Guidenet: This is another killer bargain to go with the 35 f/1.8, 50 f/1.8, 40 f/2.8 Micro and the 85 f/3.5 Micro. Nikon is doing a wonderful job of designing and producing world class optics at very reasonable prices.
I knew or hoped they'd not jack up the price of this new 85 f/1.8 portrait lens. It should blow off the shelves if you don't already have a fast 85.
Guidenet, I wouldn't call Nikons lenses world class. They're a little too distorted for that. Also, their older lenses are cheaper, except maybe the 35mm 1.8G.
I also get frustrated that my prime lenses get a lot of shake at night. They need VR in the body to complement their primes lenses.
Fullframer, I'm not shooting sports/action. I'm shooting slow shutter speeds at night. Maybe nikon should get rid of all VR since proper hand holding technique is so easy that you don't need it, and we all know that what you want is all that matters.
Does internal focusing mean it focus breathes and therefore it'll look bad for video?
Deleted17: On paper it looks like it will be sharper than the 85 1.4, and the 50 1.4. It's almost flat across at 90. It probably has the same sluggish af-s as those lenses, making it weak for indoor sports...
I was using a 35mm f1.8G on a D70 and it seemed really sluggish on that. Have to stop down for more DOF to make up for the inferior focusing.
blacksnoopy: The price is ok
The price shouldn't be over $400 in my opinion. Canon's isn't. I might just get one of those bower things.
acktown: Great news from Nikon! They are setting a new standard for quality glass at great prices.
It's not hard to set standards when you have a monopoly. The new standard seems to be more expensive lenses with tons of distortion and no in-body stabilization, albeit, sharper wide open. Oh yeah, and lots of crappy DX cameras with convoluted menus instead of buttons, oh, and accompanied by a bunch of plastiky inferior DX zooms. Don't get me wrong, I have all of them, I'm just disappointed and wish I could trade it all for the equivalent sony gear.
Pabloquiga: This is the great news for my d7000 and d5100, ah and clear for my short budget
It's also great news for jello shots and blur.
vladextron: The 85 should be a very very good and affordable lens. Now...when the 20-24 1.8 to complete the "g" series ?Bye all.Paolo.
Why would the comparable lens be f2.8? They have a 24mm f1.4. Why not a 1.8? And sigma has 20, 24 and 28mm f1.8 lenses. Bower even makes a 35mm f1.4, and out of metal. it's manual focus but it's better and you could buy several of them over the crazy prices of nikons f1.4 lenses.
Chaitanya S: very aggresively priced
Isn't the canon 85mm f1.8 $100 cheaper though?
Oveerik: What about image stabillizers? SONY has them on all lenses I put on the cameras (A900-A77)! No stabilizer is stone age!
My NIKON stays at home (D700, 20,24,35,50,55,85,105,135,180mm all whithout stabilizer)!
bridav, slow shutter speeds are something that come up a lot in photography, that's why Nikon added VR to their lenses. If online blogs are correct, it seems like VR is sharper than a bright prime lens, because primes have no VR. I hate zooms but one day I bumped my camera and shot an event with slow shutter speeds by mistake and all the shots were blurry. Yet the majority of the ones shot with the kit lens were stable.
Taking a modern day technology away from the camera reserving it for only darker zoom lenses keeps prime lenses in the stone ages of technology. Why waste your time with interchangeable lenses when they have to be all zooms? Just get a super zoom with attached sharp lens. An 85mm will just produce a lot of shaky images and jello video anyway.
joekack951, Nikon put VR in a 16-35mm but you ask what good it is? It let's you take shots at slower shutter speeds, without a tripod. That's what it's good for. Duh. No one wants to carry a tripod around when a better technology has been around forever but that Nikon refuses to put in their camera. It needs to be INSIDE the camera. What good is an 85mm prime lens anyway, especially for video and night photography, and especially on DX. Do you know how shaky that video is going to be? My whole collection is prime lenses and I get a ton of blurry pictures at night, including with a 20mm f1.8. People are always saying "Wow, you sure take a lot of pictures." It's just NOT acceptable in this day and age to tell people to carry a tripod around to use an 85mm lens or to get rid of their whole lens collection and replace it with a bunch of darker zoom lenses. Meanwhile all point and shoots have had face tracking and VR and you name it. A DSLR is supposed to be better than a G12 or super zoom.