Jump to content

Nikon Z-Mount Lens Roadmap, Updated November 2020


ShunCheung

Recommended Posts

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.thumb.jpg.590a14231033f174bf165f5b571c20bf.jpg

 

 

You can find the original from this Nikon Netherlands link:

https://www.nikon.nl/imported/images/web/EU/learn-and-explore/brochures-leaflets/Mirrorless/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

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.
Niels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.thumb.jpg.6d749d22360ab5dd384337234c46eded.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

f1.8/2 would make it a much more general purpose proposition.

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!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you saying you'd turn down a 105mm macro that would allow 1:1 @ 1 second handheld?

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you saying you'd turn down a 105mm macro that would allow 1:1 @ 1 second handheld?

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At close range, all camera motion is exaggerated, especially translational motion (which has little effect at normal range compared to angular motion).

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.

 

AF cannot work at 1:1 magnification

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only Z lens I have is the 14-30 that I have enjoyed quite a bit. Assuming the 28 pancake has a reasonable price to performance ratio, I am likely to get one. Though the Z+14-30 is not overly large/heavy given the zoom range, it would be nice to be able to reduce camera package size at times. My current "pancake" option is a Voigtlander 40/1.4 M mount which makes for a very compact package.

 

I probably would rather have a 24mm vs 28 if Nikon asked me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1:1 reproduction is a sort of standard by which macro lenses are judged. In practice 1:4 or less is more common for closeups in nature. When copying slides with a FF camera, I offset the ratio to 1:1.1, do the rough focus with the sliding tube (distance), and fine tune it with the focusing ring, strictly manual. Also, macro lenses are often used for general photography at normal distances (15x the focal length or more), for which AF and IS are very useful.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you assess your Z body’s ability to work w manual focus lenses?

Niels,

 

Niels,

 

I have one of the functions set up for quick zoom in on the selected focus point.

 

For quick work, I use the color highlighting of what is in focus, sometimes.

 

Manual focus works well with the Z series, is effectively much more precise than what I could achieve with my DSLRs. One real benefit of mirrorless (applies to Nikon Z and Sony F/FE, probably others) is that all of my older Nikon and other system manual focus lenses are viable again. For travelling ultra light/compact, I can put a tiny but decent Canon 100/3.5 LTM rangefinder lens in a pocket to pair the the VL 40/1.4. Too bad that I have not been able to find a reasonably priced 20 or 24 mm small and light lens in LTM or M mount to go with the 40 & 100. I do have a Voigtlander 24mm pancake, but it just does not perform as well as I would like.

Edited by robert_bouknight|1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...