How many DX lenses are there? Is Nikon DX committed?

[ilkka_nissila]

Joseph, There are quite a few other new wide angle primes introduced within the last 15 years in addition to the 10.5mm. The 28mm f/2.8D, 28/1.4D, and 18/2.8D were all introduced in 1994 and were new designs (that's about 12 years ago). The 14/2.8D was introduced in 2000. There.

 

Nikon isn't introducing new wide primes because they're afraid that the future may force them to go DX and so they only cater to the most common needs - zooms. Or perhaps they're having problems designing good fast wide angles for the small sensor.

 

The image quality of the 18-200mm stands out as distinctly muddier than other lenses they advertise in the latest Nikon World. Check the pictures out (I was at an OSA conference in Florida and Nikon School was also there, with this advertising magazine). It's better than a Coolpix 990 but probably not much better than the latest digicams.

[vivek iyer]

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4316516-lg.jpg"></center>

<p>

DX camera..

[vivek iyer]

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4316524-lg.jpg"></center>

<p>

A 60mm f/1.4 on DX cam.

[ShunCheung]

Vivek, sorry, I don't see what those images have to do with this discussion.

[jimi colteryahn - rep. of]

Hello!<BR>

<DD>I have the Nikon 12-24mm zoom and it is beautiful so I'm covered on the wide end. The expensive lenses are the telephoto lenses and thats where I see the Nikon DX format giving us all a chance at telephoto photography for less money. <BR>

I hope DX is the future, because DX is lighter-weight and longer!<BR>

Jimi

[vivek iyer]

Shun, I thought it was obvious (6:48 post). Samples from my DX lenses.

[david_h._hartman]

Is anyone holding their breath for a 9.7mm f/3.5 rectilinear super wide angle lens for the DX formats?

[ilkka_nissila]

I'm waiting for 20/2 DX and 13/2.8 DX, and possibly also 18/4 PC DX. I might actually quit complaining if some of these showed up.

 

I just printed some indoor available portraits I took with D200+50/1.8 at iso 400 and they are beautiful. The color under fluorescent was terrible but turning the pics into sepia in capture and some curves adjustments did wonders.

[david_h._hartman]

Here is what I am thinking: I have a 15/5.6 AI, 20/2.8 AIS, 24/2.8

AI, 28/2.0 AIS, 35/2.0 AI and a 105/2.5 AIS. Using the infamous

crop factor I need a 9.7/4.0, 13/2.0, 15.5/2.0, 18.5/1.4, 22/1.4

and a 70/1.8 to cover these holes. I need the faster lenses at

the long end for DOF and background considerations. At the wide

end Im just greedy and besides DX lenses are smaller and

lighter, right? This should be easy shouldn't it?<br>

<br>

I do have a question as to how committed Nikon is to the DX

formats? A few zooms do not make a system.<br>

<br>

Regards,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[tom_burke3]

"I do have a question as to how committed Nikon is to the DX formats? A few zooms do

not make a system."

 

Bu they don't need to make a complete system - all other AF-D lenses are fully compatible

with current Nikon Digital SLRs, plus (in the case of certain cameras) a number of non-AF

lenses also.

 

Looking at Nikon's DSLRs over the last 5 years or so, they've consistently used this one

sensor format. Yes, it's possible that at some as yet unknown future date they may move

away from it, or use other sensor formats as well as the APS-C, but at the moment the

position is that every DSLR they have produced is APS-C. Compare that with Canon who

have produced sensors in three different formats! Nikon is the company that has

demonstrated committment, in the form of cameras, to the APS-C format.

[ilkka_nissila]

Most of the Nikon short primes give so-so image quality on 10-12 MP DX sensors, so these are not really an option.

 

Canon on the other hand produces several different sensor sizes for different needs. What could be better than that? You pick your lenses and sensor size. Nikon offers only one size of sensor and one size of film. Given this choice, I often choose the film.

[ned1]

If Nikon wants to go past 12 megapixels I think they will have to go FF. Why? Because at that resolution the dominant factor is the lens sharpness. Full frame is inherently sharper than DX (same way medium format lenses are inherently sharper than 35mm).

[dennisprice]

<i>"Is anyone holding their breath for a 9.7mm f/3.5 rectilinear super wide angle lens for the DX formats?"</i> [Dave Hartman]

 

<p>I've got my Visa card ready if and when Nikon makes an <i>f/2.8</i> version under $1500. I want to re-live the fun I had when using the wonderfully expansive rectilinear 14/2.8 on my film cameras.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

I doubt there is a market for a < 10 mm prime. I mean, the 14 mm was made primarily for the D1.

[vivek iyer]

I don't know if the 14mm was made for the short lived D1.

<p>

I am positive that this <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/ultrawides/13mm.htm">13mm f/5.6</a> was made for no APS-C sensored cam.

[georges_pelpel]

I think Edward has a point. The megapixel war will force the move to larger (FF) sensors. I

remember a paper from George Lepp several years back when he mentioned that film has

reached the lens resolution limits. His point was that the latest film (such as Velvia) had

reached such a fine resolution that they were better that what the best lenses could

produce. The same has to be true for sensors. More megapixels means tighter sensors

with smaller and smaller pixels. Pixels are like grains on film, once they reach the lens

limit there's no point in making them smaller so using a larger sensor becomes the only

way to gain more usuable pixels. It is not far fetched to think that larger sensors will come

to market, they will allow digital to catch-up with medium (it's already almost there) and

large format film.

Will it be the demise of the DX format? I don't think so because this format allows for

smaller and lighter equipment, a very important factor for 95% of the market. That should

also mean that the larger size sensor cameras will keep bearing a higher price.

[ky2]

<i>"I remember a paper from George Lepp several years back when he mentioned that film has reached the lens resolution limits. His point was that the latest film (such as Velvia) had reached such a fine resolution that they were better that what the best lenses could produce. The same has to be true for sensors..."</i> --- Err... No. This is nonsense.

[Jim_Tardio]

<i>Jim Tardio recently posted a thread in the EOS Forum, discussing that a lot of pros dumping 1Ds Mark II's for the 5D.....

<p>

Unfortunately, that topic seems to touch some nerves and is generating some flames in the EOS Forum....</i>

<p>

Yes, some Canon fans are extremely upset by my harmless post. I thought I was just passing on a bit of interesting information. It's amazing how defensive they get....oh well.

<p>

The same, original post is also referenced in <a href="http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/">The Online Photographer</a>. Scroll down to Doug Plummer's Dispatches.

[vivek iyer]

Georges,

 

What the resolution of the old Velvia 50 or Ektar 25 or Techpan?

 

How many Nikon lenses are out there that would "out resolve" these films?

 

I don't think there is even one.

[imatate]

I have used several Nikon 12-24mm zoom several times out of necessity .I bought one and

returned it. Not a sharp lense in my opinion. CA was way high and it lacked real punch for

me.

I heard another wider DX zoom was on it's way but?

Anyone know about it?

 

Marcus

[david_h._hartman]

<em>[but] they don't need to make a complete system -

all other AF-D lenses are fully compatible with current Nikon

Digital SLRs, plus (in the case of certain cameras) a number of

non-AF lenses also. --Tom Burke<br>

</em><br>

This is true once you get out to 105mm and past but falls apart

with regard to wide angles through short telephotos. Note that a

105mm is a medium telephoto on the DX formats. Nikon introduced

the DX format in 1999. They need to get off their duffs and fill

the system if they are serious. Make no mistake Nikon is playing

a poker game with DX and they are holding their cards close.

[shafeeq_sinnamohideen2]

Why would DX lenses be useless on a FF camera? Unlike EF-S lenses, DX lenses mount, produce an image, and clear the mirrors of film Nikons. The D2X already has a High Speed Crop mode that only uses the center of the sensor. Presumably the future FF D could have a similar mode that only uses a DX sized region of its sensor. Even if it didnt't, you could always get the same result in post-processing. Assuming the same pixel density, with DX lenses, why should it do any worse that the D2X?