Go to a  "printer friendly" view of this message which allow an easy print Printer-friendly copy Go to the page which allows you to send this topic link and a message to a friend Email this topic to a friend
Forums Lobby MULTILINGUAL NIKONIANS English Café (Public) topic #84882
View in threaded mode

Subject: "My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve" Previous topic | Next topic
starwarrior Registered since 22nd Oct 2012Mon 22-Oct-12 11:55 PM
5 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
"My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
Tue 23-Oct-12 03:28 AM by starwarrior

US
          

The Nikon F2 and F-mount has been the gold standard in professional photography for the past 30 years. In the past 10 years or so you haven't been able to a Nikon camera or Nikorr lens without it being either discontinued or replaced by another model. A cheap lens will always be a cheap lens and when you find Nikon lenses selling for peanuts over the internet it has simply been determined that it is a cheap lens. Even though Nikon is still the Icon in professional photography it is seeminlgly placing more emphisis on it's consumer product line rather than the professional market. Money over quality is not my ideology of what the Nikon name should stand for.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Replies to this topic
ShrimpBoy Silver Member Nikonian since 08th Jan 2006Tue 23-Oct-12 04:35 AM
882 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#1. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 0


Brighton and Hove, GB
          

If you don't like the cheap lenses buy a more expensive one. Either will make great images on a D7000 or a higher-priced body. I think that says it all about Nikon.

Gary
"Yea, Sussex by the sea!" - Rudyard Kipling

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

KnightPhoto Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Tue 23-Oct-12 04:55 AM
4334 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#2. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 0
Tue 23-Oct-12 04:56 AM by KnightPhoto

Alberta, CA
          

Still, I don't think you can use digital cameras in the same analogy with lenses. Digital is only just now maturing. Of course older used digicams are cheap, take one look at the technology in them compared to today's model - no comparison! Give me any two equivalent cameras for comparison, the new one annihilates it in IQ and handling that ultimately means completely missed shots on the older cam that the newer cams are able to finesse.

Best regards, SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

starwarrior Registered since 22nd Oct 2012Tue 23-Oct-12 05:41 AM
5 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#3. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 2


US
          

Very true, film and digital technology are two entirely different animals however I also think digital editing tools invited more latitude and tolerance when it comes to lens as well as camera quality. Some day like vinyl records and CD technology or the old tube vs. solid state amplifier sound differential, film vs. digital technology will also make it's debut. Only then will all the lost elements show up in the dark room. So as for me, I am not going to throw away my old 35mm film camera just yet. I figure in a few years photography enthusiasts will be looking for them on E-Bay.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Wed 24-Oct-12 12:55 AM
4162 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#4. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 3


Toronto, CA
          

>Some day like vinyl records and CD
>technology or the old tube vs. solid state amplifier sound
>differential, film vs. digital technology will also make it's
>debut. Only then will all the lost elements show up in the
>dark room.

Photographers have been comparing 35mm film photos and slides to APS-C and 35mm digital images for many years. So far, everyone is voting with their wallets - for digital.

Of course film photograph is different than digital photography. The only commonalities are lenses and exposure settings.

The lost elements that show up the darkroom right now are nothing more than matters of personal preference - which I respect - but have nothing to do with matters of dynamic range, color depth, color accuracy or resolution. Digital has it all. I wouldn't have said that so adamantly 6 or 7 years ago. But digital has progressed, while film reached its technological peak more than 15 years ago. Even 15 years ago though, to do anything with film in a production environment (newspaper, magazine, journal, large format print, etc., etc.) is had to be drum-scanned for digitization into an increasingly electronic/digital workflow.

Film photography was the foundation for the birth of both popular and professional - I'm sure everyone knows that. But it reached the end of its natural technology life when (as long as we're still looking in the darkroom) digital sensor technology improved to the point where not only the resolution surpassed film, but also the dynamic range, color depth, editability of images, processing speed, and instantaneity of experience surpassed film.

For over 100 years, people in every country around the world knew and understood the look and qualities of film photography. The look and qualities are now changing - they have already changed - but the great film prints will be around for centuries more for people to see, appreciate and compare.

>So as for me, I am not going to throw away my old
>35mm film camera just yet. I figure in a few years photography
>enthusiasts will be looking for them on E-Bay.

Good luck (seriously), because the landfills are overloaded with film bodies traded-in over the past 10 years. The photography shops ended up with millions of them and ended up dumping most of the things in the nearest skip. You can buy just about any film body for a few dollars right now. In a few years, you'll be able to buy them for a few dollars less, especially as availability of 35mm film stock dries up completely.

Your vinyl LPs enjoyed a renaissance for a few years too. There are even a few new shops selling turntables in some of the biggest cities (which have sufficiently large populations, a tiny percentage of which support such shops). Old vinyl collections are going up, very slightly, in value. It won't last. The few remain pressing plants can't last much longer either on the meager revenues they're earning. Besides that, most pressing plants have converted most of their floor and production space to more productive work. Quite a few CD and DVD mastering operations are shuttering as well - the result of increasing online music, movie and TV show buying. As Telarc recordings of the London Phil, Boston Pops, Gene Krupa, Thelonius Monk, Led Zep, Fleetwood Mac, Oscar Peterson and a thousand other greats gradually wear out from repeated plays on the even the finest deck, arms, cartidges and spikes (and all those recordings are wearing out real fast too, or are being stored so poorly that they might as well be worn out), turntables, arms and cartidges will gather dust and then end up in the same landfill as the old 35mm film cameras.

The tube audio equipment you mentioned has never actually gone away. It's now designed and developed strictly for the elite, self-described golden-eared crowd - a technology touted for its audible warmth and openness. At least one former TV camera sensor tube fab has been refurbished as an audio tube fabrication facility in the U.S. because of a tiny resurgence of demand for tubed amps and preamps. It's just a way to develop products designed to fleece elite music lovers out of tens of thousands of dollars each. It's not going to suddenly surge and replace solid state electronics, any more than LPs are going to surge to replace digital recordings, or any more than film photography is going to resurge to displace digital photography.

In my opinon, any differences which film could boast are now relegated to the status of curiousities. If someone prefers the look of film, they can still use it and do great things because some film stocks are still available. When film stocks cease production altogether, all the remaining 35mm film cameras in active use will suddenly be nothing more than old, bulky paperweights.

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Noel Holland Platinum Member Winner in the Nikonians 10th Anniversary Photo Contest Charter MemberWed 24-Oct-12 07:45 AM
2175 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#5. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 0


TH
          

I'm a photographer not a collector or camera buff.

To me the most important factor is how well the lens performs not it's price and especially not it's resale value. I buy lens to use them as tools not as an investment.

It's been my experience that some of Nikon's "cheap" lens are far from poor performers. In fact the little 18-70mm kit lens I got with my D70 has always been considered an absolute little star for what it was and punched well above it's price point.

In my opinion the modern "cheap" consumer lens are out performing the older lens from 30 years ago. Errmmm..... why is that a bad thing? Yes it does mean that those who have 30 year old lens are not getting the resale value they might have expected because their lens are by comparison perceived to be not as good as they used to be. That perception is partly because they aren't as good as they used to be compared to modern lens formula but also that modern society has gotten into the habit of use it and bin it. There just isn't the market for second hand gear that there used to be, everyone wants brand new cutting edge gear (even when sometime the older stuff is still better).

I don't think that modern consumer lens giving us better performance compared to 30 year+ old lenses is something we should be upset about except for those people who see cameras and lens as an investment and for them I have no sympathy. All they do is keep the price of the rare and exotic at an artificially high price sitting pretty on their glass shelves and not doing what they were designed to do which is sitting on my camera helping me take photos.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Wed 24-Oct-12 11:00 AM
4162 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#6. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 0


Toronto, CA
          

>In the past 10
>years or so you haven't been able to a Nikon camera or Nikorr
>lens without it being either discontinued or replaced by
>another model. A cheap lens will always be a cheap lens and
>when you find Nikon lenses selling for peanuts over the
>internet it has simply been determined that it is a cheap
>lens.

Why do you care about this? If you're railing against planned obsolescence, it's an uphill battle. Besides that, a Nikkor lens purchased ten years ago that is still working well is also still the lens you purchased. It's still compatible with all the latest Nikon camera bodies, and with all the bodies with which it was compatible when you first bought the thing. No reason to stop using it. A D300 with which someone has been making wonderful photos for the past five years can still continue doing so for the life of the camera (another 10 or 20 years?). Just because marketing urges a D300 owner to replace the camera, it doesn't mean the camera is suddenly bad.

>Even though Nikon is still the Icon in professional
>photography

Well, one of the icons . . .

>it is seeminlgly placing more emphisis on it's
>consumer product line rather than the professional market.

So what? Nikon is still either #1 or #2 among pro shooters depending on whom you ask.

>Money over quality is not my ideology of what the Nikon name
>should stand for.

Not sure what you mean. Nikon and its competitors can't operate without reliable cash flow and quarterly profits. A company must have money in order to maintain roduct quality, develop new products, improve and support existing products. You know of another way to do this?

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

MotoMannequin Moderator Awarded for his extraordinary skills in landscape and wildlife photography Nikonian since 11th Jan 2006Wed 24-Oct-12 08:37 PM
8582 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#7. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 0


Livermore, CA, US
          

Your problem is that Nikon is too focused on consumer products? Or is it that you feel they iterate their designs too often?

If the former, you have to account for the fact that Nikon, unlike its competition, is pretty much only a camera/optics company. They don't have a massive copier/scanner or home electronics business to help fund R&D. Therefore, to exist with affordable pro gear, they need to make money where there's money to be made, and that's overwhelmingly in high-volume consumer-level goods.

If it's the latter, let me just introduce you to my old nemesis, Mr. 80-400 VR, and his brother, 300 f/4.

Larry - a Bay Area Nikonian
My Nikonians gallery

www.tempered-light.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Ellis Feibush Silver Member Nikonian since 08th Sep 2009Mon 05-Nov-12 09:47 AM
267 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#8. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 5


Summit, US
          

I'll probably die with my 18-70mm kit lens which came with my D70, the first digital camera I ever bought. It is one superb lens; great color, sharp, excellent resolution and tough as nails. Couldn't agree with you more.

efeibush

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

benveniste Moderator Awarded for is high level skills in various areas, including Macro and Landscape Photography Nikonian since 25th Nov 2002Mon 05-Nov-12 12:25 PM
9564 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#9. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 6
Mon 05-Nov-12 12:29 PM by benveniste

Boston Area, US
          

Besides that, a Nikkor lens purchased ten years ago that is still working well is also still the lens you purchased. It's still compatible with all the latest Nikon camera bodies...

Sorry, that's not even true for a vague "it'll mount and allow you to take a picture in unmetered manual mode" definition of compatibility. I offer my 60-180mm IX-Nikkor as a counterexample; that lens can be used on a micro 4/3rd camera, but the only dSLR it works with is the Kodak DCS 315.

One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it. - Galen Rowell

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Mon 05-Nov-12 02:25 PM
4162 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#10. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 9
Tue 06-Nov-12 12:30 AM by agitater

Toronto, CA
          

>Besides that, a Nikkor lens purchased
>ten years ago that is still working well is also still the
>lens you purchased. It's still compatible with all the latest
>Nikon camera bodies...

>
>Sorry, that's not even true for a vague "it'll mount and
>allow you to take a picture in unmetered manual mode"
>definition of compatibility. I offer my 60-180mm IX-Nikkor as
>a counterexample; that lens can be used on a micro 4/3rd
>camera, but the only dSLR it works with is the Kodak DCS 315.

I can find complaints about everything under the sun. But what is the point, specifically? Is it that the technological progress made by Nikon and its competitors literally prevents certain oddball lenses from working with the latest cameras? You're referring to an IX-Nikkor APS lens - a dead system which is notable for its rarity in any overview of Nikon products.

Please don't misunderstand. I'm not suggesting that Nikon is some picture of perfection. Far from it. What I originally responded to was the OP's post which seemed too full of hyperbole to ignore. My point is that I can use the time machine to walk into any Nikon dealer ten years ago (the OP's time frame), buy a Nikkor lens in production at the time, then bring it back to 2012 and mount it on any current ILC camera in the Nikon lineup (including, with the FT-1 adapter, the Nikon 1 bodies).

Frankly, it seemed to me that the OP was giving the impression that he was falling prey to marketing and merchandising pressure to replace perfectly good lenses (which he already owns) with new versions - for no good reason.

The OP also left me with the impression that he was upset about the fact that a ten year old lens is not worth as much as he wants it to be worth on the used market, because he feels that too many new lens models create downward pressure on the value of used items. He's probably right to a great extent, but that doesn't explain the current used price of the old 28mm f./1.4 AF-D which sells used for far more than it did new. There are other examples including the Nikkor 70-180mm f/4.5-5.6 AF-D Micro - another truly great lens which sells for far more used than it did new. The 80-200 AF-D has also held its value, selling for less than it did when new mind you, but for still remarkable high prices. There are still more examples

Lots of people have kit Nikkor zooms that command all of $75 (if they're lucky) on the used market ten years down the road. It's unrealistic to expect remarkable used prices for commoditized lenses, including your late, lamented, APS IX-Nikkor.

Now that 17 years have passed, I don't think the IX-Nikkor imcompatibility is a point of contention. IX-Nikkor was never meant to be compatible with Nikon 35mm SLR bodies when it was released, and the passage of time hasn't changed that. Cheap, system-specific lenses.

There's more. The OP's statement that "The Nikon F2 and F-mount has been the gold standard in professional photography for the past 30 years" is incorrect. It is one of the gold standards certainly, but Canon pro bodies and lenses have regularly over the past 30 years outsold Nikon.

I think we should stick to comparisions of film and digital 35mm, DX and FX SLR lens compatibility, and avoid the inclusion of the oddball, cheap, consumer IX-Nikkor system that went nowhere for all of four years. That said, I thought that most Nikon lenses (including the latest DX and FX lenses) work with the Pronea APS film body (AF and all, but VR won't trigger)?

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

benveniste Moderator Awarded for is high level skills in various areas, including Macro and Landscape Photography Nikonian since 25th Nov 2002Tue 06-Nov-12 02:15 AM
9564 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#11. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 10


Boston Area, US
          

I can find complaints about everything under the sun. But what is the point, specifically?

Simply put, my "complaint" is that you exaggerated your case to the point of being factually incorrect. And you're doing so again in this post.

Nikon "compatibility" has severe limits over time; the IX-Nikkors are merely one example. The loss of AF function with AF-S lenses on so many dSLR bodies is a much larger issue, as are the limits of non-CPU lenses and accessories. 10 years ago AF-S lenses weren't exactly common -- there were exactly three non-telephoto AF-S lenses (17-35mm, 28-70mm, 24-85mm). Only one of those was a consumer-grade lens.

DX lenses are not recommended with Pronea bodies, and those bodies came with their own set of bizarre compatibility issues.

The OP also left me with the impression that he was upset about the fact that a ten year old lens is not worth as much as he wants it to be worth on the used market, because he feels that too many new lens models create downward pressure on the value of used items. He's probably right to a great extent, but that doesn't explain the current used price of the old 28mm f./1.4 AF-D which sells used for far more than it did new.

Quoting the OP, "when you find Nikon lenses selling for peanuts over the internet it has simply been determined that it is a cheap lens." Neither the 28mm f/1.4 nor the 80-200mm f/2.8 nor the 70-180mm Micro ever were cheap lenses. On the other hand, prices of moderately priced lenses has not done nearly as well. In fact, resale value is quite low for all of the discontinued "normal zooms" except the 28-70mm f/2.8.

Incidentially, the 80-200mm f/2.8D is one of the lenses which does have documented compatibility issues with modern dSLR's.

Last years sales and advertising figures show that the OP is absolutely correct that Nikon is placing more emphasis on its consumer product line than the professional market. Personally, I don't think Nikon could have survived any other way, but that's a different topic.

One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it. - Galen Rowell

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Tue 06-Nov-12 02:40 AM
4162 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#12. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 11


Toronto, CA
          

Okay . . . but now I have no idea what point you and the OP are trying to make.

You seem to be pointing out that many consumer grade Nikkor lenses don't hold much value in the used lens market. You also seem to be pointing out that 10-35 year old Nikkor lens technology is not 100% compatible with technology developed over the past few years. It is somehow unacceptable or unfathomable to you and the OP that Nikon 'perpetrated' such a situation?

I am sorry, but I seem to be missing your point.

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

benveniste Moderator Awarded for is high level skills in various areas, including Macro and Landscape Photography Nikonian since 25th Nov 2002Tue 06-Nov-12 03:16 AM
9564 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#13. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 12


Boston Area, US
          

I am sorry, but I seem to be missing your point.

My point is that you continue to exaggerate your case to the point of being factually incorrect.

One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it. - Galen Rowell

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

agitater Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007Tue 06-Nov-12 04:00 AM
4162 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#14. "RE: My Biggest Nikon Pet Peeve"
In response to Reply # 13


Toronto, CA
          

>I am sorry, but I seem to be missing
>your point.

>
>My point is that you continue to exaggerate your case to the
>point of being factually incorrect.

I have not exaggerated anything. My response to the OP was no more or less general than his. I posted in kind and in context, as was appropriate.

I think you're commenting on a level of granularity of detail that I never implied in my point. I wrote also that Nikon is not perfect. Every range of complex technology products that have been developed and produced by a company over the course of a 10-35 year stretch definitely strain and frequently break compatibility - operating systems, peripheral hardware, core hardware, parts interchangeability, input/output interfaces, and much, much more. This reality should come as no surprise to anyone, least of all you and the OP.

My point was, and remains, only that for my purposes Nikon lens compatibility over the past 20 years with a succession of SLR and DSLR bodies has been excellent. Either I've been lucky or I simply tripped into a succession of compatible camera body purchases. I'm not exaggerating my experience or its facts in any way.

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Forums Lobby MULTILINGUAL NIKONIANS English Café (Public) topic #84882 Previous topic | Next topic


Take the Nikonians Tour and learn more about being a Nikonian Wiki /FAQ /Help Listen to our MP3 photography radio channels Find anything on Nikon and imaging technology - fast!

Copyright © Nikonians 2000, 2014
All Rights Reserved

Nikonians®, NikoScope® and NikoniansAcademy™ are trademarks owned by Nikonians.org.
Nikon®, Nikonos® and Nikkor® are registered trademarks of Nikon Corporation.