Nikon Announces D5300 and 58mm/f1.4 AF-S

[ShunCheung]

<p>Somehow Nikon has this unusual tendency to introduce new DX bodies along with new FX lenses. Today, they are announcing the D5300, a small upgrade from the D5200, which was introduced less than a year ago itself. Similar to other entries in the D5000 series, the D5300 has an articulated LCD. The D5300 has a 24MP sensor without the anti-aliasing filter and the Multi-CAM 4800 AF module with 39 AF points, including 9 cross type. The main improvements on the D5300 are the electronics:</p>

<ul>

<li>Expeed 4 image processor</li>

<li>High-ISO setting goes up to 12,800. Previously, only the D3S and D4 have the ISO 12800 setting without getting into the Hi range</li>

<li>Built in wifi and GPS</li>

<li>New EN-EL14a battery, compatible with the older EN-EL14 but holds more charge. Since the GPS feature tends to consume a lot of battery power, having a stronger battery is a plus.</li>

<li>Special effects: toy camera, one-frame HDR painting mode</li>

<li>The articulated LCD is 3.2", 1.37M dots</li>

</ul>

<p>The D5300 comes in three color choices: black, red, and gray. In the US, it is $799.95 body only. It is also available with the new 18-140mm DX AF-S VR lens announced earlier as a kit for $1399.95.</p>

<center>

<p>Images Copyright Nikon Inc. for news distribution</p>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17560124-md.jpg" alt="" /></center>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17560125-md.jpg" alt="" /><br>

We discussed the new $4000 Zeiss 55mm/f1.4 lens last week: <a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00c3C6">Zeiss 55mm/f1.4 Otus Distagon</a>. In comparison, this new Nikon 58mm/f1.4 G AF-S seems to be a bargain. Nikon is positioning it as the modern version of the classic 58mm/f1.2 Noct lens for low-light photography:</p>

<ul>

<li>9 elements in 6 groups, 2 aspherical elements, nano crystal coating</li>

<li>9-blade aperture diaphragm</li>

<li>minimum focusing distance: 0.58 meters, about 1.9 feet</li>

<li>metal lens mount</li>

<li>72mm filter thread</li>

<li>385 grams, about 13.5 ounces</li>

</ul>

<p>In the US, the suggested price is $1699.95. While it is less than half the cost of the Zeiss 55mm/f1.4, it is also almost 4 times as expensive as Nikon's own 50mm/f1.4 AF-S.</p>

<p>Nikon is also positioning the new 58mm/f1.4 AF-S as a portrait lens for DX bodies. While the 58mm focal length should be suitable for DX portraits, this lens is considerably more expensive than any one of the current DX bodies. I think the target market for this lens is more like high-end users that need low-light performance.</p>

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17560123-md.jpg" alt="" /></center>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Nikon Japan news links:</p>

<ul>

<li>D5300 <a href="http://www.nikon.com/news/2013/1017_dslr_01.htm">http://www.nikon.com/news/2013/1017_dslr_01.htm</a></li>

<li>58mm/f1.4 AF-S <a href="http://www.nikon.com/news/2013/1017_lens_02.htm">http://www.nikon.com/news/2013/1017_lens_02.htm</a></li>

</ul>

[michael_bradtke]

<p>Are they nuts? 1699.00?? Really??They can say it follows in the footsteps of the 58mm f/1.2 all they want. I bet the price on this is going to drop fast or it is not going to be around all that long. </p>

<p>I wouldn't mind seeing some images from it shot wide open on a D800E. But it would have to be absolutely stellar to even make me look twice. I already own a 58mm f/1.4 and have only $350 tied up in it. And yes I am happy with the way it makes images on my cameras.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Are they nuts? 1699.00?? Really??</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Actually $1699.95. When they told me that price during our conference call a couple of weeks ago, I thought I might have heard that wrong. So I double checked: "Seventeen hundred dollars?" I asked, and they confirmed.</p>

<p>No doubt that is a very high price for a 58mm lens. This lens had better be wonderful, but even so, I am sure its market will be quite limited.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/2210/AF-S-NIKKOR-58mm-f%252F1.4G.html">http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/2210/AF-S-NIKKOR-58mm-f%252F1.4G.html</a></p>

[rick_m.]

<p>Staggering price for that lens. Nothing short of absurd. </p>

<p>Nice specs on the D5300.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>

<p>Nikon is also positioning the new 58mm/f1.4 AF-S as a portrait lens for DX bodies.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, costing more than even the 85/1.4G - that makes a lot of sense. And if DX is apparently moving downscale, then who is going to buy a $1700 "normal lens? Surely no one purchasing any of the D3xxx or D5xxx bodies.</p>

<p>Now, someone again explains to me why a D400 isn't economically viable for Nikon to produce but a $1700 58mm lens is? Ah, yep, I get it - the 58 isn't going to take market share away from anything else in Nikon's lineup. Because it won't sell in significant enough numbers to begin with - everyone who needs to impress, will buy the Zeiss anyway and will find something to pick on Nikon's discount offering. And then there's always the $7000 Leica 50/2 APO ASPH - you just need to purchase a $7000 body to go along with it.</p>

[tom_boston1]

<p>Is the price on the new 58mm all that different from the 24mm f/1.4 G or the 85mm f/1.4 G? In addition to the optics, I would also expect superlative build quality.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>Is the price on the new 58mm all that different from the 24mm f/1.4 G or the 85mm f/1.4 G?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>no, but the focal length makes it pretty close to an 85 on DX. had they made it a 1.8 and cut the price to $799, it would be in the range of a lot more potential buyers. $1700 is more than any current DX body. meanwhile, the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=534438&is=REG&A=details&Q=">Voigtlander 58/1.4</a> is $500. another problem is that 58mm is a little too long to be a normal lens on FX, and most will simply opt for one of the 50mm options.</p>

[richard_driscoll]

<blockquote>

<p>Is the price on the new 58mm all that different from the 24mm f/1.4 G or the 85mm f/1.4 G?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It may not be but 58 mm is about the easiest focal length at which to design a wide aperture lens covering 24x36 mm. on a reflex camera. 24 mm is very difficult and 85 mm somewhat difficult. It is for this reason that f/1.4 lenses of around 50 mm are usually the least expensive!</p>

 

[jose_angel]

<p>The 24/1.4G enjoy two ASPH elements and two ED as well (in a total of 12 elements), the 85/1.4G is just 10 "plain" elements, the new 58 have two ASPH elements out of nine... the price sound right in comparison.</p>

[steven_p]

<p>Thanks Shun,</p>

<p>(3 more reasons for digging out my film stuff.)</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>The D5300 looks kinda interesting. Built in GPS is a definite plus. I've been thinking about one of the add-ons for my D5100. Slightly bigger screen and better ISO settings.</p>

<p>Who can remember what the D5000, D51000 and D5200's opening price was?</p>

<p>Lens? Crazy Money!</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>I notice in the press release they call it an <em>Entry-Level Model</em>. You'd think that was the 3000 series, the 5000 series is mid level and the 7000 series the 'Flagship'?</p>

<p>When I see someone with a D5300, they're no going to be too pleased when I say 'So, how is your new entry-level camera? I thought you aspired to something better?' (not that I would, mind you!)</p>

<p>They're not helping their product identity or obvious upgrade path.</p>

<p>.....unless there's a 9000 series on the way:-)</p>

<p>So that's 2 entry levels (3000 & 5000), a mid level (7000) and the new Flagship 9000!</p>

<p><strong>EDIT</strong>. ...and I see it does video @ 1080/<strong>60P</strong> see <a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00bxpg">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00bxpg</a></p>

<p> </p>

[kgavin]

<p>The price of the 58/1.4 is insane. From a branding standpoint, they could have at least put the term "NOCT" on the lens to have it compare to the previous 58/1.2. At least make us think we're buying something truly special. The literature on Nikon's site already labels it as a lens to use wide-open at night to reduce certain effects. This will probably be one of the most specialized lenses that Nikon sells...in the same category as the 45mm and 85mm PCEs. Even the less than casual user who would buy any of the other f/1.4 lenses will think twice about this lens given the f/1.8 and f/1.4 50mm options available.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>The 50/1.4 AF-S although it is only a few years old, displays a lot of aberrations (for such a new lens) wide open on a D800. It also has been criticized for its bokeh not being as nice as that of the 85/1.4 but I find it ok. I am not surprised that Nikon introduces a premium f/1.4 normal lens; quite a lot of people have been asking for it. Since normal lenses are extremely popular, Nikon will no doubt sell a reasonable number of these.</p>

<p>In the past I used a 50mm lens a lot in my people photography (combined with a 105mm for head and shoulders shots and 28mm for wide) but because of their relatively high quality (in the AF-S f/1.4 versions) I've moved to the 35+85mm pair in recent years. The 58mm is a little too close to the 85mm to warrant the purchase of a separate lens for me. A few weeks ago I took a series of portraits with the 50/1.4 wide open indoors and they came out nicely in black and white, but some color images in high contrast light that I took earlier in August lacked the quality that the 35mm and 85mm images have, in terms of flare behaviour, retaining color in backlight, and also color fringing in highlights. I thought ok the 50mm is a nice lens for the price but it can be improved. With 12MP cameras I didn't find much fault with it though, but requirements have changed.</p>

<p>I do think there are many people still using DX for events, even professionals (I see them all the time) as photography is not that profitable that everyone could justify FX and some of them will wellcome the 58/1.4 for a head and shoulders type lens if it has nice out of focus rendition.</p>

<p>I haven't used the current 50mm for night time photography or astrophotography where a lens that renders point lights nicely would be of advantage, so I can't comment on its possible shortcomings. If Nikon says that the 58/1.4 is the successor to the Noct Nikkor then it will no doubt work well for these applications. Although a specialty item, the Noct Nikkor is one of those lenses which have commanded very high second hand prices (along with e.g. AF 28/1.4D, which also was designed to perform well in this type of application, both of which at some point were in the 3k€+ price class, if I recall correctly, on the auction site, in fact I've seen much higher prices for the Noct) so there must be a market that is willing to pay this much for such a lens. It can be an image issue for Nikon as well; Sigma has made a very nice 35mm f/1.4 and Zeiss is now selling a premium 55/1.4 and Nikon very much wants to be seen as an optics leader so they're trying to cover important basis.</p>

<p>I am personally more concerned at Nikon's lack of attention towards the 135/2, ut could use AF-S and an optical update. Nikon seems to think that for shorter focal lengths, 24mm to 85mm there is a large market for fast primes, which I agree with since most indoor photography of people at events and indoor portraiture occurs in this range (aside from sports) so it is nice to have so many options. Also, Sony mirrorless cameras are now becoming available in FX / 24x36 and since Zeiss is making some AF primes for them in this range (obviously most of them are in DX format but new ones will be in FX) Nikon probably wants to assert that they master this field and don't want to take more hits or suggestions that they aren't offering some of the best. However, while the 70-200/2.8II displays excellent sharpness and contrast, and autofocuses well, I don't like its out of focus rendition and also sometimes images in available light taken with that lens appear harsh. Thus a more gentle rendering of a 135mm prime with more precise AF than the current version, and less aberrations at f/2 would be very welcome. I am considering the Zeiss 135/2 which is about as aberration free as a lens comes but it is manual focus and that can be an issue depending on the situation.</p>

<p><em>From a branding standpoint, they could have at least put the term "NOCT" on the lens to have it compare to the previous 58/1.2</em></p>

<p>It doesn't matter what it's name is; if the quality is there, there will be buyers. Even if 10% of potential 50/1.4 buyers get the new 58/1.4 instead, Nikon will be very happy I am sure. I think the main problem with selling the 58mm to me is that the 85/1.4 is so excellent. I don't have enough pressure to buy a 58mm simply because of its focal length. But there may be people who e.g. want to use the 70-200/2.8 and get a slightly shorter fast prime so that there is less overlap e.g. 24/1.4 + 58/1.4 + 70-200/2.8II could be a reasonable setup to carry. But for me the 85mm is almost always in the bag when I'm photographing people. </p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>The 5x00 series are entry level, in that they have a user interface which is not that well suited to the photographer who wants to take control of the camera; it is in that respect similar to 3x00 series. There are automated modes that do various tasks for the user but they're sort of "black box" implementations. The viewfinder in both 3x00 and 5x00 is of the pentamirror type which gives less clear image than a pentaprism viewfinder does; I think this is a crucial omission which Nikon should rectify - while I don't like an EVF at all, I'd take an EVF rather than a pentamirror optical viewfinder. Finally, I suspect that the D5300 does not have autofocus fine tune, which limits its use with wide aperture lenses. There is no question that the features and user interface design of this camera position it at the beginner. However, because of the LCD that turns to various angles, some more advanced photographers may buy this camera e.g. for macro use, or for shots at a high/low angle, and maybe for video. For video, the OVF is of no use, of course.</p>

<p>For me, the quality of the optical viewfinder is crucial, so for a DX camera I'd prefer even a D90 to the D5300, and the D7100 is the camera I'd recommend to people and might buy myself. However, for macro use I think the D5300 is very attractive. I strained my neck when I was trying to force myself down on the ice surface of the sea to see the viewfinder image when I was photographing icicles on a rock by the sea, and it took my neck a long time to recover. With a screen like that in the D5300, it would have never happened. So in that sense, it is not impossible to think that I'd buy the D5300, but by not doing so I'm trying to communicate to Nikon that the competitiveness of the DSLR against mirrorless cameras in the long terms depends on the quality of its primary advantage: a clear optical viewfinder and precise autofocus that can be fine tuned to the lens. I don't know if Nikon is getting it though.</p>

[jorgen_udvang]

<p>The 58mm looks great, as do the samples. Sharpness is difficult to judge from the small samples, but bokeh, correction for coma, little or no CA, no edge distortion etc. all make this the 50-something to have, and it's less than half the price of the Zeiss. One can always buy the 50/1.4 I suppose, but written down over 20 years, the difference only represents $50-60 per year. If it saves me more than 2 hours of post processing per year <strong>and</strong> has a nicer bokeh, it's more than worth it :)</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>I own both recent 50mm f/1.8 lenses solely because I'm not prepared to pay f/1.4 prices for lenses with the optical performance level of the existing 50mm f/1.4 options. Zeiss priced themselves out of my consideration for some time, but this may tempt me more - though for the price I wouldn't have turned down f/1.2. They don't specifically talk about spherochromatism (unlike the Zeiss, which is specifically apochromatic); the sample images look as though LoCA is reasonably controlled, but it's hard to tell at the image sizes shown. This is one of the things that particularly bugs me about most Nikkor f/1.4 lenses. I'm not a great user of normal lenses, but that may be because the ones I've had aren't all that hot.<br />

<br />

At least one of the UK retailers has it listed for pre-order at £1599. I think I'll be waiting for it to drop a bit. At f/1.4, autofocus is pretty welcome, so I'm not rushing to get a Zeiss in first. I'd like to know how well it holds up against the Zeiss in performance, though. Let's hope this isn't another 45mm AI-P collectors' lens.<br />

<br />

I remain disappointed in my experience with the 135 f/2 DC, it being a lens that motivated my move to Nikon. The Zeiss looks lovely, but pricey, and manual focus is a pain. I'm living with a combination of a 150 f/2.8 and a 200 f/2, but if Nikon do a decent job on the 135 then I may consider it.<br />

<br />

D5300? Meh. Seems like a minor update, but there wasn't much wrong with the 5200. I'd have been more excited by a D1000 (ultra low-end) or by a competitor to the small form factor 100D - but only as an impartial observer, so maybe I'm missing something. I was under the impression that Nikon couldn't shift the stocks of the D5x00 and D3x00 series that they already had, so I doubt this will help retailers much.</p>

[Two23]

<p>The price of the 58mm is astonishing to Nikon users, but is a big yawn from the Leica crowd. If it really is great, it will sell. As for the D5300, I'm interested but won't use the wifi or the GPS. Since the D5100 is still working for me, and I just bought an A. Rofs Petzval lens made in 1845 the other day for a serious pile of $$, I might wait half a year for a refurb D5300 to appear. The no AA filter interest me, along with improved AF.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[Hector Javkin]

<blockquote>

<p>I do think there are many people still using DX for events, even professionals (I see them all the time) as photography is not that profitable that everyone could justify FX and some of them will welcome the 58/1.4 for a head and shoulders type lens if it has nice out of focus rendition.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But with the price of the 58 f/1.4, a DX shooter might as well move to a D610 for portraits, particularly if they already own an 85 /f/1.4, as I do. On DX, I sometimes find that there isn't enough room to use the 85, but I can solve that with an FX body (with advantages in low light) for little more than the price of the 58.</p>

<p>Nikon might have made a better case for the new lens's Noct 58 f/1.2 pedigree, and for its price, given the traditionally low prices of its "normal" lenses, if they had given it an f/1.2 maximum aperture.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>They make that lens f1.8 and 700 bucks and I'm interested, but for nearly 2 grand... no thanks...</p>

<p>that's CRAZY!</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p><em>But with the price of the 58 f/1.4, a DX shooter might as well move to a D610 for portraits, particularly if they already own an 85 /f/1.4, as I do</em></p>

<p>Normally one needs 1-2 backup cameras in addition to the primary camera to shoot events with any kind of guarantee of success in case of equipment malfunction. And if they're different formats then one needs more lenses to be able to guarantee that everything can be covered in case of equipment failure. Sometimes the events include stage action or speaker close-ups which can be covered with a 70-200 on a DX camera but with FX might not work ideally without a separate 300mm. Also for things like the ring close-up DX might be handy given that the photographer can not just go right next to the couple for it during a ceremony for a micro nikkor close-up with an FX camera.</p>

<p>One may simply want to use a DX camera like the D7100 because it covers a larger proportion of the frame with focus points. This can be beneficial especially when shooting at large apertures. A D610 might work if one does everything with focus and recompose but quite frankly I think that's very risky with even slowly moving subjects and wide apertures. I think there are many legitimate reasons why one might want to use a DX camera, and people are using them still. I prefer FX myself and have the lenses for it but I don't have to pay my equipment from my photography and might have thought differently about FX if lenses like the 58/1.4 for portraits and a fast wide angle (e.g. Sigma 18-35/1.8) had been available from the start for DX. I can afford FX but a lot of people can not, and aren't using it. A 58/1.4 might be expensive but if one's whole system is built around DX cameras then the additional cost might not be that great.</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>I'll definitely swap out my 50/1.4G for the new 58mm 'NOCT'. </p>

[Two23]

<p>Ilkka--<br>

It's not only a matter of what you can afford, there's also what I call "alternate use of the money." For me, that typically is, "For the price of a 58mm f1.4 I could buy a really cool sliding box camera from the 1860s," or "For the price of the 58mm f1.4 I could take a trip to the North Dakota Badlands." I see the D5300 camera as very useful and a great value and will likely buy one eventually (refurb.) I will pass on the 58mm even though I'm sure it's a super lens. I just don't need anything THAT good, and would rather put that kind of money either into a historic Daguerrotype lens or a Leica lens. Actually, the next Nikon lens I plan to buy is the 80-400mm AFS. It's even more expensive but it's something I would routinely use. I'm just waiting for a deal.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Here are two recent images I captured hand held with the existing 50mm/f1.4 AF-S on the D800E; i.e. not the new 58mm/f1.4 AF-S lens, which is not yet available. My main problem is higher ISO noise and slow shutter speed wipe out a lot of the sharpness. Therefore, to some degree, it is hard to show how great the optics really is. Under such circumatances, It'll be interesting to do an A/B comparison between the two lenses.</p>

<p>When it is at base ISO on a tripod with still subjects, it may be a different story, but then, do you really use f1.4 under such circumatances?</p><div></div>