Nikon Formally Announces the 58mm/f0.95 S

Since Nikon has already pre-announced the 58mm/f0.95 S lens a year ago, the main question is why it has taken so long to come onto the market.

 

This is a huge 58mm lens with a built-in tripod collar and uses 82mm front filters. It weights 2 kg, about 4.4 pounds with a matching price of US$7999.95. I am sure its optics are wonderful, but at that price point it is very much a niche lens.

 

Both the weight and price, and even the extreme shallow depth-of-field, are ridiculous. :eek:

So Mary you'll buy two of them, one for each body. :cool:

Why, you think I am ridiculous? :(:D

Both the weight and price, and even the extreme shallow depth-of-field, are ridiculous. :eek:

So Mary you'll buy two of them, one for each body. :cool:

It must be a cheap manufacturing, if not, I wonder about the permanence of their sales department :p

Or maybe it's just a flag lens, with no other purpose than to fill pages of photo magazines and forums...

Anyway, I like that Nikon do things like e.g., the F6, Df and now a lens that Nikon users have always wanted and envied from other brands (sadly, I suspect we will keep wishing... ).

It must be a cheap manufacturing, if not, I wonder about the permanence of their sales department :p

Or maybe it's just a flag lens, with no other purpose than to fill pages of photo magazines and forums...

Anyway, I like that Nikon do things like e.g., the F6, Df and now a lens that Nikon users have always wanted and envied from other brands (sadly, I suspect we will keep wishing... ).

Last year, I was making some wide estimate that the 58mm f0.95 would be around $5000 to $6000. The final $8000 price tag is a bit higher, but seriously, once it is over $4000 or so, few can afford it and whether it is $5000 or $9000; it doesn't matter much. If one can afford to spend $5000 on a 58mm lens, one can spend $8000.

 

It is more like a "halo" product to show off the advantage of the wide Z mount with a short flange distance. Perhaps a few people in Hollywood will get one to shoot movies, plus some special applications and some well heeled collectors.

 

To me, the Noct is very different from the F6 and Df. The F6 was a last hurrah for one more film SLR when digital was clearly taking over. The Df has a narrow appeal to some who prefer an old user interface. Those two products celebrate the past. Despite my age (I have been using Nikon since 1977), I am in high-tech and more a forward-looking person. The Noct is more a showcase for the future of Nikon. On its own the Noct could be a money-losing product, but it is a good marketing and publicity product. Those benefits are much harder to measure.

The f/0.95 is a niche lens at any price. Even if Nikon sells it for $1000 it's still a niche lens. So it makes sense to sell it well into the niche lenses territory. I do not think Nikon loses money on this lens. They will make some money plus the bragging right.

Well, sometimes companies need to do something very special just to show they can and for people to talk about

The Noct is more a showcase for the future of Nikon. On its own the Noct could be a money-losing product,

I think it's not so much the showcase for the "future of Nikon" (please don't make this the future!); it's more of a marketing showcase of exclusivity to differentiate Nikon from the "common" brands. It's a lens of limited usage - the weight and price add to the prestige factor with intentional non-consideration for practicality. It's a lens that does not make a lot of sense for everyday use by the general public, but makes sense only as a status symbol for limited and frivolous usage.

55 mm F1.2 on a D 810 - 2/3 of a stop difference. Of course, I have to do my own focusing as in olden days. These lenses are getting to be silly big. That's leaving out $6K, more ridiculous still.

I should point out that the 58mm/f0.95 S is a manual-focus lens. That is the only manual focus Nikkor lens in the Z mount. (There are third-party manual focus Z-mount lenses.)

Thanks, out of my price range (and area of interest) so didn't read the reviews.

Love the tripod collar and look forward to seeing the Bokeh. Right now I can't imagine having this lens, but it would be a blast.

After all it does cost less than a new car.:) Is there an actual review with images?

I think this lens is good for Nikon business but for me I don't like it. It's f/0.95 and not f/1.0. I don't think there is any way you can set it to f/0.95 and the aperture will display as such.

The tripod mount makes it look ugly. I really hate the fact that the FTZ has a tripod mount.

55 mm F1.2 on a D 810 - 2/3 of a stop difference. Of course, I have to do my own focusing as in olden days. These lenses are getting to be silly big. That's leaving out $6K, more ridiculous still.

[ATTACH]1313716[/ATTACH]

Great comparison. I wonder if they have a "special" large case for it ?

It weights 2 kg, about 4.4 pounds with a matching price of US$7999.95. I am sure its optics are wonderful, but at that price point it is very much a niche lens.

How did Leica manage to make a 50mm f/0.95 Noctilux that weighs only 700g? With a matching price north of $11k. Which I've been told isn't optically any better than this $800 lens: Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 50mm f/0.95 III Lens for Sony E

I'm sure someone will run a comparison sometime :p

I were God all lenses would have tripod collars. Is this a dedicated Dx lens?

Of course, I have to do my own focusing as in olden days.

I suspect this f/0.95 offering will need manual assistance as well.

To date my experience with wide apertures and AF hasn't been a good one.

So Mary you'll buy two of them, one for each body.

One for each arm. With that weight, you wouldn't want to end up with unbalanced musculature!

Edited October 11, 2019 by rodeo_joe|1

One for each arm. With that weight, you wouldn't want to end up with unbalanced musculature!

No need to go to the gym now, but chiropractor expense will obliterate the savings on gym membership dues.

I should point out that the 58mm/f0.95 S is a manual-focus lens. That is the only manual focus Nikkor lens in the Z mount.

o_O:eek::rolleyes: Even more ridiculous than I thought.

Both the weight and price, and even the extreme shallow depth-of-field, are ridiculous.

The only thing that sets this lens apart from similar ones (Leica Noctilux etc mentioned above) is that this one is particularly large and heavy (Nikon took a page out of Sigma's playbook?). Compared to the Noctilux, the price can be considered a bargain. And just like with the Noctilux, there will be some who purchase this one.

And just like with the Noctilux, there will be some who purchase this one.

No doubt, people buy this too - true story. ;)

My DoF calculator won't go below f1.....:(

 

So for a head only portrait, how much DoF difference, if shot wide open, does this monster make, from my tiny, but weighty, 55mm 1.2?

Maybe the next generation will be AF, making it more useful for portraiture. Seems like in the 1800s photogs used restraints to keep people still for the long exposure and shallow DOF, that technique might be necessary with this lens!

 

Sandy, I have a 55/1.2 SC, it is much easier to nail focus with it on my Z6 than the D810.

Maybe the next generation will be AF, making it more useful for portraiture. Seems like in the 1800s photogs used restraints to keep people still for the long exposure and shallow DOF, that technique might be necessary with this lens!

 

Sandy, I have a 55/1.2 SC, it is much easier to nail focus with it on my Z6 than the D810.

 

I use it most on the DF - an out at night camera on holiday. No problem focusing it on any of my Nikons. Don't plan to get a Z - offers no benefits I can see over my DSLRs or current mirror less cameras.

I guess putting AF on this lens combined with the accurate Eye-AF mode of the Z will make a perfect portrait pairing for that style of shooting.

 

In the meantime, if I was in such a market, the Sigma 135mm ART would have a broadly 'similar' and very shallow DoF, all-be-it from at least twice as far away!

Over a year ago when Nikon first announced the original Z lens roadmap, Nikon mentioned that since the depth of field at f0.95 is really shallow, accurate AF is not possible.