looks fairly real to me, not dx either...
http://nikonrumors.com/2009/02/16/af-s-nik...-f4-g-ed-n.aspx
Read-only discussion
looks fairly real to me, not dx either...
http://nikonrumors.com/2009/02/16/af-s-nik...-f4-g-ed-n.aspx
not fisheye either
Most likely not cheap either ![]()
If indeed this lens is not B.S. Given the strugle with the 14-24mm to fit it inside a port, I'm not anxious to see the overall diameter of this chunk of glass, look like a top sider only to me.
Most likely not cheap either
If indeed this lens is not B.S. Given the strugle with the 14-24mm to fit it inside a port, I'm not anxious to see the overall diameter of this chunk of glass, look like a top sider only to me.
I think you may be correct, looks to be at least 10% larger in OD. Also, will be a challenge optically. Nevertheless some will try to use this UW. We shall see! ![]()
Check this out:
http://nikonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/...and-14-24mm.jpg
Isn't the supposed 10-18 the outside lens in the photo? If so I'm guessing it's a DX lens. Especially as it is F4.
Also the outside photo looks exactly like the center photo reduced in size via photoshop.
If it's DX it makes sense. Competes with the newer super wide zooms made by the 3rd party lens makers.
Isn't the supposed 10-18 the outside lens in the photo? If so I'm guessing it's a DX lens. Especially as it is F4.
Also the outside photo looks exactly like the center photo reduced in size via photoshop.
If it's DX it makes sense. Competes with the newer super wide zooms made by the 3rd party lens makers.
They are not shown at the same scale, note the mount diameter. This less is quite a bit bigger than the 14-24, clearly FX. A tour de force, the wide angle equivalent of a super-tele lens.
If it is real!
Not a word about a 10-18mm from the Nikon gang at the PMA show in Las Vegas.
Fred
Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.