Wanted: DX wide angle prime

<p>All I want is a 16mm f/2.8 G AF-S DX with a 52mm filter size weighing 250 grams or less. Image quality should be on a par with the 35mm f/1.8.</p>

<p>Is that too much to ask?</p>

<p>If you also want all of that for less than $150, it would be too much to ask. :-)</p>

<p>I echo Shun.</p>

<p>-O</p>

<p>Al, I agree with you and would love to see a dx 16 prime.</p>

<p>I wonder if it could be made for less than the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8, which is GREAT at 16mm...</p>

<p>The Tokina is as close as you're going to come. I don't see any advantage to having a single focal 16mm when the Tokina is available.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>@Shun: I'd pay $250 to $300 for such a lens.<br>

@Kent: Prime users value light weight, small size and image quality. DX users even more.</p>

<p>Nearly everything I can think of that would go even that wide (easy by today's standards, but impossibly wide in the days of prime dominance) would be expensive, or non-rectilinear, or both. There was a decent Spiratone/Berolina/etc. <em>fisheye</em> 12mm lens that would work.<br /> What about one of the Zeiss Distagons? I see that there is a T* 15mm f/2.8 ZE Nikon-f, and of course the older 18mm?</p>

<p>I wonder how much weight you'd actually save over one of the DX ultrawide zooms?</p>

<p>Closest you're going to get to those specs is probably a 20mm f/3.5 Ai Nikkor. 52mm filter - tick; Under 250 gms - tick; f/2.8 - almost tick; 16mm - not too far off; AF-S - nope.<br>

Then there are Tamron or Tokina 17mm f/3.5 MF lenses. A bit bigger than 52mm filter though, and possibly a bit heavier than 250gms.</p>

<p>For DX no, but Sony makes a 16mm f/2.8 pancake lens for its NEX series. (The sensor is the same size as the DX sensor.) I shot these hand-held:</p>

<p><a href="/photodb/folder?folder_id=997650">[LINK]</a></p>

<p>One or two of these were shot hand-held <em>at deep dusk.</em></p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I briefly considered a Bower/Rokinon 14/2.8 for my film Nikons. For the price, it's really not too bad of a lens.</p>

<p>i have the tokina AT-X 17/3.5. its ok optically, not particularly sharp in the corners, but has great build. personally, i'd like to see sigma update their 20/1.8 to be sharper at open apertures, or a nikon AF-S version.</p>

<p>$250-300.... I doubt it'll be a f/2.8 lens for that. Those specs - I doubt it would come in that cheap. But yes, would I still be only on a DX camera, this lens would be highest on my wishlist together with a affordable 24mm.<br>

The Samyang (Bower/..) 14mm is an idea, but it is a LOT larger.</p>

Al I think you are out of luck. Such a lens with the specs you have given does not exist.

<p>I<em> think</em> the OP is suggesting <strong>Nikon</strong> gets it's act together and supports it's DX format with prime lenses??</p>

<p>With 35mm (FOV ~53mm on film) being it's <em>widest</em> AF-S prime, there's a HUGE gap from it's 10.5mm (~16mm on film) FishEye.</p>

<p>CX has an equivalent of a 28mm, a 50mm and an 85mm fast prime.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> 16mm f/2.8 G AF-S DX with a 52mm filter size</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Better start calculating then.. Is 2.8 16mm with a 52mm front lens physically possible ???</p>

<p>If you want a compact wide angle prime, you should probably look into the Micro Four Thirds system; they have 12/2, 14/2.5, 17/1.8 etc. However, the 12mm (which matches the angle of view of 16mm on DX) is expensive. I think a DX DSLR 16/2.8 could be expensive as well, as the mirror and flange distance forces a complex optical design if performance is to be good. Pentax does make reasonable wide angle primes for DX DSLRs, e.g. 14/2.8 but the cost is $950; they also have a pancake 21mm f/3.4 for about $650. I think a Nikon 16/2.8 DX would cost around $800 at the very minimum. If they were to make just one wide angle prime, I'd like it to be 35mm or 28mm equivalent, i.e. 17-18mm or 23mm. 16mm is a bit extreme to my taste. That's kind of the problem here; if the lenses are going to be expensive due to the optical complexity, then they might as well be zooms so that people can get away with fewer lenses. Sigma now makes a 18-35/1.8 that is very large but from the images I've seen it may turn out to be a good lens. But still the question of something smaller remains.</p>

<p>Apart from Micro Four Thirds, there is of course Sony NEX, and Fuji X-Pro1 / X-E1 which offer some wide angle primes. Personally I would choose the Fuji system, but I'd wait until they get the phase-detect AF into the main sensor as in the X100s (which is a fixed 23mm f/2 lens compact camera with excellent AF and viewfinder). I am currently planning on purchasing the X100s myself, as I was very impressed by its image quality, speed, AF, and viewfinder, and also it offers flash sync at high speeds (people have reported using 1/800s and 1/1000s successfully without hypersync/FP sync, so you can actually balance a couple of speedlights with bright sunlight outdoors in a group shot). The Coolpix A offers a 17.5mm f/2.8 lens (also a fixed lens) but it doesn't have a built in viewfinder and its AF is slower and you have to watch the focus scan through all possibilities in the LCD which is to me annoying. I think the Coolpix A offers CLS support even remotes and while I haven't read confirmation I think it also syncs to high speeds. The Coolpix A is very compact for the DX sensor size and image quality gets good reviews.</p>

<p>I am planning on purchasing the X100s myself. It will be useful for documentary photographs at close distances to people, where the quietness and compact size is appreciated. I also plan to use it for formal portraits and group shots in daylight by virtue of its ability to sync act high speeds without compromising on flash power. When I'm shooting an outdoor event, such as a concert, I might have a DSLR with 70-200 with which I shoot the performers on stage, and then I could pull out an X100s from the pocket (admittedly it has to be a large pocket; whereas with the Coolpix A, even a shirt pocket is enough) and get some audience shots with the wide angle without having to switch lenses on the DSLR. However, availability of the X100s is poor at this time; there is much more demand than supply. If I wanted the same flash capabilities as the X100s offers, in a DSLR, I'd have to go to Leica S and pay over 20x as much for the setup of one camera and one wide angle. Then I could also get 1/1000s sync. Of course the sensor is much larger; I'm not disputing the advantages of the Leica S system, just giving a bit of perspective on the capabilities of the X100s. (The X100s's predecessor, the X100 had slowish AF and write speeds, issues which have been solved in the new model.)</p>

<p>I was always amazed the 35mm f1.4 AIS was 52mm filter size......and there's always the 24mm f2 AIS as-well....but they're all FX lenses.</p>

<p>If CX can do an 18mm f1.8, I can't see the problem.....making it <strong><em>UP</em></strong> to a 52mm filter ring would be silly......:-)</p>

<p>Now, making it in FX is a bit more troublesome!!</p>

<p>It's not 16mm, but it is fairly close and would probably do a great job: <a href="http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/1913/AF-Nikkor-20mm-f%252F2.8D.html">http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/1913/AF-Nikkor-20mm-f%252F2.8D.html</a></p>

<p>20mm isn't even close... jus' sayin'... Those of us who want 16 and wider... we want really wide.</p>

<p>I used the 20mm f/2.8D AF Nikkor on the D200 some years ago and it was sharp in the center but displayed massive CA towards the edges of the frame. I felt very uneasy about the images and I don't think I was happy about anything I got with DX using it. On 35mm film I found it excellent though.</p>

<p>Several have mentioned Sony NEX ... while you may be 'wishing for Nikon' and not want ANOTHER CAMERA (!) look at Sony NEX 6 with the 16mm ... small, light-weight, easy to carry, and almost 'pocket-able'. Check it out in-store ... hi-qual electronic viewfinder, tilt lcd, built in Wi-Fi, Sony aps to control from smart-phone , in-camera hdr, in-camera panorama stitching (great for the Canyon), and much more. Shot an event last week with D600/70-200f2.8 ... lots of 'run-and-gun' ... had the Sony around my neck as a wide-angle (no lens-changing here) ... excellent results. How do they get all of that in a package that small ? Custom made for the outback ... even better with the 16-50, which is not much larger than the 16prime.</p>

 

<p>In the early days of pre-AI, Nikon struggled mightily to keep a 52mm Ø filter size.<br /> For example, there was even a Nikkor 20mm f/4 with a 52-mm filter size:</p>

<p>Not so much any more, and you say 20mm's not wide enough anyhow.</p><div></div>

<p>Al: If you wait about six months, you MAY be able to buy just such a lens from Sigma .. ;-)</p>

<p>mm seems your prayer will be ( partly) fulfilled, Samyang announced a 16mm <strong>F2 </strong>DX lens in the making, , ok : no AF, and 77mm Filtersize, but still the 16mm fast lens you asked for...</p>