Nikon 50mm f1.4G AFS announced

[Rene11664880918]

I didn't hear anyone complaining about the price of the Sigma lens. I don't know what the prices are in the US but as I

said before it seems they will be selling the Nikon lens for less than the Sigma here in Japan. That would be really funny

if people complaint about the price of the Nikon one.

 

Will... I understand what you're saying but I would think that Japanese using D40~60s won't buy a prime. I am sure they

will stick to the zoom kit lens. Most people I KNOW using these cameras here they basically don't care about speed

(they use flash), they don't care about DOF, they mostly snap shoot on the green P mode. Their cameras are just big

P&S cameras.

 

For other people with more advance cameras and who are more patient to try to get a better shot the price difference

won't make any difference. Life in Japan is very expensive and if the difference in price between the AF and the NEW

AF-S (key word NEW) is only 150 USD that is just pocket change. You can't barely buy anything with that money so we

don't think there is a big difference. It's so weird but when I expend 100 USD in Japan I feel I am just spending like 10

USD. Does it make any sense? So I expect a very big market for that lens here in Japan.

 

Now look at Brian, Canon user and interested on a Nikon lens. Yeah! there will be market for it and price won't matter.

Rene'

[fotograf]

Hi Ellis, I shoot with film bodies not digital.

[Peter_in_PA]

Rene,

 

First, thanks for contributing your excellent photos to the 11-16 review!

 

For me, I would NOT pay an extra 150 for an AFS 50/f1.4 over the old AF-D, unless the image quality is WAY better. (Of

course, I live in the US, where our economy is not exactly soaring...)

[Rene11664880918]

Peter... He!He! Look at it this way, I live 2.5 hours from Tokyo. If i drive my car to Tokyo 150 USD won't pay for the round

trip. Just to pay for the toll of the expressway would be over 100 USD and the gasoline another 150 USD. So when you

look at it that way, here 150 USD is just pocket change.

 

Oh! The review, good job! no wonder those pictures look familiar!

[wasper]

Will this lens work with the Nikon D80?

[phillip_garland]

<i>Will this lens work with the Nikon D80?</i><br>

 

Yes, it is an AFS lens, so it will work with any Nikon DSLR, including the D80.

 

~Phillip

[fotograf]

Isn't the "extra" $150 the difference in price for this new lens, as the MSRP? I would think, a few months after its release, the price will undoubtedly come down.

[User_502260]

I still don't understand why this isn't an IF lens and why that would be either good or bad. Most of my IF lenses are manual focus types. They include lenses like the Vivitar 28mm f/1.9 Series 1, the Minolta 300/4.5 MD and the 300/5.6 Canon FD SSC. All of these are floating element designs but I don't know where it's written than for a lens to have internal focusing it must also have floating elements. Some of my lenses which have floating elements do not have internal focusing. These include lenses like the 24/2.8 Canon FD SSC, 55/2.8 Micro Nikkor AIS, 28/2 Canon FD SSC, 200/4 Canon New FD and 50/3.5 Zuiko. I have read many threads on the pros and cons of using teleconverters with telephoto lenses which have IF designs. Standard lenses like a 50/1.4 are not used as much with teleconverters so I don't know why this would be a big issue either. The only difference I can see is that most IF lenses have a different effective focal length at their closest focus settings than at infinity. Both the 200/4 Canon New FD Macro and the 200/4 Micro Nikkor manual focus lenses will have a different working distance at 1:2 than they would have if they were focused at infinity and then extended with tubes or a bellows to reach 1:2. A 50mm f/1.4 standard lens is not often used for macro work.

[Peter_in_PA]

Maybe IF is just not needed for such a lens. It's a pretty simple design.

[ellis_vener_photography]

"Hi Ellis, I shoot with film bodies not digital."

 

Brian,

 

Are they Canon EOS bodies?

 

If they are EOS film bodies, what I said still holds : there are adapters from sub $20 ones on eBay to $200 adapters made by Stephen Gandy and Novaflex made to use Nikon AI, AI-S and AF-D (non G-type) lenses on EOS bodies. If it is a Nikkor lens and has an aperture control ring on the lens you can use these lenses on your Canon EOS bodies.

[Michael R Freeman]

>"I still don't understand why this isn't an IF lens ..."<br><br>

 

An internal focus lens (sometimes known as IF) is a photographic lens design in which focus is shifted by moving the <b>inner lens group or groups only</b>, without any rotation or shifting of the front lens element.<br>

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_focusing">(link)</a><P>

>"... I don't know where it's written than for a lens to have internal focusing it must also have floating elements."<P>

It isn't. Two completely unrelated optical design properties.<P>

[peter_howard2]

Sorry to butt in guys, I'm new to photography and was planning on buying a Nikon 50mm F/1.8 lens to use on my D60. Having read a bit more, I'm wondering whether it would be wiser to save a bit longer and get the 50mm f/1.4. I would be using it mainly for portraits. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

Pete.

[oskar_ojala]

I'm European and I don't think most European DSLR users are likely to spend for this. People don't spend so much on photography (be it services or camera gear) as in the US. But let's see. I think Nikon does put a significant markup on the lens, since it's one element more, no exotic glass and looks like a fairly plastic build. One can buy zoom lenses with elements in the double digits, aspheric elements and ED glass for similar prices.

[Matt Laur]

Short answer, Peter: yes, I'd wait (if you anticipate having the budget for it, or for the Sigma, depending on how the actual test results come out). If you use an f/1.4 or f/1.8 lens all the way or nearly wide open, the depth of field is <i>very shallow</i>... which is part of the appeal. Your D60 won't AF with the 50/1.8, of course, so you'd be focusing it manually. If you're doing portraits, and your subject moves their head very slightly, you'll lose focus on the eyes, in a very noticeable way. A quick AF can really help to nail that down, and allow you to concentrate more on your subject, instead of watching the green focus indicator dot in your finder, or trying to resolve focus in that relatively small view. So, this new 50/1.4 or its Sigma counterpart is very compelling for your camera, that's for sure.

[peter_howard2]

Thanks very much for your very informative answer Matt - just what I wanted and yes, having learnt that these new lenses are about, I will wait and see what others who are more qualified than I think about them. Thanks once again.

[peter_k4]

gah I'm hoping for the slower lenses to be AFSed I'm kinda worried now. As a D40 user I would be able to hold off on an upgrade for several more years if I could get a 50mm and 85mm 1.8 and a 28mm 2.8. But I worry that these "cheap" primes may be overlooked since these new afs lenses with an eventual D3X will be targeting the portrait guys with the big bucks! with the $500 price tag on this one though I'm going to have to think long and hard.

 

I suppose nikon never intended anyone to be ENTIRELY happy with a d40/60 though...otherwise there'd be no reason to upgrade and SPEND MORE MONEY!

 

blast!

[Karim Ghantous]

From the review: "a circular aperture diaphragm for more attractive background blur". Is 9 blades enough? In any case, why did Nikon wait decades to give people a 50mm with near-circular aperture? If it doesn't matter (and of course it matters!), then why now?

 

Don't worry folks for those who shoot film: you still have the Zeiss 50.

[ilkka_nissila]

The reason they put the circular aperture in is because nowadays a lot of people use 50mm lenses for headshots (on DX).

So the bokeh is a more important characteristic of 50mm lenses than it used to be. In any case improved bokeh is a higher

priority in Nikon's lens design nowadays than it was in the 80s and 90s.

 

I think the 50/1.8 is more generally attractive and I would've preferred Nikon to put AF-S in that first. But the 1.4 has higher

margins, probably, so it comes first. I am sure that eventually, once Nikon has all their other autofocus lenses with SWM,

there will be an AF-S 50/1.8 ;-) Just like with D, it comes last.

[photo_galleries]

I'd be very, very interested wrt bokeh wide open... this is potentially a very good portrait lens on on a DX body.

[dan_nobile]

Here's hoping that the 50mm F1.4G AFS is the first in an updated line of AF primes from Nikon. Most of Nikon's AF primes date back to the early 1990's when they were introducing their AF systems. A lot's changed since then and it's time for the lenses to catch up with the new bodies - especially the D3 and D700.

 

I'm guessing that the filter size increase from 52mm to 58mm will allow Nikon to use a common filter size across a wide range of focal lengths of fairly wide apertures (28mm f1.8, 35mm f1.4, 85mm f1.8, 100mm f2.0, etc.) similar to what Canon has done with their line of AF primes. Now that Nikon is commited to FX bodies, it's time to update the lens lineup as well.

[dan_brown4]

Another likely benefit of the 50 AFS should be better dust sealing to keep our sensors nice and clean.

[arthuryeo]

Jose said:

>The issue here is its performance wide open. With eight elements and a modern design it could be on pair with the >very best 50s, we will see (I`m thinking on the Summicron-M asph....).

 

I hope not or else my $3000 Summilux Asph (f/1.4) would be considered an expensive paper weight. :)

 

Some talked about the missing ED elements but if Zeiss can do without any special rare earth elements in its 50mm ZF, I am sure Nikon can also do likewise.

Ditto with the "missing" aspherical element.

[aaron d]

This is a REALLY good sign of Nikon's thinking and I hope somebody there is reading my say-so! Canon tends to go full speed blasting into the ultimate extremes of expense and bulk when they make a new lens - their 50mm "L" lens is just waaay too big and heavy and EXPENSIVE for the difference between its 1.2 and Nikon's 1.4! Big deal! Especially when such high, clean ISOs are available now. Nikon is right-on if the ultimate goal is USEFUL!

 

Now I'd like to see a 28mm f2.0! Doesn't have to be a $3000 f1.4 boat anchor.....

[samuel_dilworth]

Nice to see, though like Ilkka I would have preferred to see an f/1.8 AF-S first. However, it does make business sense to get the f/1.4 out

the door first, catch those who don't need the speed but are careless with their money, then release the f/1.8 for those who stubbornly

refuse to fork out for the f/1.4. But it's good news for those who would choose the f/1.4 even if an f/1.8 lens were on the market.

 

This lens embodies some interesting design choices. Notably, it's clearly still a double-Gauss variant. I reckon it's either very ambitious or

foolish to attempt double-Gauss designs at f/1.4 in 2008! It doesn't use an aspherical element, so wide-open performance will probably

compare unfavourably with the Sigma 50 mm f/1.4 or a nature-defying design like the Leica 50 mm Summilux ASPH.

 

The good thing about laboriously optimised double-Gauss designs—which this one surely is—is that they're wickedly sharp and practically

CA-free when stopped down a bit. They also don't require fancy glass types (ED, etc.). Traditionally an f/1.4 lens was on the ragged edge

of what was possible with the double-Gauss paradigm, and therefore lagged a bit behind slower designs even at f/8. But we've had a couple

of decades of design and manufacturing experience since the last f/1.4 Nikon fifty, so I'd give Nikon the benefit of the doubt and assume

this new lens has state-of-the-art performance at f/5.6.

 

The new 50 mm f/1.4 Nikkor is therefore interestingly positioned compared to the new Sigma. The Sigma will undoubtedly be better wide

open (if you can get it to focus reliably), which is often the point of these fast lenses. But a price had to paid for that performance in terms

of size, weight, stopped-down performance, and dollars.

 

The Zeiss ZF 50 mm f/1.4 is also a meaningfully different lens, giving Nikon photographers a third 50 mm f/1.4 lens to choose from. This

one is built to an entirely different quality standard (metal filter rings, etc.), and for not much more cash, but is probably not much better

optically (if at all) than the new Nikkor, and notably worse than the Sigma wide open. It's also manual-focus only, with the benefits and

drawbacks that entails.

 

I have a feeling the new Nikkor will appeal to many though. Compact dimensions, top-notch performance stopped down, better wide-open

contrast than Nikon's old lens, reasonably priced for a new f/1.4 design, and guaranteed autofocus accuracy. The one thing that gives me

pause for concern is the phrase "ultra-compact Silent Wave Motor" in the press release. And of course the plastic filter rings.

 

Regarding the 58 mm filter ring: this is likely the new standard for Nikon primes. It looks odd now but it won't in a couple of years.

 

Good start Nikon! Now let's see equally attractive 24, 28 and 35 mm lenses please.

[ShunCheung]

Arthur, Leica has just announced a new DSLR that uses a 37.5MP sensor that is larger than FX.

Unfortunately, I am sure that your 50mm/f1.4 Summilux will vignet on it because of the "reverse crop factor."

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092301_leica_s2.asp

 

Save your pennies. :-)

 

If you would like to discuss the new Leica, please visit this thread:

http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00Qw8h