Ken “Reviews” Nikon’s Nikkor 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G DX ED Lens
Nikon 10-24mm AF-S Nikkor f/3.5-4.5G DX ED
Ken has a funny deal- he gives reviews to Nikon items that he either hasn’t held in his hands before, or as it appears in this case, he’s taken one shot outside of an office complex with!
But if you must know what he’s got to say, then take a look.
Basically, he says it’s better than the 12-24mm.
Either I’m missing something (hey, could be)- or the 12-24mm is going to go bye-bye. They’re basically similar lenses in every way that I can see. The question is “why”- why did Nikon release two lenses that compete against each other in almost every way?
May 19th, 2009 at 10:33
Of course he liked the 10-24mm. It’s cheaper and more people will buy it than the 12-24m. If more people buy it, he’ll get a kick back from the links.
May 21st, 2009 at 13:21
I think much of what KR writes is absurd, but your logic makes no sense. If he was only concerned about kickbacks from the purchase links, then he would be very positive about every product and he would favor the higher priced lenses because he would get more. He’s actually negative more often than he’s positive. If he wanted sales, he’d say, “this lens is great. Everyone must buy one. Click the link now before they sell out!”
And while his supposed equipment purchases, travels, etc., (although not his eating habits) seem to indicate that Ken is wealthy, I really doubt he’s making a robust living from clicks.