Sigma DX (APS-C) Z Nikon AF Lenses.

[mike_halliwell]

Did I miss this...?

https://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/nikon-z-mount-lenses-are-now-in-development/

Seems Nikon is granting DX-Z lens rights to Sigma.

[ShunCheung]

Yes, received an e-mail notification from B&H:

[mike_halliwell]

Makes you wonder if there's a recognised deal regarding giving Nikon Z DX lens design/production to independents?

Trying to avoid the obvious non-support of DX lenses by Nikon....again....?

[ShunCheung]

I believe there is cooperation between Sigma and Nikon as well as between Tamron and Nikon. Sigma and Tamron are supplying lenses that don’t directly compete with Nikkor lenses.

[rodeo_joe1]

Looks like all the focal lengths that nobody ever wanted are covered! 🙄

56mm? Why? Because 55mm is just too short and 58mm far too long? 

And everyone knows that focal lengths are nominal anyway (probably varying by up to +/- 2mm from what's marked). As anyone that's attempted to get an exact RR by calculating subject distance knows. 

Edited April 4, 2023 by rodeo_joe1

[Niels - NHSN]

3 minutes ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

Looks like all the focal lengths that nobody ever wanted are covered! 🙄

56mm? Why? Because 55mm is just too short and 58mm far too long? 

And everyone knows that focal lengths are nominal anyway (probably varying by up to +/- 2mm from what's marked). 

Perhaps you gain the bragging right? World's first 56mm prime lens ? (I haven't checked).

I just bought the Nikon Z 26mm f/2.8 pancake lens. I am now the lucky owner of a very unusual focal length, at least worth 15 minutes conversation with my photo friends. It almost makes up for the lens being grossly overpriced 😉.

[Miha]

@ rodeo_joe1 and Niels:

The three lenses exist for quite some years for Sony e-mount (APSC) and are a quite usable trio. Their focal lenses correspond to 24mm, 45 mm and 84 mm FF equivalents. So nothing really new.

They also don't compete with Nikon DX lenses in Z mount. Besides some consumer grade DX lenses now the photographer can use three fast lenses for (almost) every situation - landscape (16mm), standard (30mm) and portrait (85mm).

I am using those lenses on my Sony camera I bought in 2016 especially to use with these lenses - because NIkon did (and does) not have any equivalents. So I can't say these are the lenses that nobody ever wanted. I can easily imagine someone using them on Z30 or Z50 for video or stills. Because of their good quality and reasonable prices (they are even cheaper for Sony-E) there sure is a market for these lenses.

Of course, YMMV.

P.S. Nikon equivalents for FF with 1.4 aperture are too big and too expensive to be a real alternative for DX (APSC) users.

[ilkka_nissila]

1 hour ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

Looks like all the focal lengths that nobody ever wanted are covered! 🙄

56mm? Why? Because 55mm is just too short and 58mm far too long?

85mm is a popular focal length for portraits on full-frame; 1.5*56mm = 84mm.

 

If we go into nit-picking, the sensor size of the Z50 is 23.5 x 15.7 mm and Z5 is 35.9 x 23.9 mm so the ratio between the long dimensions is 1.5277x and this would lead to 56 mm x 1.5277 = 85.54mm (35 mm equivalent).

Edited April 4, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[ShunCheung]

Sigma is pricing those new DX lenses pretty reasonably too, between $400 to $500 for some f1.4 lenses. Nikon Z DX is likely a small market; I assume most Nikon DX Z users are happy with a couple of slow zooms and don't need a lot of f1.4 lenses. But Sigma already has those lens designs for other mounts. Adding the same lenses for the Z mount is not a huge investment on Sigma's part.

[bgelfand]

8 hours ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

Looks like all the focal lengths that nobody ever wanted are covered! 🙄

56mm? Why? Because 55mm is just too short and 58mm far too long? 

And everyone knows that focal lengths are nominal anyway (probably varying by up to +/- 2mm from what's marked). As anyone that's attempted to get an exact RR by calculating subject distance knows. 

Probably because these focal lengths meet the non-compete clause in the contract Sigma has with Nikon to license the Z-mount. They are close enough to focal lengths people do buy to attract the casual user at the reduced price, and people, like you, who do understand there is no difference will consider them as a reduced price substitute and judge them on a cost/performance basis.

[mike_halliwell]

Design appears to show an attached adapter flange to fit the much wider Z throat. Looks to be a rather inelegant solution.

Still, in my book the images it makes are way more important than its looks...😉

[ilkka_nissila]

14 hours ago, bgelfand said:

Probably because these focal lengths meet the non-compete clause in the contract Sigma has with Nikon to license the Z-mount. They are close enough to focal lengths people do buy to attract the casual user at the reduced price, and people, like you, who do understand there is no difference will consider them as a reduced price substitute and judge them on a cost/performance basis.

The exact focal lengths are not the primary driver for Nikon to agree Sigma to make these;  these are DX prime lenses which Nikon don't make and likely also plan not to make (there is only one DX prime in the Z roadmap), so Sigma's lenses complement the overall Z lineup without Nikon having to address this market. Sigma can more easily make certain lenses because they offer the lenses to customers using multiple mounts so they achieve higher demand that way.  They are inexpensive for the specs and likely Nikon version would be 2x the price and they wouldn't be competitive. Nikon focus their efforts on making mostly full-frame lenses and it's easier for them to charge top dollar when Sigma isn't cutting into their lens business by offering FX primes (such as they did for F-mount in the f/1.4 Art series), at least not yet. It's a win-win for Nikon.

 

Nikon have successful Z DX cameras such as the Zfc but only a few lenses that are compact and appealing for use on that camera, so in this case the offerings by Sigma address this market and Nikon can make money by selling the Zfc camera.

Edited April 5, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[mike_halliwell]

22 hours ago, ShunCheung said:

Nikon Z DX is likely a small market

Still makes me wonder why they bothered with DXZ at all?

The DXZ bodies aren't that much smaller than the FXZs.

[ShunCheung]

14 minutes ago, mike_halliwell said:

Still makes me wonder why they bothered with DXZ at all?

The DXZ bodies aren't that much smaller than the FXZs.

I think the main selling point for Micro 4/3 is not that the cameras are that much smaller, but you use shorter focal lengths so that the super teles are smaller. I have several friends who are into wildlife photography and some in their 70's or 80's have moved to Olympus. Another person travels to Africa a lot and flies in small planes, and that is why he switched to Olympus.

Another friend goes to Africa photo safaris and is waiting for a 500mm/f4 with built-in TC, but I told him that the 500mm/f4 seems to be out of favor now. It used to be popular because it was much lighter than the 600mm/f4, but nowadays the new 600mm/f4 are lighter. Neither Canon, Nikon, nor Sony has introduced any 500mm/f4 lens in the last 10 years, but they all have 400/2.8 and 600/4.

[mike_halliwell]

8 minutes ago, ShunCheung said:

Neither Canon, Nikon, nor Sony has introduced any 500mm/f4 lens in the last 10 years, but they all have 400/2.8 and 600/4.

How about the long lost Nikon 300mm 2.8s? They didn't even make an FL version, unlike the 500mm f4 and 600mm f4.

However, they did surprise the world with the 120-300mm 2.8 fl.

[Niels - NHSN]

The only Sigma lenses in which I would have a personal interest would be the DG DN Contemporary primes.

They seem to be exceptionally well crafted and sensibly priced for someting made in Japan, but sadly only available for L-mount and Sony E-mount - probably for a reason.