Nikon Z-Mount Lens Roadmap, Updated November 2020

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by ShunCheung, Nov 19, 2020.

  1. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Today Nikon released an updated roadmap, without adding any new lens but this displays the relative sizes of the lenses that are not yet released. I added today's date to it, but otherwise it is straight from Nikon:

    There is little doubt that the 400mm will be an f2.8 and the 600mm will be an f4. Those are big time sports lenses that will certainly have an accompanying sports Z body.

    NIKKOR_Z_LINEUP_Oct_2020_en_EU_original.jpg


    You can find the original from this Nikon Netherlands link:
    https://www.nikon.nl/imported/image...s/NIKKOR_Z_LINEUP_Oct_2020_en_EU_original.pdf

    The earlier roadmap Nikon release in October when they announced the Z6 II and Z7 II can be found here. There is no difference among the lenses on the map, but this earlier version does not show the sizes:
    https://www.nikon.com/news/2020/img/pic_201014_01_03.jpg
     
    NHSN and robert_davies|2 like this.
  2. When you consider all that's going on in the world at the moment, they have made admirable progress in the last 2 years.
     
  3. The 28mm and 40mm 'pancakes' are the same size......:)
     
  4. I'm glad to see Nikon is getting serious about high-performance, 20 mm to 85 mm prime lenses, and not necessarily with extreme maximum apertures. It is interesting to note that they're all about the same size, with the proposed 85/1.8 only slightly larger than the proposed 24/1.8, and smaller than the current 20/1.8.

    Their relatively slow speed doesn't bother me. I got by with a set of f/2 lenses (Leica) for decades, with no regrets. The large size compared to Leica lenses is probably to accommodate the cover glass on digital sensors, plus extra elements to correct residual aberrations. If they follow Sony's pattern, they will be sharp even when wide open, and hopefully with consistent color and rendering.
     
  5. Hope to see the 'pancake' spec's soon. I am almost decided on a z6 or z6II before the end of the year - whichever seems as the better value proposition. I will use it as a platform for my old legacy lenses and for scanning. As a camera in it's own right, it will only have value to me if the system can offer a compact prime - but I'll probably buy one anyway - I need some neg. scanning done soon.
     
  6. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    According to a previous version of roadmap Nikon provided on October 10, 2019, the following lenses were supposed to be available by the end of 2021, including both the 28 and 40mm "compact" lenses. (Nikon does not exactly refer to them as "pancakes.") Of course that was months before the Covid-19 pandemic hit the world.

    The difference between that 2019 roadmap and the current one are three lenses: 85mm S, presumably an f1.2, 400mm S and 600mm S. I am quite sure that the latter two are 400mm/f2.8 and 600mm/f4 sports lenses that cost over $10K each. And the overall timeline is extended to 2022. I assume that some lenses originally slated for 2021 could be pushed into 2022 due to delays.



    NIKKOR-Z-Lens-Lineup-Expansion_2019.jpg
     
  7. Allegedly, the 24-105 will be f/2.8-4. If true, then I expect the price to be around $1500 (using the quite high price of the F-mount DX 16-80/2.8-4 as an indicator).
    I hope the 100-400 will be an f/4 or f/4.5 to f/5.6 and not f/6.3 (which I doubt). If indeed f/5.6, then I expect a lens price of about $2700; for f/6.3 arpund $2300.
    The 200-600 will undoubtedly be f/6.3 at the long end; just wondering if Nikon will start at something faster than f/5.6 at the short end (doubtful); probably about $2k.
     
  8. I gotta say the 105mm macro looks pretty 'chubby'...:p
     
  9. I'm beginning to think it may be faster than f2.8
     
    mike_halliwell likes this.
  10. f2?
     
  11. f1.8/2 would make it a much more general purpose proposition.

    In comparison to the other lenses in the picture, it looks like it will have a 77mm or 82mm filter thread.

    I'll let the other more technically minded contributors determine if that is possible,
     
  12. Makers have tried in the past to make a Jack-of-all-trades mid-length macro/portrait. Not with great success.

    The last Nikon incarnation was a bit of a compromise, mind you, that was nearly 15 years ago...:eek:

    Maybe the much bigger lens throat and more modern computational designs with aspheric elements make it easier?

    82mm is the new 77mm...:D

    Watch that space!
     
  13. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    For a 105mm macro lens, I prefer it to be f2.8. I happen to have two different 105mm/f2.8 F-mount macros, AF pre-D and AF-S VR. For macros, since we frequently stop it much further down to gain depth of field, there seems to be no point to make it f2, which will be bulky and expensive. Moreover, macro lenses are optimized for close focusing, They are typically not the best general-purpose lenses. For example, for portraits, I would prefer a separate 105mm/f1.8 or 1.4 that is more optimized for 2, 3 meters instead of 2, 3 centimeters.

    However, the 105 macro in Nikon's image does look big, though.
     
  14. I wonder if they could have made a kinda super in-lens VR specifically for macro? Combined with IBIS it allows 1 second handheld....:cool:
     
  15. 2 to 3 meters would still be good using a macro lens. 10 times that far is problematic.

    Large apertures help in photomacrography to aid composition and focusing. Remember that at 1:1 f/2.8 effectively is f/5.6. But i doubt very many will be using the 105 mm beyond 1:1 (i use other optics, and cameras, for that), so an even faster macro lens does indeed not sound that probable.
    Autofocus is less helpfull (same for VR).
     
  16. Bug-Eye AF?...:cool:
     
  17. Are you saying you'd turn down a 105mm macro that would allow 1:1 @ 1 second handheld?
     
  18. 1 second handheld at 1:1...

    Any lens can do that. You mean: and get perfectly sharp results? That would be something.

    Would i turn down some lens that would indeed allow that? No.
    As things are, however, i would (and do) switch VR and AF off.
     
  19. A claim of that sort would dispel all credulity for that lens. At close range, all camera motion is exaggerated, especially translational motion (which has little effect at normal range compared to angular motion).

    AF cannot work at 1:1 magnification. That represents the closest distance from sensor to subject possible. Changing the lens to sensor with the focusing helix necessitates that the total distance from the subject increase.
     
  20. Yup, but what if the boffins at nikon have repurposed the VR in-lens prisms for angular/lateral in combo with IBIS sensor shift, for all the other axies? About the only axis that's difficult to 'fix' is for and aft, but i'm not sure there's much of that going on.... and all it's doing is moving the focused plane minutely.

    Maybe it's 1.5:1, then it can. Laowa have had quite a lot of interest in their 2:1 macros, even though they are MF.

    But, I guess Nikon isn't famous for thinking outside the box regarding lenses.
     

Share This Page