Nikon Introduces D600, 24.3MP FX, US$2099.95

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>While I am impressed with the 24mp, I just don't see me paying $2100 for an entry level camera. It's not even small eitheir.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Come on Kent, the D600 is not an entry-level camera, and since it is FX, the mirror, penta prism, etc. can't be that small. If you want a small FX camera, pay $2800 for the Sony RX1; they even include a Zeiss 35mm/f2 lens into that price. The problem is that you are stuck with that one lens (which is not a zoom) and one focal length.</p>

<p>For all practical purposes, the D600 is the FX version of the D7000, which is a higher-end consumer DSLR with dual memory cards, a 100% viewfinder, etc. The D600 is retaining the scene mode selection on the D7000; that gives you a clue of its targeted market.</p>

<p>The one thing I don't like about the D600 is the Multi-CAM 4800 AF module, with 39 AF points and 9 of them cross type. That module works quite well on the D7000. However, I have been complaining about the 51-point Multi-CAM 3500 since it debut on the D3 back in 2007. Those 51 AF points are too concentrated in the center of the FX frame, and Nikon has not improved that layout in the D4/D800 generation. Unfortunately, on the D600, it is changing in the wrong direction. I am sure that is one way Nikon is differenciating the consumer D600 from the higher-end D4 and D800.</p>

<p>However, even though the D800 uses the same Multi-CAM 3500 AF module as the D3, D700, and D300, I have concluded that AF accuracy on the D800 has improved even over the D3, D3S, and D3X, all of which I have tested but do not own. Unfortunately, with the introduction of the D600, it is clear that there won't be a true successor to the D700, which is a downsized D3 and shares its sensor and almost the same frame rate. If you want D4 performance with a lower pixel count, I am afraid that there won't be a cheaper option in FX. Hopefully there will be some option in DX.</p>

<p>Another somewhat annoying issue is that back in the D300/D700 generation, they share the MB-D10 vertical grip. Today, the D7000, D600, and D800/D800E use three different grips.</p>

[EricM]

<p>Is there a 10 pin connector?</p>

[Two23]

<p>Ikkla--<br>

I just don't see FX as becoming mainstream. The 4/3 is where the market & technology is going. That's clear with the latest Sony release and Canon jumping into the field. My take is that Nikon is trying to carve out a NICHE market, mainly in an attempt to sell more lenses. A second reason is to avoid competing head to head with the larger Canon and Sony. In 1922 the 35mm frame was the future, but not now.<br>

Vince--<br>

Frame rate on the Leica IIIc is not quite as fast as what I get on my 1951 Rolleiflex MX-EVS, but is still faster than what I get on my Chamonix 4x5 & c.1922 Heliar lens. :-) For the price of a D800 & 24-70mm lens, I've put together a pretty nice little collection of first class historical cameras & lenses. I can resell it for at least what I paid for it. More importantly, I'm having fun and learning a lot!</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[chris_brandstrom]

<p>The distinction should be made that the D600 in not an entry level camera in an absolute sense (out of all cameras)....but certainly it can be considered entry level, <strong>for an FX camera. </strong>Certainly its now the lowest cost to entry for FX.<strong><br /></strong></p>

<p>I say hopefully the trend continues. Imagine something like the Sony RX1 in the sub-$2000 range? That would get very interesting for me.</p>

[Two23]

<p>Shun--<br>

OK, maybe it is more mid-level. I wasn't thinking of something like the D3100. It's definitely not a pro body though, with flash sync of only 1/200s etc. I am surprised they couldn't make it smaller as that would have definitely broadened its appeal. As for the new Sony, it looks pretty impressive!. The fixed lens wouldn't bother me so much as I've mostly been shooting a 1951 Rolleiflex all summer. However, the camera I really lust for is the Leica M9! It IS small and the lenses are outstanding! I got to play with one for a Saturday morning about a month ago. I fell in love but just can't justify putting >$12,000 into a camera ane a lens or two. Yes, I could wait a few years for the M8 to drop in value and pick one of those up, but I have no doubt that meanwhile the price of Leica lenses will only climb. One of the things that's really caught my imagination about the 4/3 system is I can mount Leica lenses both new & old on them, along with Voigtlanders, Dallmeyers, Darlot, Zeiss Protars.......</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<blockquote>

<p>Certainly its now the lowest cost to entry for FX.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Canon 5D MkII is cheaper and still a current body (officially)</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>In 1922 the 35mm frame was the future, but not now.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>True, but no matter how advanced these new smaller sensors get, they will never achieve the bokeh of a 35mm sized sensor and a lot of people use full frame solely for that reason (myself included).</p>

[EricM]

<p>This should be called the D6000, not D600. Still waiting for a true D700 replacement</p>

[leopoldstotch]

<p>I find it strange how buying the D600 and 24-85 VR separately comes out a dollar cheaper than buying the kit. Unless my math is way off, that kinda defeats the purpose of buying the combo.</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>Virtual horizons... If I use the D600 in portrait orientation, will the <strong>viewfinder</strong> tell me if I'm pointing up or down or level, ie pitch in portrait!...or is that only on the back screen?</p>

[conradwebb]

<blockquote>

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=24372" rel="nofollow" data-bitly-type="bitly_hover_card">Shun Cheung</a> - convinced now that there won't be a DX D400 - don't think there is enough demand for a high-end DX camera these days.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>For sure there was a demand - I along with many others was (still am) waiting for the D400 to move on from my trusted D70. Instead at the beginning of this year with a need for higher resolution beckoning for specific exhibition project, I purchased a D5100 based on the fact that it is essentially a D7000 disguised in a cheaper body and so far, apart from trying to get to grips with the new control interface and live view (very alien when compared to a D70) it has been a superb performer and an inexpensive option to boot.<br>

I think Nikon faced a problem with many pros and serious amateurs being quite happy with an upgrade on the well built weather proofed solid DX Nikon and as such the D300s was proving to be a barrier rather than a jumping post for photographers to move up to FX. <br>

Therefore I think this is generally just about the market's perception and Nikon have decided that there needs to be an easier financial incentive for photographers, whether amateur or pro, to move from DX to FX. The D300s was considered to be a Pro DX by many and at the same time the D700 was not considered an Amateur FX - it was just an alternative FX to a D3.<br>

Now I believe the market perceives the D5100 to be an amateur DX, the D7000 a serious amateur DX, the D4 a serious pro FX and the D800 an alternative serious pro FX which lets the D600 become a serious amateur FX - essentially filling the hole left vacant by the lack of D300s replacement. This way the jump from DX to FX feels less momentous financially. For sure if they had announced a new 24MP D400 with awesome low light capabilities, a strong hi-tech magnesium alloy, fully weather proofed body - many of us (me included) would not bother the consider FX for a considerably longer while yet.<br>

I believe they are trying to ensure the desirability of FX remains for all Nikon photographers and to achieve that it is important that the DX range does not get so good that wanting to move up to FX eventually becomes an unnecessary. Then of course at the same time they still have to respond to the competition and that in turn blurs the categories even further.<br>

For my part the performance of the D5100 is outstanding and rather than continue to fret about bodies I have started trading up my glass. The never used D5100 18-55kit lens and my Nikkor 18-200 have been traded in for 17-55mm 2.8DX for event work, a Nikkor 50mm 1.4G was purchased at the same time as the D5100 for formal portrait work, and I retain my favourite Nikkor 105 VR 2.8 Micro for candid portraits, macro work and my current project which involves focussed stacked macro gigapans.<br>

<br>

</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Is there a 10 pin connector?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>None on the D600.</p>

<p>The 10-pin connector is only on the "higher-end" bodies such as the D200, D300/D300S, D700, D800 and the D2, D3 and D4 families. The D7000 is kind of in between high and low end; it has the aperture follower tab for AI lens metering, 100% viewfinder, and dual memory cards but no 10-ping connector. Again, the D600 is more like the FX version of the D7000.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I find it strange how buying the D600 and 24-85 VR separately comes out a dollar cheaper than buying the kit. Unless my math is way off, that kinda defeats the purpose of buying the combo.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Try B&H, you get $100 off if you buy the D600 and the 24-85 VR together: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892428-REG/Nikon_D600_Digital_Camera_with.html">http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892428-REG/Nikon_D600_Digital_Camera_with.html</a></p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Virtual horizons... If I use the D600 in portrait orientation, will the <strong>viewfinder</strong> tell me if I'm pointing up or down or level, ie pitch in portrait!...or is that only on the back screen?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>On the D800, you can view the virtual horizon in both the back LCD and inside the viewfinder (as dotted bars indicating the amount on tilt, along the bottom and right side of the viewfinder). I <strong>assume</strong> that the D600 has the same feature, but I have not seen a D600 yet.</p>

[orcama60]

<p>Patience is a virtue but still not buying. Patience and more patience. Don't understand why 1/200 sync speed. Cannon was right then ? 5.5 fps ? Are we getting into a new frame rating concept ? Why 5.5 and not 6 or 5 ? Looks like a joke to me and apparently it does not increase even if you attach the new battery grip. Are you kidding me ? Why don't take away the video ( which means nothing to me cause I am not a videographer ) and increase the fps instead ?<br>

24 mp CMOS ? It would have been better 16 like the D4 in my opinion. D4 professional sport shooters got enough mega-pixels to get all the details they want in their pictures. More than that is not necessary at all ! <br>

39 position auto-focus sensor instead the 51 that I got in my D300 ? The sensor is better than the one in the D300 but why they did not improve it to 51 position auto-focus like the D300/D3 and D4 ? That would have been a plus !<br>

So, I will give up everything I got for what ? More mega-pixels ? It is the same D7000 but FX.<br>

In this case I am better off with the D7000 at 1K than this new camera at 2k price doing the same thing the D7000 is doing, except for bigger sensor and buffer-free problem. U1 and U2 are welcome but not necessarily beats my banks in my D300. In a few seconds I can change to a different bank. So, I don't see a big improvement on what we already got, like the ones we had long ago when the D300 / D3 hit the market ... unless I wanted to have a FX camera at an affordable price. <br>

Are we getting something that makes us go crazy for it like we were some years ago when the D300 / D3 were introduced in the market ? I don't think so ! D800 users will probably buy this camera and wonder why they did not wait a bit longer and spent 3K + in a camera that has been a problem with its focus issue. They would love the D600, cheaper, focus-problem-free and not anymore blurry pictures ( we hope ), U1 and U2, more fps ( 1.5 is a BIGGG improvement .. lol ), so I guess the D800 price will drop drastically. Not buying and still more patience. Let's see how does it behave on the field. Photo.net Nikon forum will be crowded. </p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p><a name="00aokU"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=5600559">Conrad Webb</a> , Sep 13, 2012; 10:20 a.m.</p>

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=24372" rel="nofollow" data-bitly-type="bitly_hover_card">Shun Cheung</a> - convinced now that there won't be a DX D400 - don't think there is enough demand for a high-end DX camera these days.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sorry, that was NOT what I wrote. I was quoting <a name="00aoff"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=323291">Dieter Schaefer</a>'s comment at Sep 13, 2012; 12:40 a.m.</p>

<p>I have no insider information, but I believe that Nikon will introduce a successor to the D300S, a DX-format sports/action camera in the coming months. If Nikon does not, Canon and Sony will eat their lunch.</p>

<p>However, we might as well call Photokina 2012 "the FX Photokina." Sony already announced several FX-format cameras, a DSLR, a point and shoot, and an FX NEX camcorder. Most likely Canon will have something to announce in the next few days.</p>

<p>DX will just have to wait. So do the Nikon 70-200mm/f4 AF-S VR lens, 300mm/f4 with VR and some 80-400mm zoom with AF-S and VR.</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>There is something SO special about full-frame shooting, and I have shot plenty of Nikon DX and Canon 1.6x crop cameras, not to mention many other formats.</p>

<p>I am truly glad to see full-frame coming to smaller cameras, and not only because these arms and shoulders are getting old. I really hope that more people will begin to understand why some of us rave about full-frame shooting, especially when shooting in near darkness or when shooting wide--and I want to see more people have the opportunity to shoot full-frame without mortgaging the house.</p>

<p>I want the opportunity again myself!</p>

<p><a href="../photo/9835420&size=lg"><strong>[link]</strong></a></p>

<p>Could have been a Nikon. Wasn't, but who cares? We've come a long way since the 5D and the big Kodaks.</p>

<p>My next one, God willing, will be a Nikon. I have waited a long time for the opportunity.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>Shun, I should have included Nikon's text for '<strong><em>translation'</em></strong>...:-)<br /> <br /> <em>......as well as a virtual horizon feature showing not only horizontal tilt to the left or right (roll), but also forward and backward tilt (pitch; only the roll indicator is displayed in the viewfinder).</em></p>

<p>............is that like the D800? I think it's NOT, but I'm not sure! Pitch only visible on the back screen? That's daft and another reason to buy a D800!</p>

<p><strong>EDIT </strong>Found the answer here.... Only roll in viewfinder.</p>

<p><a href="http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d600/features04.htm#a11">http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d600/features04.htm#a11</a></p>

[robin_barnes]

<p>The UK recommended price of £1955 is unrealistic. Cameraworld in London is currently selling the D800 for £2099! </p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Mike Halliwell, Nikon's virtual horizon in 2012 is now 2D, which can show both horizontal tilt and upward/downward tilt. I actually recorded a video on this feature a while ago (using one D800 to capture the video on a second D800 showing this feature), but my wife has not put it on YouTube yet.</p>

<p>See the attached image of a D800 (not D600). The green line shows horizontal tilt and the blue/brown areas indicate upward/downward tilt. In this case my D800 is pointing downward, so you see more brown area (ground) and less blue (sky).</p><div></div>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>Kent, Nikon makes digital SLRs and accessories for them - that's one of their main businesses. Mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses are a new product segment which Nikon doesn't appear to be very interested in competing in. They have the 1 series but the image quality and lens lineups aren't that great. There are two problems with DSLRs that have DX sized sensors. First, the viewfinder is small, and so one of the key advantages of the DSLR design, a large, crisp, optical, real-time viewfinder is reduced in value and usability. Ok, in top of the line DX cameras like D7000 and D300s, it can still be quite good, but I always found it difficult to identify subject expression using DX viewfinders. Secondly, the flange distance of the F mount appers to prevent the design of reasonably compact, affordable, and high performance wide angle primes that would help realize the small camera concept. To see how much difference there is, compare the size of e.g. the 24/1.4 AF-S or 25/2 Zeiss with the 23mm f/2 lens in the Fuji X100 camera. The 28/1.8 for FX is obviously also big, but not as much considering the sensor size. The price performance of the 28/1.8 is much better than for the 24/1.4 on DX - assuming you want this kind of a cornerstone lens for e.g. reportage and event photos. The DX DSLR has its special field of use also, which is long lens photography, for which it may well be the best type of camera. So both camera types have their own ground for which they are best. Neither sports/wildlife photography nor low light reportage are "niches" but extremely widespread fields of photography in which thousands of professionals make their living, and many amateurs and families also participate in documenting animals and the lives of their own families and friends indoors and outdoors. And for documenting people indoors there is no better type of camera than the FX DSLR.</p>

<p>IMO cameras with EVF/LCD only, and no optical viewfinder are ill suited for photographing any type of moving subjects. Tried the Nikon J1, when shooting a series of shots you do not get a continuous viewfinder during the series but a series of delayed playbacks. The same is true of the Sony SLT cameras, reportedly, when using high fps. So in practice you get very few shots where the subject is fully included in the frame, unless you use quite short glass and look past the viewfinder! If you think photographing moving subjects or the photography of people indoors are niches, then what is the photography of trains at night with strobes?</p>

<p>Personally I happen to think that the 24x36mm format has never been as strong as it is today. It is the undisputed leader of low light photography, has the broadest range of lenses available, is highly suitable for action photography, portraits (allows separation of subject from background), the recording of human life, landscape etc. There are of course many applications for smaller cameras, as well as larger ones, but for sheer diversity in possibilities FX is without rival.</p>

<p>Let me know how you will pull out this kind of background separation with a micro four thirds camera:</p>

<p>

<p>At nightfall, no less. In my opinion the problem with MFT is that no matter how fast lens you get, there's no way you can pull off such clean direction of the visual focus of the viewer. If you get a Nokton you might have a shot but you'd have to go ISO 3200 and it would be a normal lens, not a short tele. With FX I can do good separation of the main subject using depth of field using any focal length from 24mm to 200mm, shooting virtually in any light in which humans can see the subject, and then darker, without flash. No smaller format camera can do that, and never will, since sensors are getting so close to the theoretical limits possible due to photon statistics. (Medium format could theoretically be even better but the manufacturers do not appear to have access to good high ISO sensors nor are making very fast lenses. Hardly small, either.)</p>

<p>What is happening is that on the consumer front, there are cameras that are producing good results in bright light on stationary subjects that are smaller than before, but the high end equipment is getting more and more powerful in terms of what kind of shots can be made, and in what kind of conditions. The standards of photography are moving up; professionals and many advanced amateurs seem to be electing to use somewhat bigger equipment to get more performance and creative options rather than settling for the same old results only using a smaller camera. Nikon is answering by increasing the performance of their cameras and lenses to match user requests. </p>

<p>Lenses for 35mm cameras used to be quite small, especially primes, but now it seems users only care about performance, not cost or size, and witness the popularity of lenses like the 14-24/2.8 which is huge but sells like hot cakes. People that buy this class of cameras now seem to care about is what can be done with it, not so much about what it costs or how big it is. I used to have the Nikon 24/2.8 as my extreme ultrawide and it was very popular for film cameras. Now it's neither good enough nor wide enough. That's where the world of DSLR photography seems to be going towards. So there is both a tendency for miniaturization in the mirrorless camera segment, which is thriving, but DSLR lenses have not gotten smaller, quite the contrary. Nikon wants to ride the area of photographic equipment where they have a history and expertise. It is not small cameras. For small cameras, IMO you're best looking at MFT, Sony, or Fuji (maybe Canon). I don't think Nikon can be blamed for their choice: they sell cameras and lenses like hot cakes by sticking it out with the type of gear they do best.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>I hope Nikon continues the D7000 and D300s lines with new high performance DX cameras (e.g. D400) as many nature photographers need them. However, I do believe a greater part of the market for other things than tele-oriented photography will move to FX, as the prices of the cameras are slowly reduced. A good part of the former entry level DX DSLR market may move to NEX/Micro Four Thirds etc. because of the compacness but for people who want to photograph action I think they will stick it out with DSLRs, some DX and some FX.</p>

<p>I also hope Nikon overcomes whatever reasons they have for not making a compact wide angle prime for DX DSLRs, as many people have use for such a lens. The 35/2 (DX equivalent would be 23/2) used to be not only the reportage photographer's standard lens but also this focal length was the most popular for fixed focal length film compacts (e.g. the Olympus Mju-1 and -2) though with slightly reduced aperture for compactness. If you look at mirrorless cameras all the manufacturers include this type of a lens or its close approximation, so it cannot be that there is no market for it for DX DSLR users.</p>

[cl_wood]

<p>I pre-ordered mine last night from B&H. Hoping the supply issues won't be as dramatic as the D800 stories I've heard, but I'm basing my expectations on a 2-month wait (of course I won't complain if it comes in sooner). While I was hoping for a slightly lower price, like $1899, I was highly skeptical at the $1500 rumors. I am excited that most of the specs were accurate, even the slight drawbacks to this camera are miles ahead of my D70s. For example, I know some don't like the 'plastic-y' body of the D600 but I'm a small woman, so I'm thankful that it's lighter - it doesn't matter how sturdy a camera is if I can't handle it easily. Plus it'll still be an upgrade to the construction of my current camera.<br>

I bought my D70s in 2006 & have really enjoyed it. However, I've been camera shopping for 2years and the D70s's performance, even after an expensive Nikon repair, has deteriorated. As a non-pro, the D800 was just too far out of my price range, so I'd planned on a D7000, resigning myself to 5-6yrs more of DX. The D600 price is a stretch but worth it to me to have full-frame (all my lenses are FX as I started out with a N80). I'm sure I will have a learning curve but I'm looking forward to it. :) I also enjoyed Thom's article on the D600, especially the sychronicity (for me personally) of this: "All in all, the D600 seems very well rounded. Indeed, I believe it will start the FX revolution-for-the-mainstream pretty much the same way the D70 started the DX DSLR revolution-for-the-mainstream oh so many moons ago...". <br>

I also wanted to say thanks to Shun & the other knowledgeable commenters on these forums - I always research here before making any photography decisions. Even if my shooting needs are not the same as more advanced users, I always appreciate the insight.</p>

[Sanford]

<p>A camera for all the people who ever thought: "if I only had a bigger sensor, my life would be perfect".</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>Shun, Thanks for that but it was the viewfinder info I was after. It seems the pitch is only displayed on the LCD and NOT the viewfinder....unlike the D800.</p>

<p><img src="http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d600/img/features04/img_06.png" alt="" /><br>

This is the D600's Virtual Horizon.<br>

<em>The in-camera virtual horizon can detect both rolling (horizontal inclination) and pitching (forward or rear inclination) directions and display the inclination of the rolling and pitching directions on the LCD monitor and rolling direction (<strong>ONLY)</strong> in the viewfinder..</em></p>

<p><img src="http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/img/features04/img_07.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>I've met the D800's virtual horizons in viewfinder (as Above) and LCD, and love them.</p>

<p>Better buy a D800 for £100 more.....!</p>

[elliot1]

<p>A big sensor does not always mean 'big' performance. I am sure The D600 has an excellent sensor but if you recall, Sony's original 24mp full frame camera did not give the best IQ. Even the D3X is exceptional at low ISOs but not as good at higher ISOs).</p>

<p>It will certainly be interesting to see how it stacks up to the D800 and 5DMKIII. Assuming similar performance to the DdMKIII, this body could sway a lot of buyers to Nikon instead of Canon (if they were considering one over the other).</p>

<p>Illka, I will post samples of the 200-400mm with the 2x TC in another thread.</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>Based on the image quality of the D3200, which is not bad, I am expecting great things from spreading the same number of sensors out a bit.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>A camera for all the people who ever thought: "if I only had a bigger sensor, my life would be perfect".</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Sanford, don't go spoiling the party. A lot of us have been waiting a long time for this day--ever since the D3X came out, in fact--about $5,000 ago.</p>

<p>Say, I wonder how it will match up (image quality wise) against that old veteran!</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Mike, I am checking with Nikon USA to see when we can borrow a D600 to test it out. This should be an excellent high-end-consumer camera. However, I don't think I will buy one; as I said, I already have a D800E and a D700, which is still fine IMO, and I am looking for better AF. Once we have a D600, we'll provide the details and answer those little questions.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Better buy a D800 for £100 more.....!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is very odd. In the US, the D800 is $3000, and the D600 is 70% of that at $2100. That seems to be a reasonable difference.</p>

<p>Personally, I have no doubt that there will be a D400 in the coming months. However,</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I also hope Nikon overcomes whatever reasons they have for not making a compact wide angle prime for DX DSLRs, as many people have use for such a lens. The 35/2 (DX equivalent would be 23/2) used to be not only the reportage photographer's standard lens but also this focal length was the most popular for fixed focal length film compacts (e.g. the Olympus Mju-1 and -2) though with slightly reduced aperture for compactness. If you look at mirrorless cameras all the manufacturers include this type of a lens or its close approximation, so it cannot be that there is no market for it for DX DSLR users.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Some fast DX wide-angle prime is unlikely going to happen.</p>

<p>The problem is that even a 20mm lens is not that wide after the 1.5x crop factor, and any DX DSLR lens still has to have to original registration distance designed to clear the mirror for 35mm film. Anything 20mm or wider will be quite extreme and will have plenty of optical issues, especially at f1.4 and f2.</p>

<p>If you need a wide angle and need low light performance, you are much better off getting FX, which is now as inexpensive as $2100. Mirrorless also has the advantage that it doesn't need to clear the mirror. Tokina's 11-16mm/f2.8 is probably as close to a wide-angle DX "prime" as you will ever get for Nikon and Canon APS-C DSLRs.</p>