Reasons why no Nikon 85mm f1.2?

Started Apr 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
brightcolours
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,868
Like?
No, they do not have "a protective filter"
In reply to cosmicnode, Apr 14, 2013

cosmicnode wrote:

whoosh1 wrote:

Think this is an internet myth.

Grevture wrote:

whoosh1 wrote:

Other than hearsay.

Leonard Migliore wrote:

The mount's not big enough.

There's a discussion here about putting a CPU chip on a 50mm f/1.2 AI-S Nikkor and it was noted that you have to grind a piece off the rear element to get space for the contacts.

Take a look at this image and see how hard it is even with the wider EF mount ...

The rearmost lens element is so large the contacts has to invade into it.

It look's almost as if the rear elements on both lenses are flat. could this be only a protective rear filter which would not actually be the required rear element diameter ?

Neither the 85mm f1.4 D nor the 85mm f1.4 G (AF-S) have a flat slab of glass, bot have a real optical element at the back. So does the Canon 85mm f1.2 L USM (II).

. Nikon has been known to add protective front filters as part of the optical formula of long lenses and the slip in filters are required at all times, effectively the last element. Lenses such as the 300f2.8 and 200-400f4 have these features. Just a thought, I know as much about lens design as most people here.

-- hide signature --

Mike.
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure."

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow