexplicably, Nikon, known for rapacious lens prices releasesa cheap 200-500mm f/5.6
On 8/5/2015 3:01 PM, PAS wrote:
"nospam" wrote in message ... In article , PAS wrote: I can't say it's good, because I've never used a Tamron or Sigma long-range zoom. Really! I've never used a D810 but I know it's a darn good camera. You don't necessarily have to use something to know how good it is or isn't. nice contradiction. you've previously said the only way to know if sigma/foveon cameras are any good is to use one. Never said that. I suggested that you use one. Nice try but in typical fashion you twist people's words. He does not twist words. The whole world twists the meaning of his words. NB to nospam: I know you will reply with an obvious statement. -- PeterN I want to be wrong this time. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
want advice re 400mm or 500mm lens for Nikon | scenic_man | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 4 | November 15th 06 02:53 PM |
want advice re 400mm or 500mm lens for Nikon | scenic_man | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 4 | November 15th 06 02:53 PM |
500mm lens for nikon | Bob | Digital SLR Cameras | 13 | September 16th 05 02:01 AM |
Nikon AF-S 500mm f/4 lens for sale | Tim Watkins | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | April 2nd 05 08:48 AM |