Nikon Announce Z-Mount DX lens, 24mm f1.7

[ShunCheung]

New DX lens, 24mm/f1.7 Z mount, US$279.95, available in mid June 2023.

Product images, copyright Nikon USA Inc.

[mike_halliwell]

Wow, some of those aspheric elements are kinda crazy shaped, i wonder how they grind/make them?...🤔

[mike_halliwell]

If I put this on my Z9, is it true I can't force Full Frame?

Might make an interesting semi-pancake 35mm lens.....😉

[ilkka_nissila]

It's nice to see a reasonably fast wide angle prime for DX. Also one that maintains the potential for compactness that cameras like the Zfc have. The lack of a lens like this was one of my main issues with Nikon DX in the DSLRs. A friend of mine got the Sigma 18-35/1.8 which is a huge lens; very nice quality though, but in many cases it stays at home because of the size and weight. This is very compact. Users have the option of 24/1.7 DX, 26/2.8 pancake or 28/2.8. I guess there are a lot in a small space of focal lengths but potentially these could all sell a lot of copies. 

Edited May 31, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[ShunCheung]

3 hours ago, mike_halliwell said:

Wow, some of those aspheric elements are kinda crazy shaped, i wonder how they grind/make them?...🤔

I believe aspheric elements are molded plastic elements.

The mount seems to be plastic on this lens too.

[roland_vink]

10 hours ago, ShunCheung said:

I believe aspheric elements are molded plastic elements.

More likely molded glass, especially for the rear element. Plastic would be too soft and easily damaged for an exposed lens like this. Nikon used to make lenses with aspheric plastic molded onto a regular glass element, many of the early AF aspheric lenses like AF 28-70/3.5-4.5 used this type of glass. However, radically aspheric surfaces are not possible with this technique. The middle aspheric element of the 24/1.7 thin and has a complex shape, so I would say it is glass also.

I think the cost of glass molded lenses has come down and more complex shapes are possible, so I don't think Nikon uses the hybrid plastic/glass aspheric lenses any more (but this is just a guess).

It's a shame Nikon didn't stick with 52mm as their standard small filter size, but it looks like they wanted this lens to be as compact as possible. The f/1.7 aperture is unusual - half a stop faster than f/2. As far as I know this is the only Nikkor with this speed. Many other Nikon lenses use f/1.8 - 1/3 stop faster than f/2.

[bgelfand]

15 hours ago, mike_halliwell said:

Wow, some of those aspheric elements are kinda crazy shaped, i wonder how they grind/make them?...🤔

Wikipedia is your friend.  LINK: Aspheric lens - Wikipedia

Scroll down to the heading  "Manufacture"

 

 

[ben_hutcherson]

At the beginning of May, I was shopping for a mirrorless system to supplement my F mount lenses(which aren't going anywhere) but specifically wanted DX for size and weight reasons.

I actually took a serious look at the ZFc and the Z50, with a nod to the former as I like my Df a lot and a few respected reviewers compared the two cameras favorably but in particular with a lot of the annoyances that are commonly cited with the Df controls addressed.

In the end, I went...well...a lot more expensive and in a different direction since I was less than impressed with the DX Z-mount lens line up. The 12-28 was announced while I was looking but of course availability was a few weeks away(and I wanted it for an end of May vacation) so ultimately went a different direction. I know there are a lot of FX format Z mount lenses, and there's a good argument for investing in that direction for if I do eventually move to Z mount FX cameras, but my principle concern was size and weight(which is why I was shopping for DX in the first place) and many common Z mount FX lenses don't have much(if any) size or weight savings over their F mount counterpart, and of course an FTZ gains nothing in that department.

 

There is a company that makes a well APS-c mirrorless line, and in fact has a big focus on it and more importantly to me offers a lot of models conventional button and knob controls. After a lot of back and forth research, shopping, etc I finally bit the bullet and bought Fuji X-T5 and 16-80 f/4 kit. I've bought a cheap "dumb" F mount adapter that I've mostly used with AI/AI-s lenses although want to research the more advanced adapters that are supposed to allow some control over my G/E/AF-s lenses.

Although I used the camera a lot around home, after taking it out and shooting nearly 2000 photos on a trip(I know not many for a lot of you but generally a lot for me) I have a lot of annoyances with it. It's definitely positioned-both by price and specs-as a higher end body than the ZFc-and many of my issues are "it doedn't work like Nikons." Still, though, I find myself constantly annoyed that my Nikons seem to just do what I tell them(i.e. release priority means release the shutter when I say to, not try to AF and then refuse to fire if you can't) where the Fuji seems to always in the back of its mind seems to second guess me and sometimes fight me to get it to do what I want. There's also how touch instant MF over-ride is compared to what I'm use to on AF-s lenses, and that if you bump it accidentally and, for example, are using BBAF(which isn't "true" BBAF like Nikons and can still jump to the shutter release if you hit the buttons in the wrong order) you have to release and repress to restart AF whereas if you let go of the ring on an AF-s lens it will return to AF. There's also the fact that 15fps looks impressive on paper, but the camera gets REALLY warm even with a handful of relatively short bursts and seems to slow down/get sluggish until it cools(even in single shot mode, and yes this is after the buffer has offloaded to a UHS-II card). That's compared to my D5, which could shoot at 12fps all day and not break a sweat. I've also questioned, and it's still an open question for me, how much value 40mp offers in an APS-C camera(which is around ~80mp by my back of the envelope math with the same pixel pitch on a full frame sensor) and if it's really just churning out big files without a ton of added detail over a the earlier 26mp Fuji sensor or Nikon's excellent and now well loved 20mp sensor that I think first showed up in the D500 and now seems their DX go-to. I know I have to basically do everything right, including my best lenses used at their sweet spot and generally on a tripod to see a meaningful difference in detail between my D850 and D810 or even D800.

I say all of that for a reason, though, and not to bash the Fuji-which is a great camera at the end of the day. I never felt like Nikon was great about fleshing out their DX DSLR line-up. Yes, you had the plastic fantastic kit lenses and some occasional decent even if consumer oriented ones like the 35mm f/1.8, 10-20mm AF-p and 10-24, but a lot were plastic fantastic kit lenses, so-so super-zooms like the 18-200 and 18-300 that were built to high-end consumer standards, and the nice well built lenses like the 12-24 f/4 and 17-55 f/2.8 seemed to languish in their early to mid 2000s form that worked okay with 10-12mp cameras(like the D200 and D300)without an update that paired them well with newer 20mp+ cameras.

This is the second DX Z mount lens Nikon has announced in as many months by my count, and even though this one seems a consumer lens(not a pro-grade weather sealed one like the well regarded 23mm f/2 Fuji) it's also faster and half the price of the Fuji. Even though I generally prefer metal mounts, I don't get too bothered by plastic especially in an otherwise good but budget minded lens. I seem to recall a Lens Rentals blog post that said something like "Yeah, we see more broken plastic mounts, but they're also easy to replace and less likely to damage the lens or camera."

If I'd seen that Nikon seemed to at least be fleshing out their DX line-up a bit more, I might have been inclined to give the ZFc a more serious look.

[ShunCheung]

If one wants to go DX/APS-C and also likes the retro style, Fuji is definitely the way to go, since they have no FX cameras. Fuji's focus is APS-C and medium format. Nikon's focus is clearly FX.

[Gary Naka]

The 24/1.7 + 18-140 would make a NICE 2-lens kit.

I just wish Nikon had made a F-DX 24/1.7.

[ShunCheung]

14 hours ago, Gary Naka said:

The 24/1.7 + 18-140 would make a NICE 2-lens kit.

I just wish Nikon had made a F-DX 24/1.7.

I am afraid that Nikon is never going to introduce any new F-mount lens, perhaps except for some anniversary edition, collector's items (but even that is doubtful). But there is already an F-mount 24mm/f1.8 AF-S, although an FX lens.

Please keep in mind that the new DX 24mm/f1.7 has a plastic mount. It is very much a consumer-grade lens.

[conrad_hoffman]

It would make no economic sense for Nikon to introduce more F-mount lenses, since their future is Z-mount now. It's not like the F-mount lineup is missing much after all these years. IMO, a small lens like this is just fine with a plastic mount and the whole consumer/pro thing is more about weather sealing focus performance and optical quality. A bigger heavier lens, yeah, I want metal! I'm not a DX user but it seems like a very appealing lens. 

[ilkka_nissila]

12 hours ago, conrad_hoffman said:

It would make no economic sense for Nikon to introduce more F-mount lenses, since their future is Z-mount now. It's not like the F-mount lineup is missing much after all these years. IMO, a small lens like this is just fine with a plastic mount and the whole consumer/pro thing is more about weather sealing focus performance and optical quality. A bigger heavier lens, yeah, I want metal! I'm not a DX user but it seems like a very appealing lens. 

I think Gary was just wishing Nikon had made one at an earlier time (i.e. when DX DSLRs were a new thing). I too wished they had made a fast wide angle prime for DX. Probably Nikon didn't do that because were prioritising FX for wide angle and low light work, as it was better suited for those tasks, and also an F-mount DX 24/1.7 would have been much larger than the one that is now available for mirrorless.

 

It'll be interesting to see if Nikon produce more DX primes. There is still a lot of people for whom FX is too expensive and/or who would prefer even smaller cameras. Fuji does make an APS-C system with a dedicated line of lenses that are optimized for that sensor size, but Nikon has some technological advantages (better AF, Bayer sensors) and for people who like Nikons for the user interface, colors etc. or even just the way Nikon lenses render images. Although I use FX, I think for most practical uses of photography, DX would be sufficient if supported with similar lineups of lenses and technology as FX cameras have. FX is better for low light and overall image quality but a lot of people only use a fraction of that image detail that they record in the final use of the images or videos. For example it seems really at odds with common sense that Nikon says that (online social media) content creators etc. are driving ILC camera sales, and then those images and videos are posted (on instagram) with a 1080 pixel width limitation. It makes no sense at all to buy expensive equipment and then only use it to publish images on such a constrained platform.

[mike_halliwell]

2 hours ago, ilkka_nissila said:

 

It'll be interesting to see if Nikon produce more DX primes.

They do seem to have stopped with the Lens Roadmap. Nothing much has been added in quite a while.

There are still lenses due, but nothing else.....eg. 200 (180?) - 600mm is due, some would say overdue. 

I'm guessing they might have a high res DXZ model to semi-compete with the birders and wildlife shooters who've gone M4/3.

The D500 had extra reach, regarding pixels on target, until the D850 came along.

[ShunCheung]

3 hours ago, mike_halliwell said:

They do seem to have stopped with the Lens Roadmap. Nothing much has been added in quite a while.

Nikon, like many other cameras, do not like to reveal their future plans and products. When the Z system was new without too many lenses back in 2018, Nikon had to assure their customers that plenty of new lenses would be available, such that it was safe to buy into the Z system, unlike Nikon 1. Now that the Z system is 5 years old and plenty of lenses are already available. Perhaps there is no need for that roadmap any more.

I hope there will be a Z-mount fisheye and some tilt-shift lenses, and some people want a 70-200mm/f4 VR, etc. The old pace Nikon had for the F mount was about 5, 6 new lenses a year.

[mike_halliwell]

46 minutes ago, ShunCheung said:

I hope there will be a Z-mount fisheye and some tilt-shift lenses, and some people want a 70-200mm/f4 VR, etc

Resurrect the old 200mm f4 macro?  2nd hand prices are still crazy!

or maybe update and licence the Sigma 180mm f2.8 OS 1:1 macro into Z Mount ?

[ilkka_nissila]

5 hours ago, mike_halliwell said:

They do seem to have stopped with the Lens Roadmap. Nothing much has been added in quite a while.

There are still lenses due, but nothing else.....eg. 200 (180?) - 600mm is due, some would say overdue. 

I'm guessing they might have a high res DXZ model to semi-compete with the birders and wildlife shooters who've gone M4/3.

The D500 had extra reach, regarding pixels on target, until the D850 came along.

They added a fast 35, an 135, etc. I don't there is any sign of Nikon slowing down lens development.

 

But the roadmap is not really needed any more. In the beginning they needed the roadmap to assure customers that lenses would come but now most things are already there, so they could just announce new lenses when they are ready. But the roadmap could be a useful marketing tool. The problem with it is that sometimes people won't buy lenses that are already available (even if they are suitable for the task), instead they wait for some future lenses on the roadmap. That's not good for Nikon if it happens. E.g. I am guessing that if Nikon had not placed the 200-600 on the roadmap, a lot more people might have purchased the 100-400 or 400/4.5 + 1.4x. (This is just an example, and I'm not saying it is what happened, but there is a risk of lost or post-poned sales when there is too much pre-announced.)

Edited June 5, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[conrad_hoffman]

1 hour ago, mike_halliwell said:

Resurrect the old 200mm f4 macro?  2nd hand prices are still crazy!

or maybe update and licence the Sigma 180mm f2.8 OS 1:1 macro into Z Mount ?

I don't know anything about the 200mm f/4 macro. Was the optical design anything like the inexpensive 200mm f/4 AiS tele?  I had one for maybe 40 years and never took a single decent image with it. No pop.

[mike_halliwell]

12 minutes ago, conrad_hoffman said:

Was the optical design anything like the inexpensive 200mm f/4 AiS tele

Very different beast entirely!

It would seem production ran to 2020..

http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html#200Micro

[ilkka_nissila]

59 minutes ago, conrad_hoffman said:

I don't know anything about the 200mm f/4 macro. Was the optical design anything like the inexpensive 200mm f/4 AiS tele?  I had one for maybe 40 years and never took a single decent image with it. No pop.

Well, no. 13 elements in 10 groups in the 200 AF Micro, whereas the Ai-S 200/4 has five elements in five groups.

 

Plenty of pop in images from the 200 Micro. Shallow depth of field in this case unfortunately:

 

With focus stacking, however, at least static subjects can be sharp:

 

[ShunCheung]

1 hour ago, conrad_hoffman said:

I don't know anything about the 200mm f/4 macro. Was the optical design anything like the inexpensive 200mm f/4 AiS tele?  I had one for maybe 40 years and never took a single decent image with it. No pop.

The AF-D version of the 200mm/f4 macro can natively focus to 1:1, and that is still the latest version. There has never been any AF-S 200mm macro.

[ben_hutcherson]

I've watched on and off for a 200mm Micro for a while, as it's supposed to be outstanding. ~$900 seems to be the going rate-quite telling for an AF-D lens to still be that pricey IMO-and even though I'm certainly not averse to spending that much on a lens it's been a lot of back and forth for me to see it makes sense for me for that particular lens.

I LOVE the 105mm f/2.8D Micro. In fact in actual macro use I tested it a fair bit along side the AF-S VR version I briefly owned and found the D lens better from about 1:4 on down(although I might be tempted to try it again since IIRC the D850 can do automated focus stacking with AF-S lenses although I could be confusing that with a different camera). If the 200mm f/4D is even equal to the 105mm, I know I would be extremely pleased with the results. My problem is that the 105 is often snug for me in my typical studio macro situation, and even down to 1:1 I don't normally find the lens getting in my way or obstructing the light(that is a real problem with the 60mm f/2.8D and every other ~50mm macro lens I've used).

I know that's drifting far from the original topic of the thread, though. To me dedicated DX lenses are a good thing for times where I want a small and light kit, even though for someone who shoots FX and DX side by side there's also a good argument against dedicated DX lenses. Going back around again, that's why I settled on Fuji for small and light, and am continuing to use F mount for everything else.

[mike_halliwell]

What's known about the 70-180mm ?

It's kinda assumed to be a Tamron relabel.

Maybe it's the original Nikon zoom macro of the same FL updated to Z mount?

🙂

[roland_vink]

I would be very surprised if the 70-180 is not a Nikon version of the Tamron lens. On the roadmap it is shown on the same line as the NIkon/Tamron 17-28 and 28-75 lenses which suggests the same connection. If Nikon did resurrect their old 70-180 macro, I am sure it would have a new optical design which takes advantage of the new Z-mount, it would be an S-line lens, and it would be listed in the macro section and not with the zooms.

[mike_halliwell]

10 hours ago, roland_vink said:

If Nikon did resurrect their old 70-180 macro, I am sure it would have a new optical design which takes advantage of the new Z-mount, it would be an S-line lens, and it would be listed in the macro section and not with the zooms.

Maybe they're just holding their cards close to their chest, so to speak, keeping the competition in the dark?

Or maybe not!

☹️

Edited June 6, 2023 by mike_halliwell