new lenses to come

Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
3,937
Location
Chicago
I want some AFS prime lenses, 35,50,85. for FX. I Found a nice 50 1.4 which I bought.

Do you think there will be a 35 2.0 or 1.8 and the same for 85 ?
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
4,793
Location
Nutley, New Jersey
No on the 35 f/2 (but what do I know) - the 35 1.8 is already out for DX and they assume if you bought into FX you can buy their 35G.....the 85mm is most likely to be a 1.8G before all others IMO
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
4,553
I agree with Dom, the 85/1.8G seems a likely lens to be announced before long. Then there's left only 105/2 and 132/2 in the fast prime front.

I'd guess lenses like 14/2.8, 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2 and 180/2.8 are pretty low priority.

FWIW Nikon just filed a patent for a rectilinear (non-fish) full frame (FX) 10mm f/4 :eek: ultra-hyper-wide lens, so guessing is worthless. Who knows what Nikon thinks is high priority?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
1,520
Location
Orlando, FL
Since the only FX bodies also have screw-drive AF motors, there isn't much market need to convert most FX lenses. The 24/1.4, 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 were most likely driven by factors other than being AF-S.

I agree that there is a possibility of the 85/1.8 being done since it is a fairly inexpensive fast prime that would have utility on the many DX bodies that need AF-S lenses. My hunch is that the 180/2.8 is not a big seller any more, so I would not expect that lens updated.

At this point, Nikon sees FX as an upscale market, so I don't see the business reason to do "low cost" FX primes. I agree that leaves a 35/2 update very unlikely. Right now they have a 24, 35, 50 and 85mm, all f/1.4. The need for low cost AF-S primes is DX. They have a 35 and 50, so an 85/105 is possible, and maybe a 20-24 f/2.8, but that is sketchy to my mind.

I suspect that most people buying/owning D3x00 & 5x00 bodies are not big users of primes, internet forums aside. Add to that the fact that many zooms are of very high quality and the improving high ISO capability of even modest bodies, and I don't think most consumers are clamoring for fast primes. For most users of these type of cameras, a 35 or 50 f/1.8 is adequate for when they want the speed or DOF control over their f4-5.6 zooms.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
4,553
If they already have lenses like the 85 F1.8 and 35mm F2, then how hard is it to add the AFS motor and nano coating?
It would be a mistake to do that, imho. Nikon hopefully wants to look into the future, which will bring higher resolution sensors. Just using a bolt-on tactic to add a swm motor would not increase resolution and contrast and neither would it create a higher quality boke. On top of that good film era lenses are less than stellar with digital.

A lens is a long time investment and designing is difficult. Since Nikon seems to update most of the lenses pretty slowly -- sometimes taking 20+ years -- I think it is a good idea to try to improve the design instead of just making cosmetic changes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
14,901
Location
Los Angeles, USA
At this point, Nikon sees FX as an upscale market, so I don't see the business reason to do "low cost" FX primes. I agree that leaves a 35/2 update very unlikely. Right now they have a 24, 35, 50 and 85mm, all f/1.4. The need for low cost AF-S primes is DX. They have a 35 and 50, so an 85/105 is possible, and maybe a 20-24 f/2.8, but that is sketchy to my mind.
I don't really see this. Why would Nikon release the 16-35, 24-120 and 28-300 or a soon to be released 50 1.8 G? I think Nikon still wants to grow the FX market. Nikon history has also showed us that they tend to trickle down pro technology into lower price brackets.
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
1,520
Location
Orlando, FL
I don't really see this. Why would Nikon release the 16-35, 24-120 and 28-300 or a soon to be released 50 1.8 G? I think Nikon still wants to grow the FX market. Nikon history has also showed us that they tend to trickle down pro technology into lower price brackets.
The 16-35 & 24-120 are far from inexpensive lenses - to my mind they are not targeted at the 3x00 & 5x00 buyers. I'm at a bit of a loss to explain the 28-300.

I'm not saying there will not be eventual trickle-down, but I think it is a long time before we have FX bodies that are AF-S only. Therefore my opinion is that there isn't a big market in Nikon's mind for low cost AF-S FX primes.

I think the 50/1.8 was redone anticipating sales on lower end DX bodies. It was probably no more expensive to make it FX.

I think FX primes will become AF-S only when Nikon decides to update/redesign the optics for other reasons. The recent 85, 35 or 24 are not just AF-S/nano thrown on the legacy formulas - they are brand new optical designs that exceed the old designs. I think a 70-200 f/4 AF-S/G/N is more likely at this point than new 35/2, 180/2.8, etc. The only prime that might get a redo would be the 300/4, but given how long they have held onto the 80-400 design, I'm not holding my breath there either.

Nikon marches to their own drummer. I am offering what I think might (or might not) happen based on the patterns of the company over the last several years, not what I hope or want to happen.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,959
Location
Australia
i want a 105/1.4 afs-vr with DC!

actually, if they upgrade the 105 or 135 f2.0 DC glass with AF-S and VR, i'll get one.

i agree that i can't see Nikon making 'low cost' FX primes any time soon. which suits me.
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
1,520
Location
Orlando, FL
i want a 105/1.4 afs-vr with DC!

actually, if they upgrade the 105 or 135 f2.0 DC glass with AF-S and VR, i'll get one.

i agree that i can't see Nikon making 'low cost' FX primes any time soon. which suits me.
I think the 135DC was discontinued last year. 135mm has not been in vogue as a focal length for quite a while. Nikon sold far more 105/1.8 AIS lenses than the 135/2 AIS 30 years ago as well. And there were a huge number of 105/2.5's sold relative to the 135/2.8 I believe.

I'm not sure what I think Nikon will do with the 105/2 DC - it is such a specialized piece that I can't see a lot of motivation to update it myself. And they don't seem to be interested in adding VR to any of the shorter primes except the 105 Micro (odd choice since it is pretty useless at macro distances). They seem more interested in tweaking the high end stuff to be state of the art (the recent super tele makeovers and 85/1.4 redesign) than catering to the pro-sumer enthusiast (16-35 and 24-120 being the exceptions).
 
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
3,551
Location
Redmond, WA
Prediction #1 is that Nikon will be unpredictable. :wink:

I would guess we'll see these primes within the next few years:

200 Micro AF-S -- the last of the micros to move to AF-S and G-type

85/1.8G AF-S -- plenty of room for this lens under the $1,700 85/1.4G

AF-S G-type replacement for the 105/2 DC

AF-S G-type replacement for the 135/2 DC

50/1.2G AF-S -- something they can charge 24/35/85 type-pricing for a 50mm

AF-S G-type replacement for the 180/2.8 -- either 180mm or 200mm

Some attempt at a wider DX prime, like an 18/4G DX -- Nikon had indicated they'd make additional DX primes, before they rolled out the 85/3.5 -- I don't think they'd stop at just two

As far as zoom goes, I think it's almost a certainty we'll see a 70-200/4G AF-S VR given the 16-35/4G VR and the 24-120/4G VRl. Nikon's also overdue for another consumer standard zoom.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,959
Location
Australia
I think the 135DC was discontinued last year. 135mm has not been in vogue as a focal length for quite a while.
the 70-200/2.8 zooms have all but killed the demand for 105mm and 135mm primes.

except for those of us who really want (and are prepared to pay for) that extra speed.

And there were a huge number of 105/2.5's sold relative to the 135/2.8 I believe.
i rekon a large part of the reason for that was how stupidly, ridiculously, insanely good the 105/2.5 was.

it totally blew the 135/2.8 away (and was a lot easier to focus to boot).

actually, the 105/2.5 blew away just about any other lens you care to compare it with.

I'm not sure what I think Nikon will do with the 105/2 DC - it is such a specialized piece that I can't see a lot of motivation to update it myself. And they don't seem to be interested in adding VR to any of the shorter primes except the 105 Micro (odd choice since it is pretty useless at macro distances). They seem more interested in tweaking the high end stuff to be state of the art (the recent super tele makeovers and 85/1.4 redesign) than catering to the pro-sumer enthusiast (16-35 and 24-120 being the exceptions).
i dunno.

the DC glass was totally unique to Nikon. they sold quite a few of the D-series ones iirc. one thing they had going against them was that people didn't understand how the DC worked or how it could be used.

i had a bit of a play with a 135/DC a few years ago and LOVED it.

the other point about those D-series DC lenses: they're built like TANKS.

i rekon a 105/1.4 DC/VR/AFS would find a market. not a very big market compared with, say, a 35/1.8DX, but it would find a lot of admirers in the Sport, Fashion and Wedding worlds (categories of photographer who are well known for happily dropping large wodges of cabbage on sexy glass).

it would also be one-in-the-eye to Canon.

honestly, if such a lens came on the market tomorrow (and it had damn well better be sharp @ f1.4), i would be prepared to drop AUD$5k on one in a heartbeat.
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
1,520
Location
Orlando, FL
the 70-200/2.8 zooms have all but killed the demand for 105mm and 135mm primes.

except for those of us who really want (and are prepared to pay for) that extra speed.
Good point.


honestly, if such a lens came on the market tomorrow (and it had damn well better be sharp @ f1.4), i would be prepared to drop AUD$5k on one in a heartbeat.
Which wouldn't be too far off of what something like that would cost probably.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,959
Location
Australia
Good point.
my 'cadet kit' at the mighty Blacktown Star newspaper in western Sydney back in '94 had an FM2+MD12, 24/2.8, 50/1.4, 105/2.5 and 200/4 glass with a 300/4 shared between the Blacktown and Parramatta offices and a Metz 45-CT1 flashgun.

in, iirc, '96 i was issued with an 80-200/2.8 one touch and an F90x.

while i'd loved that 105 (and i'd rarely used the 200) my aversion to zooms evaporated with that 80-200. a 24, 50 and 80-200 and you can do 95% of the jobs you need to do for a newspaper. the other 5% require either ingenuity or patience or access to a 300 or a TC for the 80-200.

for 99.999% of snappers in 99.999% of shooting situations, an 80-200/2.8 is more than up to the task (assuming you're working in that focal length range ofc).

Which wouldn't be too far off of what something like that would cost probably.
spooky amount of cabbage to consider dropping on a short tele lens huh?

but for those of us who shoot a lot of sport under crappy lighting.....

basketball (or volleyball, netball, table tennis.....) in a school sports hall or typical youth centre indoor court (read: bleagh light) wouldn't be such a PITA with a 105/1.4.

such a beast would have a market, just not a very big one.

on another note, i'd love to see a 300/2 afs-vr. i probably wouldn't get one straight away (still paying for the 200/2), but it would certainly go high up on the lust-list.
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
3,937
Location
Chicago
I made the decision. Consider my 35 2.0 AF is the worst 35 in my bag against my 35 2.8 AiS, 35 4.0 Curtagon shift converted Leica mount, 35/70 2.8, and I wanted something that would be sharp into the very corners at 4.0. 16/35 is not, 24/70 2.8 is not if you can believe the photozone tests, and that leaves the 35 1.4. I believe their test as I compare them with findings on lenses I already own.

I bought the 35 1.4 and preliminary tests show the very corners are very very good, not perfect. It does better than the other lenses I have by a country mile. It has excellent micro contrast and nice snappy colors as a raw file, no boosts of any kind.

I will check out 1.4 to 2.8 tomorrow and put up some pics.

The 85 1.4 is ordered. Well will see how long coming.
 
Top Bottom