|
Black!
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Grey is the new black.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
But is black the new grey?
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I don't like the grey lenses (feels cheap?). Unless you're shooting sport or celebrities with you 500mm f4 ;)
Considering the 70-200 is quite big (as my 80-200 I guess), personally I 'll prefer the black version.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Black, personally. But that's just cuz I prefer that my lens match my body (and likewise, that my carpets match my drapes). :)
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
black or grey... I'd say black/camo combo works best :-D
Originally posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
Vilhelm Sjostrom edited this topic 72 months ago.
|
|
|
LOL, classic!
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
i feel the grey draws more attention than the black one.
(that camouflage skin looks really wild. hopefully the body matches it :))
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Black, oh God, black. Canon shows something interesting about the way people think: because over there the white lenses tend to be the good ones, people think the lenses are aesthetically appealing. They aren't. It's like having a car with one door the wrong color.
Not that I have strong opinions about this.
An entirely camo camera would be great for wildlife, but would probably get you kicked out of every private building in New York.
Originally posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
Ryan Brenizer edited this topic 72 months ago.
|
|
Black, definitely.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Get the black and be happy that you did.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
hot pink.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
mureena- how did u get that paint job done???=O
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
froca: it's not paint, it is a removable neoprene skin for the lens. you can buy it from www.lenscoat.com
the neoprene fits very well, does not move during use, leaves all controls reachable and usable and is removable without any trace on the lens.
I'll shoot some better photos including macros of it once I get to studio lighting (right now travelling).
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I also today took the D2x to a tailor for measures. He told me he's most likely able to sew together a camo neoprene casing for the body, with velcro zippers, holes cut out or see-through plastic for controls. I'll know in a few weeks if it works or not.
The D2x is weatherproof, but the lenses aren't. With wildlife the camo makes sense, and it also adds to better protect the lens from rain. My thinking was to get soft padding to protect the lens from bangs and scratches. I travel a lot and that 70-200 is so prone to swing and hit something even if you are very careful.
Originally posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
Vilhelm Sjostrom edited this topic 72 months ago.
|
 |
tribute to [deleted] says:
Long L lenses are white so they'll absorb less heat from sunlight when shooting outside on a sunny day. Purely a functional, not cosmetic, consideration.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
more on the topic at
www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID6/4404.html#13
www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID6/4164.html
Originally posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
Vilhelm Sjostrom edited this topic 72 months ago.
|
|
Black!
@broken bones: That's the argument Canon gives. It sounds like a complete pile of …. The rumor is that it was because they used fluorite as the low dispersion glass of their lenses, which sounds only half bullshit—calcium fluorite is a crystal that is more susceptible to thermal shock. But tell me Does this sound likely?.
The reality is, it’s a marketing thing.
Besides, how many Canon lenses now use fluorite as their low-dispersion glass? If any do, it sounds silly: ED/UD/SLD glass has improved to have better optical properties than fluorite.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Hell, give me my black Nikons and a roll of aluminum foil and I'm ready for the Sahara. If I wanted white lenses I would have bought Canon. White lenses are nothing more than a fashion statement gone wrong.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Black. No question.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
i mean... you know what they say...
once you go black...
you got awesome glass...
:-)
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
screen name not available [deleted] says:
well... one can't dismiss canon's white lenses as a marketing tool on the one hand and insist wholeheartedly on black nikon lenses on the other.. if color and marketihng dont matter, why do we care so much, hmmmmm... just a thought... ;) personally, i'd go with black casing, but only because i like the lens to match the camera body...
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
i don't think it's strictly marketing, otherwise why would Nikon offer a grey lens? to help Canon? the same with Minolta, look at their 80-200mm f/2.8 APO, it's also white.
my guess is that Canon saw a marketing opportunity and took it, but it does have functional purposes.
personally, i'd go black simply because i don't like to draw attention to myself, nor do i want to feed Canon's marketing machine. BUT if i was someone who shot outdoor sports all day long in the hot sun, yes i would choose the grey lens.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I waiting for the blueberry or tangerine but lime comes in a close second.
Go Nikon Black.
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Black it is then, order's made.
Cheers!
Posted 72 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I had a 70-200mm f2.8VR in black and am now shooting with a Canon 70-200mm f2.8L IS.
My experience is that the black lens looks meaner, almost weapon-like, which can lead to some people giving you an often unwanted second look.
The white Canon, OTOH, can never be mistaken for anything other than a harmless camera lens.
Performance wise, I prefer the Nikon.
Posted 71 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
nikon lenses are black. professional nikon cameras (except for Fn) are black. because many of us believe that this should always be the case, the black lens will have better resale value. get the black one.
Posted 71 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
In Japan, the white Nikkors are far more common. In fact, I can't think of ever seeing them in Canada (possibly because Nikon Canada doesn't import them?).
Posted 70 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
hmm... go for black...but if there was a pink version, i go for the pink HAHAHAHHA,,,makes u very unique! ^_^
Posted 70 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
My girlfriend would love a pink version. Good job they don't make one really.
I did get the black in the end, here's the proof:
Originally posted 70 months ago.
(permalink)
Rob Gillespie edited this topic 70 months ago.
|
|
|
Phew! You did get the black. Now I can rest easy. LOL
How are you enjoying your new lens? I love mine.
Posted 70 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
It's ridiculously good. Now I just need another 30 years experience before I can utilise it properly LOL.
Posted 70 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Actually, the heat argument is it. Minolta was actually the first to make white lenses, back in the 1960's. Minolta/Sony long lenses are available in white to this day.
Big, black lenses are not a good thing when outside shooting in the heat. They get very hot, infinity focus can shift and the lens may get too hot to use. Especially with fluorite lenses which also have a higher rate of thermal expansion than most other types of optical glass.
Canon's L branding is the Red Ring, not white lenses.
Originally posted 70 months ago.
(permalink)
Mawz edited this topic 70 months ago.
|
|
Congrats, it's a nice piece of lens :-)
Posted 70 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I bet a shiny pink lens would reflect heat well. Maybe someone should tell Canon.
Posted 70 months ago.
(permalink)
|
Would you like to comment?
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).
|
Nikkor /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to Nikkor discussion threads
