Riddle me this...

Bruce wrote in
:

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
On Monday, May 9, 2011 4:41:57 AM UTC-5, Bruce wrote:
Paul Furman
wrote:
RichA wrote:
Why would someone pay $2900 for a Nikon 28mm f1.4 when the new
24mm f1.4 is out and $1800.00? Is the 28mm a better lens? $3k
is what the 28mm go for on Ebay.

If they want a 28mm lens, not 24mm - pretty big difference.


Exactly so. If you want a 28mm lens, a 24mm simply won't do, no
matter whether Rich thinks it is a "better" lens.

I'd agree definitely if you put it the other way around -- if you want
a 24mm, a 28mm simply won't do. I certainly found it worth buying a
24mm when I already had a 28mm, carrying both, and switching to the
24mm as needed.

I suspect some people WOULD accept a 24mm in place of a 28mm, though.
Especially if they could save over $1000 on the deal.


Those people might be better served with a good wide-angle zoom.

The so-called "saving" of $1000 is misleading, because Rich is
comparing two very different things. The AF Nikkor 28mm f/1.4D is a
rare item that was discontinued about five years ago. It was a low
production, hand made lens, designed for film and made with a very
expensive precision ground glass aspherical element. For that reason,
it was always an expensive lens to buy when new, but it has now become
an exotic item that sells to collectors for stellar prices.

The AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G is a very recent model (2010) designed
specifically for digital use. It has a molded plastic aspheric
element that gives outstanding optical performance at a much lower
price than the 28mm f/1.4. Apples and oranges.

I should point out that, previously on here, Rich very strongly
criticised the price of the 24mm f/1.4 for being extremely high ...
but consistency was never his strong suit.

And grey areas or things with more than yes or no answers aren't yours.
If Nikon released lenses in 1mm increments, would you feel compelled to
buy them all?

On Tue, 10 May 2011 12:01:15 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

Rich wrote:

And grey areas or things with more than yes or no answers aren't yours.
If Nikon released lenses in 1mm increments, would you feel compelled to
buy them all?


No, I use as few lenses as practicable. My favourite outfit remains
24mm, 35mm and 85mm or 90mm. Three lenses.

In the dim distant past, these were much my thoughts. As decent zoom
lenses became available I was gradually seduced by the ability to
change focal lengths with a flick of the wrist. There was a period
when I carried both primes and zooms but for the last seven years I
have relied on but two zooms. My main camera is now a Nikon D300 for
which I have a 16 to 85mm and an 80 to 200mm. I occasionally feel
frustrated by the lack of a wider aperture prime but that is rare.

Regards,

Eric Stevens