DSLRUsers.com

As stated here

start saving your pennies, this option is going to be very expensive

huynhie wrote:As stated here

start saving your pennies, this option is going to be very expensive

I 'AM LOOKING FOWARD TO THEIR 24-120VR

LOZ wrote:

huynhie wrote:As stated here

start saving your pennies, this option is going to be very expensive

I 'AM LOOKING FOWARD TO THEIR 24-120VR

I've been told that you're not permitted to buy another lens in the same range.

There is already converter exists and you can use Hasselblad mount Zeiss lenses with Nikons. AFAIK, there is no correction glass, just byonet converter

Hlop wrote:There is already converter exists and you can use Hasselblad mount Zeiss lenses with Nikons. AFAIK, there is no correction glass, just byonet converter

Why should we bother with converter while we will get the real and straight into Nikon F mount. Quality and clarity should be miles better then those converters.

Birddog114 wrote:
Why should we bother with converter while we will get the real and straight into Nikon F mount. Quality and clarity should be miles better then those converters.

Why? It doesn't put anything between zeiss glass and digital matrix. Quality won't be changed by anything

Hlop wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:
Why should we bother with converter while we will get the real and straight into Nikon F mount. Quality and clarity should be miles better then those converters.

Why? It doesn't put anything between zeiss glass and digital matrix. Quality won't be changed by anything

Yes, it does.

Birddog114 wrote:

Hlop wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:
Why should we bother with converter while we will get the real and straight into Nikon F mount. Quality and clarity should be miles better then those converters.

Why? It doesn't put anything between zeiss glass and digital matrix. Quality won't be changed by anything

Yes, it does.

Bit of an air? Here is the link. There is no glass element in converter

As if the Nikkor line needs any help with higher resolving optics. It's would have been more beneficial to the white camp... (yes, I'm saying Canon lenses are soft, Canonites will be quick to quote the "L" if they own one, but aren't so quick to explain what the 'Luxury' denotes)

Hlop wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:

Hlop wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:
Why should we bother with converter while we will get the real and straight into Nikon F mount. Quality and clarity should be miles better then those converters.

Why? It doesn't put anything between zeiss glass and digital matrix. Quality won't be changed by anything

Yes, it does.

Bit of an air? Here is the link. There is no glass element in converter

Knew, seen & tried that but won't help much Hilop!
If you want to try and compare, next year in Feb, I'll borrow one set of the converter + the Zeiss glass for you to try at the Pinic day.

Birddog114 wrote:Knew, seen & tried that but won't help much Hilop!
If you want to try and compare, next year in Feb, I'll borrow one set of the converter + the Zeiss glass for you to try at the Pinic day.

Would be great to try! Thanks for offering!

More updated:

Sept 29:

http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/news/2004/0929_e.htm

Dec. 10
http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/portfol ... 1213_e.htm

The Zeiss website has Carl Zeiss presents ZF here BTW those Nikon announcements are for semiconductor patents and not for lenses.

huynhie wrote:The Zeiss website has Carl Zeiss presents ZF here BTW those Nikon announcements are for semiconductor patents and not for lenses.

Yes, there's alway a beginning!!!!
A Dating, then engagement then wedding!!!!! hehehehehe!