Jump to content


Frosty

Member Since 02 Mar 2007
Offline Last Active Jan 01 2013 08:48 AM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Nikon 10-24mm F3.5-4.5G ED

30 July 2009 - 11:26 PM

I haven't bought a single Nikon lens yet that's cost effective.

I have a - Nikon 60mm f2.8 micro, Nikon AF-S 70-300mm VR and Nikon AF-S 35mm f1.8 lenses that are not only cost effective but wonderfully sharp, well made and better than anything else for similar money.


I should have qualified my statement, boy do I feel sheepish. I should have said in the aperture range of f/2.8 and faster. I hope I didn't come off wrong???


Best Regards,

Frosty

In Topic: Nikon 10-24mm F3.5-4.5G ED

30 July 2009 - 12:16 PM

Tamron did it with the 11-16mm f/2.8. Cost effective? I haven't bought a single Nikon lens yet that's cost effective. The best bang for the buck would have to be the 50mm f/1.8. All and all, if we want quality glass at f/1.2- f/2.8 it's going to be pricey no matter what. Nikon likes to collect $1,000.00 minimum, usually $1,800.00 for fast glass with the exception of a few lenses. Nikon makes some wonderful lenses don't take me wrong. I'm willing to pay the price but some of the newer glass they have put out is shamefully over priced like the 24-120mm VR, not terrible, but not too good either.... IMHO. I would really like to see Nikon step up with some new fast glass and AFS in the shorter focal range, when I say fast I mean f/1.2, f/1.4. If they build good lenses they'll sell them for sure! Regards, Frosty

In Topic: Nikon 10-24mm F3.5-4.5G ED

23 July 2009 - 10:56 PM

I'm still a bit leery, I'm gonna wait a while and see how this one does. It would have been so nice if they would have made this f/2.8. Then again maybe a miracle will happen and I can go FX and get the 14-24mm f/2.8 Woooo Hooooo. Best Regards, Frosty