So Nikon was busy at PMA '08..

[ex1z7]

The D60 has no AF motor :(..

Bodies : Nikon D60.
http://a.img-dpreview.com/news/0801/nikon/D60_front_rgb-001.jpg
http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=2&productNr=25438 I'll link the specs on this one, pretty long..
Lenses :

AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR
http://nikonusa.com/images/products/2178_360.jpg

Focal length: 16-85mm

Maximum aperture: f/3.5-5.6

Minimum aperture: f/22-36

Lens construction: 17 elements in 11 groups (with two ED glass elements, three aspherical lenses)

Picture angle: 83° - 18° 50´

Closest focus distance: 0.38 m/1.3 ft. (throughout the entire zoom range)

Maximum reproduction ratio: 1/4.6

Number of diaphragm blades: 7 (rounded)

Filter/attachment size: 67mm

Diameter x length: Approximately 2.8 x 3.4 inches (72 x 85mm)

Weight: Approximately 17.1 oz. (485g)

Supplied accessories: 67mm Snap-on front lens cap LC-67, Rear lens cap LF-1,Bayonet hood HB-39, Flexible lens pouch CL-1015

Optional accessories: 67mm screw-in filters


AF-S Micro-NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED
http://nikonusa.com/images/products/2177_360.jpg

Focal length: 60mm

Maximum aperture: f/2.8

Minimum aperture: f/32

Lens construction: 12 elements in 9 groups (with one ED glass lens, two aspherical lenses, one with Nano Crystal Coat)

Picture angle: 39°40´ (26°30´ with Nikon DX format)

Closest focus distance: 0.185 m/0.6 ft. (life-size)

Maximum reproduction ratio: 1.0x (life-size)

Number of diaphragm blades: 9 (rounded)

Filter/attachment size: 62 mm

Diameter x length: Approximately 2.9 x 3.5 inches (73 x 89mm)

Weight: Approximately 425 g/15.0 oz.

Supplied accessories: LC-62 62mm Snap-on front lens cap, LF-1Rear lens cap, HB-42 Bayonet hood, CL-1018 Flexible lens pouch

Optional accessories: 62mm screw-in filters, including circular polarizing filter



PC-E NIKKOR 24mm f/3.5D ED
http://nikonusa.com/images/products/2168_360.jpg

Focal length: 24mm

Maximum Aperture: f/3.5

Minimum Aperture: f/32

Lens Construction: 13 elements in 10 groups (with three ED glass elements, three aspherical lenses, one with Nano Crystal Coat)

Picture angle: 84° (maximum 101° when fully shifted)

Minimum Shooting Distance: 0.7 ft./0.21m

Maximum Reproduction Ratio: 1:2.7

Diaphragm Blades: 9 (rounded)

Filter size: 77mm

Focusing: Manual focus

Dimensions: Approximately 3.2 x 4.3 in (82.5 x 108mm)

Weight: Approximately 25.7 oz/ 730 g.

Supplied Accessories: HB-41 Bayonet Hood, CL-1120 Flexible Lens Pouch



Also released are 6 new Coolpix
P60
L18
S600
S550
S520
S210
http://www.nikonusa.com/announcement08_coolpix/index.html

[AccentAE86]

wow, those three lenses look awfully familiar to the canon 17-85 IS, 60mm macro, and 24TSE...

and no focus motor sucks!

Why even bother making a compatible lens mount when the lenses don't even fully work?

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by AccentAE86
wow, those three lenses look awfully familiar to the canon 17-85 IS, 60mm macro, and 24TSE...

and no focus motor sucks!

Why even bother making a compatible lens mount when the lenses don't even fully work?

Because it's the budget camera, and 99.9% of buyers of that camera are never going to use anything other than the kit lens anyway. :dunno:

Anyway, we'll see the D80 replacement later this year.

[Mitsu3000gt]

As much as everyone rags on the D40, it's Nikon's biggest bread winner so from a marketing perspective it did very well.

I think they still should have thrown a focus motor in it though for obvious reasons.

I'm intrigued by the 16-85vr and although it's a little slow, I would expect it to perform at least as good as Nikon's other kit lenses making it a winner.

I don't think anyone was expecting a 60mm macro update given how badly people seem to want things like:

50mm AF-S (and 50mm DX equivalent AF-S)
85mm 1.4 AF-S VR
80-400 AF-S VR
300/4 VR
24-120 f/4 VR
70-200 f2.8 that doesn't vingette on the D3 at f2.8
New 200mm macro
Full line of f/4 zooms like Canon, especially a 70-200 f/4


I'm sure there will be many more surprises ahead over 2008. Looking forward to see what the do with the D90 as well.

EDIT: I would also love to see some point and shoot cameras using APS-C sized sensors. The D40's 6mp sensor would be a nice one, and likely cheap. There are used Fuji F30's on amazon.com for $600 USD (last time I checked) and Fuji F30/F31fd on E-bay for $450+ USD. I think I paid $300 CDN for my F30 more than a year ago.

[dino_martini]

So no AF in the camera, but it is in the lenses? How does that work? Im not well versed in SLR cameras.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by dino_martini
So no AF in the camera, but it is in the lenses? How does that work? Im not well versed in SLR cameras.

Some lenses have a built in AF motor some don't. There are some pretty key lenses that don't have AF motors in them, which is why some people get upset. The ones that don't will only manual focus on the D40/D40x and D60. All of Nikon's other cameras have a focus motor built in the camera and it will AF any lens that supports AF, with or without a motor in the lens.

[Hash_man]

Seems like the d60 is basically the exact same camera as the d40x except for a few minor minor changes... same 3area AF, same screen and body, same sensor, same 12bit processing...

To be honest I was expecting alot more improvements.

Also, Nikon's coolpix line is still nothing special IMO.. :dunno:

[Ferio_vti]

A VR kit lens is pretty good bonus.


http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=2176

[Gibson]

Good to see that they stuck with the EN-EL9 battery instead of changing it for a different one.

Also good to see they added a dust reduction function, instead of the stewpid white dust-off reference photo.

SHOULD have bumped the number of AF sensors to 5 like the D50, but oh well.

[clem24]

Wow interesting stuff. I guess the 18-70 is now obsolete. I wonder why we need yet another one of these do everything lenses. I thought there were enough already? How about a 16-70 2.8 VR that performs even better than the current 17-55, which is only mediocre compared with the Canon 17-55IS..?

My assumption on the focus motor is that it saves on camera size and weight, and ya, BCS is right. Users of this camera probably won't go beyond the kit lens, or buy something like the 18-200VR and leave it on there. It's funny how *all* of my main lenses are not AF-S and require the AF motor (Tamron 17-50, 80-200 2.8, 10.5, Tokina 12-24, 50 1.8).

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt

70-200 f2.8 that doesn't vingette on the D3 at 2.8

I doubt we'll see that any time soon, there's really no point. The thing is, lenses (especially zooms) on FF at max aperture suffer vignetting/falloff. This was well-known when film was the only "sensor," but the years of using DX has people used to the sweet spot of the lens, or who have never shot film at all. Plus, the larger the aperture the more obvious the falloff usually is. This isn't new, it's happened from the beginning of photography and it continues to this day - heck, digital sensors that don't like oblique light have amplified the "problem."

It's not just Nikon, either - a friend of mine shoots a 1DsII, and the corners using the 16-35 wide open looked like he'd PS'd some extra vignetting in.



Originally posted by AccentAE86
wow, those three lenses look awfully familiar to the canon 17-85 IS, 60mm macro, and 24TSE...



Well, competition is competition. Not mentioned in this post was that Nikon will also be displaying a new PC-E Nikkor 45mm f/2.8D ED and PC-E Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/2.8D ED at the show next week.

Me, I'm excited by the PC Micro-Nikkor. Being able to adjust DoF on the fly could be fantastic.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat


I doubt we'll see that any time soon, there's really no point. The thing is, lenses (especially zooms) on FF at max aperture suffer vignetting/falloff. This was well-known when film was the only "sensor," but the years of using DX has people used to the sweet spot of the lens, or who have never shot film at all. Plus, the larger the aperture the more obvious the falloff usually is. This isn't new, it's happened from the beginning of photography and it continues to this day - heck, digital sensors that don't like oblique light have amplified the "problem."

It's not just Nikon, either - a friend of mine shoots a 1DsII, and the corners using the 16-35 wide open looked like he'd PS'd some extra vignetting in.



I think its also a bigger deal for people who shoot things like figure skating, skiing, and hockey where it really shows on the white background. It's apparently totally gone by f4 as well, which is where that lens gets super sharp anyways. I didn't know, however, that it was such a common problem as this seems to be the only lens people are complaining about with the D3. Easily corrected in PP, but it is an extra step.

I really thought they would update the 80-400vr but maybe its coming later on this year. Considering what they've done with the 14-24 and 24-70, I am pretty excited about anything new Nikon wants to bring out.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

The great part about corner falloff is that it's super-easy to fix - Heck, ViewNX automatically corrects for the 70-200/D3 combination.

I, too, expected an update of the 80-400, but you never know with Nikon. I sure as heck wasn't expecting an update of a PC lens, much less all three including the Micro.