The hot and cold in Nikon's latest lenses

My first response? I'm psyched! Finally, Nikon 1.) introduces a world's first and 2.) revisits the professional days of yore. My second response is, well, we'll get to that in a moment.

First up to the plate is the AF-S 16-35mm f/4 G VR; the world's first ultra wide professional zoom with Vibration Reduction. Like all new Nikon lenses this one also receives the N emblem for Nano Crystal coating and inherits Nikon's newest lens styling with a magnesium body and undoubtedly solid, tight construction. The constant aperture of f/4 gives you moderate speed - especially for a lens in this price range. And since we've hit that topic, the lens will be available this month with a $1,260 price tag. Ouch.

The main issue I have with this lens is it's price. It is approximately $600 cheaper than the excellent 14-24mm f/2.8 which, at first glance, looks to be a chunk change - around 33% savings. But when you break down the specs, you really have to ask some tough questions. What are you getting for the extra $600 with the 14-24mm? First, you're getting a wider wide. Second, you're getting an even flow to the next major lens in the Nikon lineup - the 24-70mm f/2.8. There is no overflow from 24-35mm. Not that that's a big deal, but you're technically purchasing more on the long end, which you don't need, if you own the medium tele. You're also gaining a stop of light with the higher end lens.

Now, what does the new baby brother offer that its older sibling does not besides price? First, it offers VR. Many may consider this overkill for a wide angle, but it's a nice feature for sure. Another nice feature is that it will take a filter - even if just for protection purposes - and it's a standard 77mm pro size to boot. The 14-24's bulging front element prevents it from accepting a filter, let alone a normal snap-in lens cap.

Now let's look quickly at how it stacks up against it's closest rival, the Canon 17-40mm f/4L. The Nikon offers a little more on the wide end, but the Canon makes up for it on the long end. Both lenses have quick and quiet AF thanks to Nikon's AF-S and Canon's USM technology. Both lenses offer a constant aperture of f/4 and build wise, both are in the pro end of the lineup. The VR does give the Nikon the technology advantage, but the Canon is much lighter on the pocketbook at under $800. At the end of the day the Nikon might be more technologically advanced and perhaps even sharper, but for nearly $500 more, it is really might not be such a great comparison.

This lens is going to appeal to the prosumer and professional Nikon shooter who simply doesn't need the speed of the 14-24mm. This will likely be a many photojournalists and travel photographers and landscape lovers. For sports shooters, wedding and event photographers and those who work in other low light areas, the 14-24mm will be in tow.

To sum up this lens, I think it will be insanely popular - for those who can afford it -because of what it is: a well-built, wide, pro caliber lens with VR. However, for many shooters in the market for a wide, pro caliber lens fitting this description, the 14-24mm may still win when it comes down to it. Personally, I'd rather cough up the extra coin for the speed of the 14-24mm. There are simply too many times where f/4 wont cut it for me and in the $1200+ range, I want all I can get. I'll sacrifice the filter and VR. But that's just one shooter's opinion. My advice would be, if you don't see yourself in one of the lesser expensive lenses and you're not switching to Canon, think long and hard about your investment to ensure you're getting the most for your money.

Now onto something that's less revolutionary and more evolutionary; the new AF-S 24mm f/1.4G. This is a lens that a lot of Nikon shooters have been waiting for since the 28mm f/1.4 vanished a while back. A super fast, wide angle lens that is quiet and sharp is just what many a pro has been awaiting in the Nikon lineup.

When this baby showed up on the announcement sites last night around 10 p.m. CST you could almost hear the applause of Nikon shooters worldwide.

Up until yesterday, Nikon's fast and wide AF lens selection was rather sparse. Ok, let's face it, aside from the 35mm f/1.8 - which is limited to the DX camera line - it was really non-existant. The new 50mm f/1.4G doesn't qualify as a wide angle and everything else is older than virtually every camera that anyone is really shooting today. None of them were AF-S and all of them were limited to f/2.8 with the exception of the 35mm f/2D. I tried that lens and must have had a bad sample because it's really the worst Nikkor lens I've ever used. It focused dreadfully slow compared to my other lenses and was terribly softness.

Enter the state-of-the-art 24mm f/1.4. It's reportedly razor sharp, quick, quiet and obviously fast. So, what's not to love? The price tag. At $2200 it's a financial beast. It's only $300 less than Nikon's superb new 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II. Bottom line, you've got to know you need it before you put it on the credit card. The shooters who are going to get this know exactly who they are, and perhaps surprisingly to many, that might not be a small crowd. I've read other reports of people suggesting that this lens would pair nicely with the likes of a D40-60. But, just because it will focus on such a camera by no means entitles it to be there. If someone is rocking a $2200 lens on a $400 camera I'll be more than surprised.

The Canon version comes in at around $1800, so prices are again elevated in the Nikon camp, but it is a newer lens and the gap is a little less significant. Nikon has nothing else like it.

So, if you want and need it and have the cash, don't hesitate, get it. It'll be that good. If you're like me, love it all you want, but don't start making room in your camera bag just yet. I'm going to have to weight the cost against the images it will provide me and when all is said and done, I'm probably better off going for the more versatile 14-24mm and saving $300.

Both are great releases and appeal to specific markets. I'm (and the rest of the Nikon world) waiting for the AF-S 85mm f/1.4 VR and I wouldn't mind seeing an AF-S 135mm f/2 VR either. Rumors also suggest an AF-S 35mm f/1.4 as well. The first is a pro staple and the second is a lovely option that many of us would love to see hit the shelves. If they do decide to offer a pro grade high speed 35mm, that too will be news for Nikon. They have promised a surprising release year for 2010, so we'll see.

Until next time, be safe and happy shooting.

- R

Thoughts on the new Apple iPad

I'm psyched about the new Apple iPad and the upcoming iBook Store. The reason I'm not completely bent out of shape about the new device centers on the fact that it does what it is supposed to do and that's it.

"It doesn't multitask!" So what? About the only thing I would likely really want to multitask would be iTunes and maybe something like Pages or Keynote. The big thing is a lot of Apps, especially the games, now allow you to pull your audio over and run it in the App. Problem solved. Seriously, if I wanted to do major multitasking on the fly I'd pack a laptop.

Remember, this thing is not going to run major third party Apps like Photoshop or Office. So having several things open at once is not a major concern for most users. At work I often have Final Cut Pro, LiveType, iTunes, Safari, Photoshop and Indesign all running in different Spaces simultaneously. But that's on an 8-core system with 16GB of Ram and a heck of a graphics engine. When I want to do major manipulation to photos, video or even extensive work with something like Keynote, it's going to happen on the desktop.

The main things that I would see myself using it for are as follows: Sharing my portfolio. Apple pushes the idea of sharing your vacation and family albums from iPhoto with friends and family on the run. It also works nicely as a digital photo frame when charging on the optional dock. But what Apple failed to hit on is the possibilities this device offers working graphics, photography and video professionals. It just might be the best portable device for sharing your work with potential clients.

It's a sleek and sophisticated device and perfect for the mobile professional. I'd use it to display wedding portfolio images, slideshows, marketing graphics and even film to clients and potential partners. I often meet clients in a relaxed atmosphere like a coffee shop. Pulling this small, light and highly capable device out of a portable sleeve would make the presentation both beautiful and unique. Tons of multimedia professionals are going to pocket (almost literally) these things as tools of their trade.

It is obviously going to be an excellent iTunes video playback device for road trips. For someone who travels often to cover sporting events throughout the southeast and internationally to work with orphans and communities in need, this could prove an ideal travel companion.Checking email, surfing the web, sharing photos and using Apps can all be done with supposedly excellent battery life in a light weight and small profile tablet. The optional photographic accessors which include an SD card reader and USB connection hub should prove valuable to photographers of every style. Ideally either Apple or a third party should create a Compact Flash device since all professional cameras use these media cards. I don't see pros using it as a proofing system for immediate image feedback, but it would be a useful tool on the go as long as it is used within the limits of the devices storage capabilities. For travel and vacation work it should be an exceptionally good tool. If Apple ever rebuilds a full or scaled down version of iPhoto for the device like they did for the iWork suite that would just up the ante for such purposes.

Using the apparently incredible calendar, contacts and notes applications. Without personal experience with these apps it's tough to say exactly how good they can be, but everything points to a far better experience than even the iPhone can deliver. For someone who has to keep up with the schedules of ten athletics teams, my personal work assignments, social activities and my freelance photography and videography work, the calendar application would prove invaluable. I'm also a fan of the Notes app on the iPhone and using it on a larger display could also prove helpful.

The Pages, Numbers and Keynote applications will appeal to a lot of people. For me, Pages would be a definite yes with Keynote coming in a close second. I don't do a lot with Keynote in my line of work, but for $10, you never know. I do use it for teaching photography class and I use it as a large preview/remote device for those presentations. Pages would prove a great productivity application for writing articles on the fly, logging field notes and keeping a travel journal.

And finally, iBooks. This could be cool. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of reading on the Kindle or the Sony Reader. I really like the technology, especially in bright light, but they did such a good job of making the displays look like pages, that, well, it's just like a page. Maybe I'm an odd duck, but I really like reading articles on my iPhone even though the screen is small. It's backlit and easy to read in the dark. And, oddly enough, it's easier on my eyes than the previously mentioned devices. So, regardless of your screen type preference, the interface on the iPad is exceptional. Not only can you change the font size and the font, the interactivity of the book and pages is just play cool and natural. With books being able to embed not only photos, but videos, it brings new life to a once stagnant medium. Now, how could they make this better. Well, if I were smart enough to design my own App that could add usability to the iBooks application, I would add highlighting and the ability to embed notes. The major reason why I have not left the paper book world for the digital counterpart ,even though I love the Green appeal, is because I highlight text and write notes in the margins. If Apple or someone were to add these two features to iBooks then I'd be far more likely to buy the titles of interest in the iBook Store. The features seem rather easy to implement. Just have an opaque color option in the menu bar that you can apply with the touch of a finger. You could simply use the same feature that Apple uses to Copy on the iPhone. Simply tap and hold and then drag the bars where you want them to start and stop and then fill it with the desired color. Adding a note could be simple too. Adding a toggle or pin that when tapped would expand into a note window for making notations about the text, responses or ideas would further enhance the usability of iBooks. It would also likely help promote the addition of college and professional text books to the iBook Store. The last thing, and perhaps the main thing that users are most potential buyers are likely curious about is what titles will be available. When the iTunes store first launched it was difficult to get older tracks and many new releases. That has been improved greatly over the years. With the popularity of iTunes it is likely that publishers will catch on and fast. We will see in the coming months just how many titles - other than major best sellers which will undoubtedly be available - will make their way into the iBook Store.

My final thoughts? I will probably get one. I will, for a time, use it in place of a laptop since I have plenty of power on my desk. Personal use always reveals the strengths and weaknesses that we either didn't know existed or under or overestimated in our preliminary thoughts about the item. Only time will tell, but I'm looking forward to getting one and putting it through the paces. If I had to predict now, it will likely be one of my favorite devices for both productivity and entertainment. The only question now is to 3G or not to 3G. For complete versatility and resale value (just in case) the 3G build is the way to go. But the extra $130 plus the monthly data plan does leave room to question this. But, hey, we have 60-90 days to ponder it. Until we all get our hands on one, we can only wait and hope that it's as well executed as we've been led to believe.