Nikon 14 -24 f2.8 cutaway.

dougdarter

dougdarter

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,099
Name
Douglas
Edit My Images
Yes
Why cut a £2k lens in half?? To show us what is inside of course.

I just found this cutaway pic on kr.com. It's fascinating, and offers as well, a pretty convincing reason why these lenses are so damned expensive.

D3R_4636-cutaway-950.jpg
 
nice find Doug - love the way you can see the half screw and is it still attached to a body?

Cool :)
 
I remember seeing this before somewhere but not as high resolution. It really does make you appreciate what goes in to making the high end gear doesn't it!

I think it may be a D3 thats chopped in half as well, from when I saw the pics before some time ago.
 
That's pretty impressive. And cutting a D3 in halve? Wow. Shame it's not in the picture
 
Looking at this is like looking at perfection :D
Seeing all the small parts fit together, and the optics which bend light to form the images we see, amazing :)
 
I've got this lens and love it to bits. This picture makes it look like very good value!
 
Possibly one of the best lenses I've used (right up there with the 300mm f/2.8 VR for optical perfection) - I recently sold mine - daft in a way, but wish I could use C-Pols and NDs it :(

Great lens!
 
I'm of the opinion that this was probably a terminally faulty lens and camera - why cut a perfectly good lens and camera in half??

I wonder how the cut it so accurately - a laser?? The striation marks that can be seen, run perpendicular to the lens mount, if a saw had been used, I think they would have been parallel. There seems to be a lot of plastic in the build, I'm quite surprised. Given the price, I would have thought that they'd use metal.
 
Would anyone with half a clue mind annotating it?
 
Richard Peters said:
Thats the one thing that bugs me about it too! :(
Click to expand...

Optically it blew me away. Sharp wide open, corner to corner at all focal lengths.

But... I could not justify an f/2.8 lens (no matter how good) if I can't use my grads, and my pols for landscape work.

I spent ages looking into DIY filter solutions, but they will only work on DX, and this lens is overkill on DX and those lovely sharp corners are cropped out.
 
puddleduck said:
Optically it blew me away. Sharp wide open, corner to corner at all focal lengths.

But... I could not justify an f/2.8 lens (no matter how good) if I can't use my grads, and my pols for landscape work.

I spent ages looking into DIY filter solutions, but they will only work on DX, and this lens is overkill on DX and those lovely sharp corners are cropped out.
Click to expand...

Meh, got to be a non DX DIY solution, I mean anything is possible, right?

I'm gonna do it.

Gary.
 
dougdarter said:
I'm of the opinion that this was probably a terminally faulty lens and camera - why cut a perfectly good lens and camera in half??

I wonder how the cut it so accurately - a laser?? The striation marks that can be seen, run perpendicular to the lens mount, if a saw had been used, I think they would have been parallel. There seems to be a lot of plastic in the build, I'm quite surprised. Given the price, I would have thought that they'd use metal.
Click to expand...

Perhaps some of it was cut as separate pieces, and re-pieced back together, that seems like a more reasonable way of doing it.

I also imagine some parts were taken off and smoothed down/polished, like the lens elements. Cutting them that well would be almost impossible I would have thought, and cutting it and re-polishing it seems the more likely bet.
 
Well, once there is a solution you all let me know! lol

Lee filters are pretty big, maybe something could be fashioned using them. Andy what are you using now for wide angle goodness on FF?
 
Richard Peters said:
Well, once there is a solution you all let me know! lol

Lee filters are pretty big, maybe something could be fashioned using them. Andy what are you using now for wide angle goodness on FF?
Click to expand...

I've not quite nailed this down yet...

I've tried two lenses, the Tamron 17-35 and the Nikkor 18-35, both were really good (sharp at f/8, no vignetting, good corners). The Sigma 15-30 is excellent but there is that filter thing again...

It did occur to me just to stick to DX for wide rather than spend £1k on a lens!
 
puddleduck said:
I've not quite nailed this down yet...

I've tried two lenses, the Tamron 17-35 and the Nikkor 18-35, both were really good (sharp at f/8, no vignetting, good corners). The Sigma 15-30 is excellent but there is that filter thing again...

It did occur to me just to stick to DX for wide rather than spend £1k on a lens!
Click to expand...

Andy, I was gonna ask this on your latest for sale addy , but noticed it's now closed. Erm, how many lenses do you own and what's the most you've had in any one time?

Cheers :lol:
 
dougdarter said:
It's fascinating, and offers as well, a pretty convincing reason why these lenses are so damned expensive.
Click to expand...
You've lost me there, Doug. Cut pretty much any high-end lens in half and it's going to look like this. I can't see what makes this cost twice as much as, say, a Canon 24-105L.

But it is an amazing and fascinating picture.
 
What impresses me most is that they've cut the lens in half and its all still together.. I cant cut a bit of damned cake without it all crumbling to bits :D :p

Regards, James
 
Damn! That is pretty cool! Never used the lens myself.


I very much doubt it'd have been a laser that cut it. The laser would have to be very highly powered indeed to cut the glass, and if the same laser was used to cut the plastic, there would be considerable damage to the surrounding as heat would speard from the point of incidence.
 
I cant see why you couldnt just get some filters from some larger format cine cameras? Sure they wont be cheap but a big filter close to the front element would work as long as you have 100% coverage of the lens fov.
 
StewartR said:
I can't see what makes this cost twice as much as, say, a Canon 24-105L.
Click to expand...

The Canon 24-105L is smaller and considerably lighter (670g compared to 1000g). Maybe bigger elements cost more to produce? :shrug: That front element on the Nikon is a huge bulbous dome!

Flashy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top