FYI: NEW Nikon 50 / 1.4

Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
1,475
Location
Live in Ohio but from NJ
I took it a little OT
because of the mention of the 58mm filter on the new Nikon

sorry folks
Yeah, my reply to you was about the new 24-70 that is 82mm.

Francis was talking about the 50 1.4 which is 77mm.

Wings confused the two and thought Francis was talking about the 24-70. :tongue:

So much fun with new lenses being released - confusion abounds! :Curved:
 
Joined
Feb 25, 2008
Messages
517
Location
Canada
It doesn't have any Nano Crystal Coat, but it does have Nikon Super Integrated Coating (SIC). Maybe this is the new technology repleacing the Nano Crystal Coat?
This "SIC" seems to be new ? no...?
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
2,450
Location
Bay Area, USA
It doesn't have any Nano Crystal Coat, but it does have Nikon Super Integrated Coating (SIC). Maybe this is the new technology repleacing the Nano Crystal Coat?
This "SIC" seems to be new ? no...?
it's their old coating that nikon has been using for many years...
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
1,706
Location
New Zealand
it's their old coating that nikon has been using for many years...
Well... it's not their old coating, it's their current coating and used where Nano coat is not applied. The older coating was Nikon Integrated Coating (NIC) which was replaced by SIC (awful acronym!) around 2000. SIC is better than the older coatings, being more effective over a wider range of wavelengths, and unlike Nano Coat, is tough enough to withstand the rigors of exterior use.

Nano Coat is even more effective and works on a different principle, but it's very delicate so is only applied to selected inner surfaces where it will be most useful.
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
808
doesn't seem like nikon went all out on this one. it's mostly plastic, and they did not use Nanocrystal coating, or aspherical elements, or ED glass, or VR. but it's going to be a great lens nonetheless.
It's understandable. If they went all out, made an epic 50/1.4 for €1,000, I wouldnt buy one. Now if they made an epic 50/1.2 for €1,000, totally different story. :smile:

This new lens just needs to be a noticeable improvement over the current 50/1.4 AF, which shouldnt be difficult.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
494
Location
New Zealand
You nailed it Man .... They can stick this cheap mass assembled stuff .... I'll take a Japanese Nikkor anyday.
I applaude Sigma. Tamron took the easy option of cheap overseas manufacture (anyone want a 6.3 lens) but I want good glass. My Nikkor lenses are made in Japan and they work.

AS I see it, Nikon produce the 'real' Nikkors in Japan. The 6.3's are elsewhere.

God, I wish I could afford Leica.

Geoff. Good point about tooling cost. Me thinks the problems is that the old tools that built the Nikkor AIS are out the door.Along with the "skilled craftsmen/women to do the work. Remember the hand polished Noct:biggrin: Iv made plastic tools and except for the mold , no tooling required. Now the cross hatching on the Nikkor AIS aperture ring requires tools(cutters on milling machine). And these bits wear out. And need to be resharpened. A typical Dye for a plastic injection mold made out of tool steel will last a life time.
I was talking to someone who sells used high end camera's/lenses for a living who also happens to be skilled in lens repair. His veiw on the new Nikkor's is that compared to the Nikkor AIS, "The new Nikkor's are not good":redface:.

And as far as marketing what heck is super ED glass?
Iv still not been able to get one straight answer on that one?
Remember when they used to place ED glass and not even tell us. Nikkor 3oo 4.5 Non IF?



As far as Nikon knowing more than we do. Hmm. I know what I see. I know what I feel. And I know what I can touch. And there is a unnamed magical quaility of the Nikkor AIS that Iv yet to feel with any of the plastic mass produced modern lens that are being pumped out today, that in the words of R.E.M, "leaves me cold"
And I wonder if they do know more than us? Maby more about price point and market share...OO. But Like I said . We are the consumers. And out of the 16 or so Nikkor's in my personal collection 8mm-800mm not one is a AF.
I have bought them and got rid of them. And while I have sold some really great Nikkor AIS ( most of which I have replaced and vow to never give up untill death) I have not once thought I sure miss that Nikkor 24 AF 2.8? the Nikkor 24 f2 AIS is a differnt story. That should say somthing. :tongue:.

If the new Nano coating are better on camera's like the D3 than why isnt nikon putting them on there latest new pro 50 1.4? VR add three stops to the ability to hand hold. Where is it. Like I said they can shove there "letters on the barrel" down are throats on the endless consumer ?_ zoom lenses than why not the one lens every single person who owns a nikon should have in the collection. Maby we dont need VR. Maby we dont need Nano coatings. Heck maby we should just buy used Nikkor 50 1.2 AIS for $400.00 off cafe members?. Wait a minute, that me. The consumer dosnt know any better:redface:. Well if its up to me, now they do. Nikon is getting rich and we are getting less than what I know they could put out. Look at the Nikkor 200 F2 VR.:biggrin:. Why dont they give us there best every single, every single lens?
Im not stupid, its because of price point. Adding that coating would add(_?_) on (__?__) units Nikon thinks they can sell in (__?__)time frame.
And after all who cares because twe are just going to release version 2 in a couple of years anyway:frown:., Get it right the first time Nikon.
I bought my Son a D70 and loaned him my Nikkor 300 4.5 ED-IF AIS untill I good afford to buy him a AF. He like his 70-300 ED lens I got him for him birthday but told me later, when I told him I was going to buy him a AF so he could trade me back the Nikkor 50 f2 AIS that dosnt even meter on his camera. Dad you screwed me on the 300 4.5 ED-IF AIS your not getting the 50 back. I was so proud. He is only 11 and he can tell good from not bad , but not so good as what I had before.

Be honest does this new Nikon 50 1.4 meet or exceed your expectaions.
One of my friends is one of the best Knife makers in Canada, maby the world. He said somthing that was struck me to the core one time

"excellence is the only game in town"

When I pick up a classic Nikkor AIS like the 50 1.2 AIS Im in in awe. I think about the designer who came up with it . The craftsmen that spent years perfecting there craft making it. It amazing to me that 20 plus years later it still works as good as it did the day it was made. My collection of Nikkor's and all the photo's Iv taking with them over the last 25 years is somthing I will pass down to my childern. When I pick up one of the new Nikkor AF I feel nothing. Except maby a lump in my throat. Im with this thread, and nikkor's lumpy AF glass.

Gregory
 
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
112
Location
LA
You nailed it Man .... They can stick this cheap mass assembled stuff .... I'll take a Japanese Nikkor anyday.
I applaude Sigma. Tamron took the easy option of cheap overseas manufacture (anyone want a 6.3 lens) but I want good glass. My Nikkor lenses are made in Japan and they work.

AS I see it, Nikon produce the 'real' Nikkors in Japan. The 6.3's are elsewhere.

God, I wish I could afford Leica.
You'd think that in 2008, people would care less about where something is made considering how easy it is nowdays for a company to relocate a factory. Also, perhaps you should focus on real world performance instead of what the "made in" sticker or price tag says.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
14,976
Location
Los Angeles, USA
After reading through this thread, I wonder if the Sigma might be a good alternative. Usually Sigma is the brand of compromises, but in this case it looks like Nikon maybe the one compromising for mass production sales. I'm going to have to wait and see how the comparisions pan out. Hey Francis, want to take one for the team and pick up the 50 AFS? :wink:
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
14,976
Location
Los Angeles, USA
You'd think that in 2008, people would care less about where something is made considering how easy it is nowdays for a company to relocate a factory. Also, perhaps you should focus on real world performance instead of what the "made in" sticker or price tag says.
Tokinas, Sigmas and Tamrons are made in Japan. But it seems Nikon Thailand has better quality control! So the whole location argument doesn't quite work.
 
P

Paul.r.lindqvist

Guest
After reading through this thread, I wonder if the Sigma might be a good alternative. Usually Sigma is the brand of compromises, but in this case it looks like Nikon maybe the one compromising for mass production sales. I'm going to have to wait and see how the comparisions pan out. Hey Francis, want to take one for the team and pick up the 50 AFS? :wink:
IMO

Sigma does a great job, offering lenses that Nikon either is to slow to offer or simply wont.

However when their offering is equivalent to that of the Nikkor they often draw the shorter straw (when it comes to pro zooms and fast primes)

If the new Nikkor match the Sigma performance wise (wich shouldnt be to hard) i really dont see any advantage for the sigma, and considering the slightly higher price its really no bargain.


The build and handling will most likely be superior in everyway (unless you prefer plastic and the EX finish offcourse)

So while the Sigma got a head starts, i suspect it will lose the race in the long run. (refering to this particular lens) unless they dump the price on it.

I couldnt care less where a lens is made, as long as it perform as i expect it to. Then you can argue that the performance is related to exactly that, but thats another matter. .-)

Kindest
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
14,976
Location
Los Angeles, USA
IMO

Sigma does a great job, offering lenses that Nikon either is to slow to offer or simply wont.

However when their offering is equivalent to that of the Nikkor they often draw the shorter straw (when it comes to pro zooms and fast primes)

If the new Nikkor match the Sigma performance wise (wich shouldnt be to hard) i really dont see any advantage for the sigma, and considering the slightly higher price its really no bargain.
I'm not too fond of Sigma finishes either. You should see my Sigma 1.4 tc or what's left of it! It peeled off ages ago! Hahaha! I admit though, I am a Nikkor freak. And the 50 has always been one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used.
 
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
112
Location
LA
I'm not too fond of Sigma finishes either. You should see my Sigma 1.4 tc or what's left of it! It peeled off ages ago! Hahaha! I admit though, I am a Nikkor freak. And the 50 has always been one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used.
Did your TC have the latest Sigma "EX" finish? I like the finish on my 12-24 although I would prefer the latest metal Nikkor finish over it but thats not always an option.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Messages
966
Location
Nottingham, UK
You nailed it Man .... They can stick this cheap mass assembled stuff .... I'll take a Japanese Nikkor anyday.
I applaude Sigma. Tamron took the easy option of cheap overseas manufacture (anyone want a 6.3 lens) but I want good glass. My Nikkor lenses are made in Japan and they work.

AS I see it, Nikon produce the 'real' Nikkors in Japan. The 6.3's are elsewhere.

God, I wish I could afford Leica.
It's all in your head. Where the lens is made has nothing to do with how they perform. Leica lenses are stamped made in Germany, but there are rumours that some of them are made in a factory in Canada and shipped to Germany just to get the stamp, as that means so much to some people that they won't even consider a lens not made in Germany.

Silly really.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom