> I think my problem with Nikon AF-D lens pricing is that there is a HUGE > *price* discrepancy between the consumer grade lenses and the professional > lenses. Back in the MF days, pro lenses were maybe 2x the cost of the > consumer grade prime. Now, the AF-D lenses are often 3-4x the price of the > consumer zoom/prime. Has anyone else noticed this? Yes but consumer grade lenses were also much more expensive before (if you take inflation into account). 20 years ago, all most amateur could afford was an entry level camera with a 50mm. Nowadays, most serious amateur have (slow) zooms covering the range from 28 to 300. Even moderatly fast (f2.8) fixed lenses and zooms are much more affordable now, in AF, than they were in the AIs line. Look at the 28mm f/2.8 AF-D, 180 2.8 ED AF-D or 80-200 AF-D to name a few. Most are accessible to serious amateurs who are willing to spend a reasonable amount of money. That was less true 2 or 3 decades ago. I agree that pro-grade AF lenses (and AF-S zooms) tend to be very expensive. But when your compare an AF 85mm 1.4 side by side with a MF one, you will notice that the construction of the newer one is much more complex (I did not say better). These days, fast primes are also less used than before (not saying they are less useful), which has an impact on production volume and price. Nicolas.
