Article: Nikon 1 NIKKOR 32mm f/1.2 Officially Announced

S

STM

Senior Member
I would never spend that kind of money on a lens like that, even if I owned a DX camera, which I do not.
 
J

jwstl

Senior Member
STM said:
I would never spend that kind of money on a lens like that, even if I owned a DX camera, which I do not.
Click to expand...

It's not a DX lens. I think the price would make more sense if it was for DX.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
E

eurotrash

Senior Member
Wow. Just..I have no words other than 'wow'.. Sure, it's nice. But really, for this camera? I just don't see the point at all.. And that price. 'Wow' again. Equivalent of ~85mm? Nah...
 
D

DraganDL

Senior Member
Useless. Teasing...but who? Why? Surely, no one really needs it (that lens)... As far as I can tell (but then again, I am short sighted), it's just another sign of disorientation in Nikon's headquarters: we aren't sure where to focus, so let produce little bit of this, little bit of that... hit and miss... Instead of doing it properly: having a REAL output control (quality control), increasing the quality of sensors, raising the confidence among the existing users/owners and persuading the wanna be photographers to purchase Nikon cameras...
 
Last edited:
F

fotabug

New member
Hey, do any of you really know anything about this lens? If it were a DX lens, it would be a top optic! Image quality is superb, of a quality that you can get only with Nikon's pro lenses, none of which are cheap. But, according to your statements, you wouldn't buy one of them either. This is a top notch lens and, yes, I use it and love it. Just expounded on something based on seeing its introduction and knowing nothing about it, does not contribute anything of value. I was hoping for more knowledgeable feedback in this forum.
 
Top