"stay away from nikon lens"

[chriscrawfordphoto]

I hadn't realized that so many of the posters here were plagued by these awful lenses. But I am nothing if not a caring individual who puts the community first and foremost. As such, I have decided to provide a public service, because these Nikon lenses are all so terrible, I have decided to offer an international Nikkor Glass disposal service. If you have any functional Nikkor lenses that you need to get rid of, you can send them to me and I will safely insure that you need not come in contact with these horrid lenses anymore. And because I care so deeply about this altruistic mission, I will even be willing to pick up the cost of postage of the items to my Nikkor lens disposal facility here in San Diego, CA. USA. Please contact me so that we can arrange your shipment to me of these hazardous lenses.

I am also willing to handle the disposal of Carl Zeiss and Leica (Leitz) lenses, which may be oppressing you as well as current generation Voigtlander optics as well at no additional cost to you.

Yours most sincerely,
- Doug Green

You're too late, someone else already tried that. To be witty, you have to be first.

 

[John Hermanson]

Yeah, that was a funny comment to make about Nikkor optics. Excellent lenses, but these days there are the "kit"varieties. Last year, I took in a D200 in trade, which came with the Tokina 12-24mm zoom. An excellent set up. To cover a wider range, I bought a 18-135mm Nikkor and was surprised (after photographing framed artwork for a local artist) by how much pin-cushioning it had (at almost all focal lengths). Also, lens has a plastic mount. See: http://www.zuiko.com/index_038.htm , John

 

[mudman]

John - its a superzoom lens. I bet you'd see the same from any company and any superzoom they make. I try to avoid the things like the plague.

 

[dougjgreen]

You're too late, someone else already tried that. To be witty, you have to be first.

Theirs was a much less comprehensive single offer. I am forming an entire commercial enterprise dedicated to this mission, and also accepting Zeiss and Leica optics that are similarly problematic. Plus, I offered to pay postage, thus making a higher competitive bid.

 

[Uncle Bill]

That comment is plain odd, I have made several prints from negs created in Nikon cameras with Nikkor lenses, heck my enlarger lens is a Nikkor 50 f2.8 and all are brilliant. Someone is fooling you Darko.

 

[winjeel]

(Only read the first and sixth pages... no new jokes to add, I'm affraid)

In my mind, and based more on reputation than experience, the Leica's are outstandingly the best, the Minoltas, then it becomes a splitting-hairs tussle for next, being between certain Pentaxs, Nikons, Sigmas, and Tamrons, but following the pack is Canon. But Canon does have excellent marketing!

I've seen a comparison somewhere, between a Hassleblad and a new Sony A900, and it really, really was quite close. I think it was something like an 85mm on the 'blad, and probably a Carl Zeiss on the A900. For what it's worth, the bokeh on the Minolta G's make them worth the money over the CZs, from what I have seen and been able to compare.

In anycase, if I were to change teams, it'd probably be to the Nikon team.