Previous news story    Next news story

Nikon creates 18.5mm F1.8 fast prime lens for 1 system mirrorless cameras

By dpreview staff on Sep 13, 2012 at 04:00 GMT
Buy on GearShop$186.95

Nikon has announced the 1 Nikkor 18.5mm F1.8 fast 'normal' prime lens for its 1 system mirrorless cameras. The 18.5mm lens offers a field of view equivalent to that of a 50mm lens on a full-frame camera. Its wide maximum aperture makes it easier to get the most out of the 1 system cameras in low light and to produce shallow depth-of-field images. The lens will be available in black, white or silver, at a cost of around $189.95.

Jump to:


Press Release:

NEW 1 NIKKOR 18.5MM F/1.8 OFFERS NIKON 1 SYSTEM SHOOTERS COMPACT PERFORMANCE AND CREATIVE CONTROL

MELVILLE, N.Y. (September 13, 2012) – Today, Nikon Inc. announced the latest addition to the Nikon 1 system, the compact and lightweight 1 NIKKOR 18.5mm f/1.8, a fixed focal length addition to the 1 NIKKOR family of lenses. The 18.5mm f/1.8 gives Nikon 1 System shooters a fast prime lens that is consistently able to deliver outstanding image quality and sharpness for stills and HD video, whether shooting awe-inspiring landscapes, flattering portraits or documenting the family vacation in glorious HD video.

"Nikon's new 1 NIKKOR 18.5mm offers extremely fast performance alongside the accuracy and image quality that photographers have come to expect from a NIKKOR lens," said Bo Kajiwara, Vice President of Marketing, Planning and Customer Experience, Nikon Inc. "With the continuing expansion of the 1 NIKKOR line of lenses, Nikon is committed to ensuring every moment is captured with tremendous speed and amazing clarity."

1 NIKKOR Speed and Versatility
The 1 NIKKOR 18.5mm f/1.8 prime lens features the popular yet versatile focal length of approximately 50mm (35mm equivalent) and a large f/1.8 aperture, making it ideal for portraiture and everyday shooting. With the large aperture, consumers can create a dramatic depth of field with beautiful image blur, or shoot with confidence in challenging lighting conditions.

Conveniently compact and crafted with eight optical elements in six groups, the 18.5mm fulfills the promise of NIKKOR quality with solid handling and optical excellence. The lens is lightweight, weighing in at a mere 2.5 ounces to further complement the portability of the Nikon 1 System. Seven aperture blades help to create a pleasing circular bokeh for a natural separation between subject and background.

Price and Availability
Compatible with the Nikon 1 J1, J2 and V1, the 1 NIKKOR 18.5mm f/1.8 will be available in early November 2012 in Black, White and Silver and will have a suggested retail price (SRP) of $189.95*. For
more information on this and other 1 NIKKOR lenses and other Nikon products, please visit www.nikonusa.com.

1 Nikkor 18.5mm F1.8 specifications

Principal specifications
Lens typePrime lens
Max Format size1″
Focal length19 mm
Lens mountNikon 1
Aperture
Maximum apertureF1.8
Minimum apertureF11.0
Aperture ringNo
Number of diaphragm blades7
Aperture notesrounded blades
Optics
Elements8
Groups6
Focus
Minimum focus0.20 m (7.87)
Maximum magnification0.12×
AutofocusYes
Motor typeMicromotor
Full time manualUnknown
Distance scaleNo
DoF scaleNo
Physical
Weight70 g (0.15 lb)
Diameter56 mm (2.2)
Length36 mm (1.42)
ColourBlack, White, Silver
Filter thread41 mm
Hood suppliedNo
159
I own it
14
I want it
9
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Nikon 1 Nikkor 18.5mm f/1.8

Comments

Total comments: 116
MEBEE
By MEBEE (Sep 16, 2012)

What shallow depth of field?
At 10 feet this lens gives 3.5 feet DOF and that is nowhere near to being shallow!

1 upvote
magneto shot
By magneto shot (Sep 17, 2012)

...the shallow dof is nowhere near the FF....this is nikon's mistake of using a puny 1" sensor. dream on...

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Oct 29, 2012)

It's about like using a 30mm f3 on APS-C, so not really as dire as you would suggest. It would be similar to an f2.8 standard zoom on APS-C for DOF control.

0 upvotes
Davidgilmour
By Davidgilmour (Sep 16, 2012)

Nice, this will give us J1 owners the same shallow DoF as the full frame 5DMKII with 50mm f1.8! Happy!

0 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Sep 16, 2012)

Not really... It will be an excellent lens, but it will only give you the DOF as a fullf rame 50mm f4.9.

0 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Sep 16, 2012)

Excellent! This is what we have been waiting for. I'll buy one as soon as possible.

2 upvotes
omniuspi
By omniuspi (Sep 16, 2012)

Looks great! Not only is this a nice traditional angle of view, but it's also the fastest lens yet for the 1 Series, which will improve low-light shooting for the family. The shallower DoF is also welcome for helping shoot interesting photos with isolated subjects or suggestive background effects.

Comparing the MTF charts shows the lens is an improvement over the 1 10mm and fairs well against the AF-S 50mm as well. Cheap and small to boot.

This will be a great addition to the 1 Series lenses and I can't wait to start shooting pictures of my family, memorable experiences, and interesting things I see around me, with mine on my V1.

0 upvotes
Wutwut
By Wutwut (Sep 15, 2012)

Yes Nikon, continue to ignore customers with D90s and D7000s who really do need a fast wide prime. *Stomps off to Fuji*

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
simplecameraguy
By simplecameraguy (Sep 21, 2012)

what focal length are you looking for? this lens is a normal prime, not really wide. For DX, nikon users have enjoyed the 35mm/f1.8 since 2009, which gives the same field of view as the CX 18.5mm.

0 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (Sep 15, 2012)

ok and now go for the 50mm f1.2G, my 1.4d is falling apart and i need a new 50 soon

0 upvotes
malcolm82
By malcolm82 (Sep 14, 2012)

This lens barrel is big enough to fit a 25/1 m43 lens. Do they think it looks more professional this big and will sell better for the price? Maybe they realized people will not want to pay this much for a 5 gram lens if it was too obvious so they built this massive barrel around it.

0 upvotes
zapatista
By zapatista (Sep 14, 2012)

If someone bought a v1 with 2 lenses for $900 when the system was introduced....a lot of the current customer base, I'm guessing less than $200 for a good, fast prime is not a huge amount.

0 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Sep 16, 2012)

If $200 for this lens is a lot of money for you then you should get another hobby. Regarding the size, personally I am happy that it is not a tiny pancake.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 13, 2012)

"Nikon creates 10.5mm F1.8 fast prime lens for 1 system mirrorless cameras

Nikon has announced the 1 Nikkor 18.5mm F1.8 fast 'normal' prime lens for its 1 system mirrorless cameras. The 18.5mm lens offers a field of view equivalent to that of a 50mm lens on a full-frame camera."

Looks like it is a nifty new zoom lens from Nikon. Apparently it goes from 10.5mm to 18.5mm -- at least, the title states one focal length, the text another. The photo shows "18.5mm," so maybe it's that?

A bit confusing, nonetheless.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
3a
By 3a (Sep 15, 2012)

DPR. please correct it :)

0 upvotes
Peanut88
By Peanut88 (Sep 13, 2012)

How on earth can the author get the title wrong ? !
DUH !
It should be 18.5 and not 10.5 mm lens.

2 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Sep 13, 2012)

wait, people actually buy Nikon 1s?

6 upvotes
REShultz
By REShultz (Sep 13, 2012)

People actually read articles about cameras that they wouldn't entertain buying?

7 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 13, 2012)

I'd guess that they do. For the same reasons people read news about the places in the world they will unlikely go to.

6 upvotes
REShultz
By REShultz (Sep 13, 2012)

Ridiculous comparison. Just call it what it is, a poster with nothing better to do than stir things up.

2 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Sep 17, 2012)

Say whatever you want, the Nikon 1 is a stupid camera and most people know this.

2 upvotes
woodrow2
By woodrow2 (Feb 5, 2013)

I got rid of my slr a while back because it always sat at home and also, the shutter sound would scare wildlife. I still wanted fast focusing and when this lens came out I bought a j1 and the 18.5mm. All told I have $600 invested. I just took a 2am walk through the scenic down town area and was easilly able to handheld shots illuminated only with street lights using 800iso. I for one am happy.

0 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (Sep 13, 2012)

"Nikon creates 10.5mm F1.8 fast prime lens for 1 system mirrorless cameras"

So is there a 28mm eqv lens in DP's office somewhere?

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 13, 2012)

10.5, 18.5, or whatever really is focal length -- why bicker about every darn millimeter, folks!?

0 upvotes
Kim Seng
By Kim Seng (Sep 13, 2012)

Lots of hassle about the New 18.5mm f1.8 lens. I love the present 10mm f2.8 lens so this new lens 18.5mm is more than a like. I am enjoying my V1 now and this new edition will be a plus into my new collection. I have just seen the sample of pictures of the new lens in the Nikon Web site with pretty impressive pictures. Most important is that it can take good pictures is all I want. So my next deam lens I hope Nikon will come out with the super telephoto lens 100-400mm so that it can fully auto focus.

2 upvotes
DPhotoWriter
By DPhotoWriter (Sep 13, 2012)

Typo in the title? should be 18.5 not 10.5?!

1 upvote
Deleted1929
By Deleted1929 (Sep 13, 2012)

Nice price - make the J1/V1 more interesting to me anyway.

1 upvote
toughluck
By toughluck (Sep 13, 2012)

In terms of DOF, it's a 50/9 equivalent, so good luck trying to get meaningful defocusing. It should have been f/1.2 or f/0.9 for the size -- while it would still have poor defocusing control, it would have been much better.

Also: Why is the lens and the bodies so huge? Sony just released RX1 which, lens included, is thinner than this lens is long. Not to mention huge N1 bodies.

1 upvote
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Sep 13, 2012)

How did you arrive at f/9?

0 upvotes
Deleted1929
By Deleted1929 (Sep 13, 2012)

It's actually equivalent to about f4.8 on full frame, which is fine. About f3.5-ish on crop frame.

1 upvote
bradleyg5
By bradleyg5 (Sep 13, 2012)

You take the crop factor and apply that many stops. so 2.7x crop is roughly 2 2/3 stops you add to the aperture to get your depth of field. go to the 1/3 stop scale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number

So 50mm F/4.5 in terms of angle of view and depth of field. BUT NO that does not mean light transmission changes, it's still the same intensity of light regardless of crop.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Sep 13, 2012)

@bradley: nice explanation, seemingly many people entering comments here should read this in order not to blame themselves by their comments. ;-)

0 upvotes
JensR
By JensR (Sep 13, 2012)

> So 50mm F/4.5 in terms of angle of view and depth of field. BUT NO that does not mean light transmission changes, it's still the same intensity of light regardless of crop.

Intensity of light doesn't really matter, because it ignores the area over which this intensity is applied.
Better way to look at it:
This lens lets through to the sensor as many photons per unit of time as a 50/4.5 would on 24x36. These lenses would be equivalent and their images would be indistinguishable.

4 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 13, 2012)

JensR is right. Though the lens is closer to 50 mm f/4.9 full-frame equivalent (since the crop is 2.7, therefore 4.9=1.8*2.7).

For those who will start saying that that's just wrong, just compare the actual apertures 18.5 mm /1.8 = 10.2 mm, and 50 / 4.9 = 10.2 mm. Same angle of view, same effective area of lens to collect the light => same DoF and photonic noise at the same shutter speed on the respective sensors.

1 upvote
wariag
By wariag (Sep 13, 2012)

The smaller effective aperture would mean darker picture (with the same magnification) if it was an objective of the telescope.
With the same magnification and smaller entrance pupil we would have darker image but our eye remains the same.
There we have the smaller aperture BUT the shorter FL and smaller sensor as well, so the area brightness of the image created by 18mm f 1.8 lens shall be the same as with FF equivalent - 50mm f1.8 lens assuming the same light transmission of the optics.
So: such lens would behave as 50mm f 4.9 regarding FOV and DOF, but it would give You the same shutter speed as 50mm f 1.8 FF equivalent - again, assuming the same effective transmission of the lens system inside.
The number of photons passing through the lens in the given time is the light stream (correct unit: lumen) but the image brightness depends on the area covered by this stream (there goes lux unit). And the CX lenses really do not create the same size imaging circle as FF lens :)

0 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 13, 2012)

wariag, you are right, if you collect the same amount of photons on a smaller area the brightness is increased. Duh!.. :-P BUT, and it is an important "but", imagine CX, DX, and FX (in Nikon terms) sensors with the same pixel count, say 10 MP. Then the number of photons **per pixel** will be the same for all these sensors with the respective equivalent lenses on them (18/1.8+CX, 33/3.4+DX, 50/4.9+FX). In other words , regardless of the sensor size such three final images will have been created by the same amount of light per pixel of your final image. I.e. they will have essentially the same image (photonic) noise, provided similar sensor efficiencies (which, for the sensors of the same generation is true regardless of their size).

2 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 13, 2012)

In other words even though the "ISO" will be different (because of the way it is defined), provided the same shutter speed at the appropriate respective ISOs the equivalent lens/sensor combinations (e.g. 18/1.8+CX, 33/3.4+DX, 50/4.9+FX) will give you essentially identical images in terms of image noise, DoF, AoV ( and also diffraction effects ).

2 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 13, 2012)

All the intricate technical comments in this entry will make me take so much better photos and videos, it's not even funny!

0 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 13, 2012)

They could (and are intended to) indeed help you chose better tools for the job.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 55 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
malcolm82
By malcolm82 (Sep 13, 2012)

Not only is this lens equivalent to 50mm f/4.9 but you can actually use this exact lens on a full frame sensor with the exit pupil of the lens 2.7x the distance from the sensor surface as it is on a nikon 1 body. This will give you a 50mm f/4.9 macro lens. So does the lens magically capture more light by using it on a smaller sensor?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
malcolm82
By malcolm82 (Sep 13, 2012)

This lens would make a great macro lens when used reversed on a 5x4 large format camera. It would be an F/17 and image a 12.8x9.6mm area with the same image quality as you get using this lens on the 1 system for normal photography.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
wariag
By wariag (Sep 14, 2012)

malcolm82, there is no magic but just laws of physics.
And You have answered Your own question talking about using CX lens as FF macro lens.
CX lens is calculated to cover CX format sensor with it's imaging circle. When You use it as a macro lens You must put it further from the sensor so Your focus point is close to the lens and the imaging circle grows. The amount of light collected by the lens is the same, but the area which must be illuminated grows.
You can use medium format lens on 35mm camera without light loss (you are just cropping the centre part of the imaging circle), but You cannot do the same in opposite direction.
That's connected:register distance, frame format, aperture.

ppastoris:
Lenses are just lenses, and are as effective as they are intended to be, regarding frame format they are intended for.
But I see that we are now talking about sensor - so our 10megapixel 2,7x crop CX format sensor has "pixel efficiency" compared to 27megapixel full frame sensor - right? :)

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
malcolm82
By malcolm82 (Sep 14, 2012)

I did not ask any question. I was illustrating equivalence by pointing out that not only are small format lenses equivalent to higher F larger format lenses but they are actual higher F lenses when used on the larger formats as a macro lens. Equivalence is about total exposure or amount of light captured and not light density which is irrelevant.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
malcolm82
By malcolm82 (Sep 14, 2012)

"You can use medium format lens on 35mm camera without light loss (you are just cropping the centre part of the imaging circle), but You cannot do the same in opposite direction."
You are cropping the lens which means you are losing light obviously... What do you think is happening to all that light not hitting the small sensor? It is not being put to very good use is it?

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
malcolm82
By malcolm82 (Sep 14, 2012)

Why do so many people seem to think that the goal of low light image quality is to expose at the lowest possible ISO setting? Would you rather use a Nikon 1 camera with the lens at F/1.2 exposing ISO 1600 than a full frame with lens at F/2.4 exposing ISO 6400? Guess which picture will be better?

1 upvote
wariag
By wariag (Sep 14, 2012)

First, I was wrong with the sensor pixel count equivalent, for full frame equivalent of Nikon 1 sensor it shall have ~74 megapixels ;)
malcolm82 - sorry, but You are wrong in the matter of light loss
with medium format camera used on 35mm.
"The focal length and apertures on a medium format lens adapted down to 35mm format remain the same as when used on a medium format camera. There is no light loss since the actual film to lens diaphragm distance remains the same. A tele-extender (or extension tubes) will alter the film to lens diaphragm distance, thus there is a light loss resulting in a change in f/stop. This is not the situation with a medium format to 35mm lens adapter. An 80mm medium format lens remains 80mm when used on a 35mm format. A 200mm medium format lens adapted to 35mm is still a 200mm. "
citation from:
http://www.shutterbug.com/content/mix-and-matchbradapters-using-lenses-different-camera-bodies
also see:
http://www.physicsinsights.org/simple_camera_brightness_1.html

0 upvotes
malcolm82
By malcolm82 (Sep 14, 2012)

"You are cropping the lens which means you are losing light obviously... What do you think is happening to all that light not hitting the small sensor? It is not being put to very good use is it?"

Does it look like i was talking about a reduction in light intensity to you?

0 upvotes
malcolm82
By malcolm82 (Sep 14, 2012)

JensR and ppastoris also explained it is not about light intensity and yet you keep going on about it as if we are saying small format lenses have a reduced light intensity for the same F-number? Did you read what they are saying at all?

Equivalent focal length= focal length multiplied by crop factor
Equivalent F = F multiplied by crop factor
Equivalent iso = iso multiplied by crop factor squared

Did you read this:
"Would you rather use a Nikon 1 camera with the lens at F/1.2 exposing ISO 1600 than a full frame with lens at F/2.4 exposing ISO 6400? Guess which picture will be better?"

1 upvote
toughluck
By toughluck (Sep 14, 2012)

I just reran DoF calculations with CoC in mind -- indeed, the correct aperture regarding DoF, assuming the same resolution, is f/4.8.
I stand corrected

0 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 14, 2012)

Hey, wariag ( Варяг? ;)), what is it that either not yet clear to you or what do you disagree with? I could not quite figure it out from your last few messages.

What me, malcolm82, and JensR are explaining in this forum thread is that a better way to compare lenses used with light sensors of varying sizes is to use the "equivalent focal length" and "equivalent F-numbers" which for a given lens+crop sensor combination give the focal length and F-number of a lens which on a full-frame 135 format sensor has the same angle of view, produces exactly the same depth of field, and collects the same total amount of light as the said crop lens. It can be shown, that light itself "carries" intrinsic noise that the sensor (could be film by the way) simply captures (see Wiki on photonic/shot noise). The sensors do add to this noise, but it can be shown that the noise in midtones (the one that most people are interested in) is determined mainly by photonic noise captured by the sensor.

2 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 14, 2012)

..therefore since the "equivalent" lenses capture the same amount of light within a given time on their respective sensors the photonic noise is the same, and in turn the midtone noise of the captured image is the same (+- about half a stop for sensors of the same generation).

In short, the point is that thinking about 18 f/1.8 lens on a 2.7x crop sensor as an equivalent of 50 f/4.9 on a full-frame sensor gives you exact correspondence between DoF and AoV, as well as puts you within about +-0.5EV in terms fo what the noise in your final images taken by 18 f/1.8 on CX will look like compared to FX. Thinking about 18 f/1.8+CX as 50 f/1.8+FX achieves none of those goals except for AoV, and just confuses you about DoF and low-light capabilities of the small camera.

3 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 14, 2012)

I think what most people do not realize is that the noise is already present in the light that creates the image. Sensors simply capture that noise, amplifying midtones noise to approximately the same degree irrespective of pixel size or the manufacturer. DxOMark webpage has a good intro article on that, called “Essential characteristics of noise” if you are curious to learn more.

1 upvote
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Sep 16, 2012)

toughluck: Obviously math is not what you are best at...

0 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (Sep 13, 2012)

It should be 18.5/1.2

2 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Sep 13, 2012)

1 is the system that Nikon shot themselves in the foot with.

Everytime they release something about 1...

They blast themselves in the foot again... with a shotgun, bazooka, RPGs...

They will soon be a crippled bloody mess if they don't ditch this silly 1 thingy...

.

4 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (Sep 13, 2012)

no its not about ditching the 1" sensor, but giving it a weathersealed pro body, and make it way smaller, why does a 1" camera have to be bigger than a m3/4 ?

just make a ricoh grd/ pentax Q style body.

and also dont include functions like motion shot or how its called, before you dont include normal functions like timelapse double exposure and so on

3 upvotes
toughluck
By toughluck (Sep 13, 2012)

I agree about making the 1 more attractive, but double exposure is quite pointless in digital. Once you do the double exposure, you can't play with mixing the two or performing any actions, adjusting levels, or applying filters which would only affect one of the exposures.

1 upvote
T_O_M_E_K
By T_O_M_E_K (Sep 13, 2012)

Any additional feature you have in your disposal helps you become that much more creative. You are the photographer and camera is your tool. The more tools you have the easier it is to create something new and interesting right out of the camera.

My favorite double exposure technique is photographing same object with one frame being in focus and another slightly out of focus. That soft and dreamy effect it creates reminds me of paintings.
It is so much easier and faster to do it on your camera’s LCD screen than in post.
It is all about trying new things and in camera double exposure lets me do just that.

0 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Sep 16, 2012)

Rubbish.

0 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (Sep 13, 2012)

Won't save a dying format - Nikon please stop digging that hole and ditch the 1 series - your capable of so much better. Roll on the 2 Series - YES - it WILL happen - just you wait and see.

1 upvote
technofan
By technofan (Sep 13, 2012)

Samples can be seen via google image
search....

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (Sep 13, 2012)

@DPReview Why the title of the news says 10.5mm??

0 upvotes
aleckurgan
By aleckurgan (Sep 13, 2012)

this barrel looks a bit too big for those tiny lenses inside.

1 upvote
Anonymous Gerbil
By Anonymous Gerbil (Sep 13, 2012)

It seems to me that they should be doing something a little more bold with their lenses, since the sensor will not be attracting that much attention. Image stabilization would have been a good way to set themselves apart, or a larger aperture.

2 upvotes
lmtfa
By lmtfa (Sep 13, 2012)

The N1V1 breaks my heart. I bought into this system with blinders on thinking that it's Nikon and would perform like my other Nikons, great! It hasn't and never will. It took Nikon four years to develope the system, was that because they were waiting for the "B" team engineers to graduate college? Looks to me like it was class project. I make no apologizes for my feelings, not when I see Sony (Nex 6), Olympus and Panasonic manufacturing more advanced cameras. By Nikon putting out a J2 for me that spelled out the death nell for the N1 system. It's going up for sale soon, real soon.

2 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (Sep 13, 2012)

sorry, but one single look at the specs and the body would have tell you what you found out after you bought it

dont blame nikon for that, i mean at the end DO blame them, but not for you buying the crap they produced hehe

they should make their video line with this sensor, its slightly bigger then super16 format, no mirror box etc

just release a sensor that has exactly 1920x1080 pixel, so you dont have to skip lines or do pixelbinning.

1 upvote
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Sep 13, 2012)

I bought the V1 for my wife, but I ended up with it. And I just love it, not with the 10, or the 10-30 on, but with the 30-110, and even better, the AF-S 70-300 VR. Amazing! Lots of bird photographers use their V1, and just love them. Not my ideal for wide shots though, so the 10 and the 10-30 get very little use!

For those shots I use a NEX-5N with a Sigma 19, plus a wide add-on lens.

A few examples of tele shots with the V1, some with a Canon close-up, screw-on converter:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/5376374738/photos/2176210/_dsc8493

I'd love a few added functions on my V1, and I'd love a more sensible arrangement of the buttons, a higher spec sensor, and a normal flash shoe, in addition the one supplied today, but other than that, I am pleased as punch!

3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 13, 2012)

"they should make their video line with this sensor, its slightly bigger then super16 format, no mirror box etc. just release a sensor that has exactly 1920x1080 pixel, so you dont have to skip lines or do pixelbinning."

Agreed. Wouldn't that be nice? It probably will never happen, though. Too much vested interests to the contrary all over the place.

"I bought the V1 for my wife, but I ended up with it. And I just love it.... Not my ideal for wide shots though."

Yeah, that would be the understatement of the year, Tord. Your whole "system" cannot provide a perspective wider than the equivalent of a 27mm FF 135 lens. Not by using Nikon Series 1 lenses, at least.

I guess it's a bird-cam and sport-cam, that's about it, right?

0 upvotes
Najinsky
By Najinsky (Sep 13, 2012)

Lol, I thought it was just a case of excitement for the RX1, but now it seems a more likely explanation is maybe you guys are just partying like rockstars at Photokina. That's more like it!

Title should be 18.5 not 10.5, also what's the Maximum Magnification under focus (is it just the 2.7X crop of the sensor?), and what about the zoom method, does that mean it extends at power on (would be strange as making it telescopic would presumable have allowed it to be a lot thinner)?

1 upvote
technofan
By technofan (Sep 13, 2012)

This is BEGGING for VR!! Has it got it?? Don't give with one hand only to take away with the other! VR? Please?

1 upvote
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (Sep 13, 2012)

come on ... vr is overrated, no one needs that exept in teles

2 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Sep 16, 2012)

You don't seem to be familiar with Nikon primes... No 50mm or any of the equivalent lenses has VR.

0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Sep 13, 2012)

Like everything in life this lens can be viewed at from different sides: on one hand it is a welcome addition to poor Nikon 1 lens offer, both the speed and the standard focal lens are fine and make it the best lens choice for the 1 system. On the other hand, taking into account tha latest releases in CSC segment, Nikon 1 with it´s tiny 1" sensor seems even more funny and cannot be taken as a serious camera (especially when the prices are similar to much larger-sensored CSCs). And adding a first serious lens after the second generation (J2) was introduced seems a bit late. However I would still not erite the Nikon 1 off, with some price drop and some new lenses it may still be an interesting alternative to enthusiast compacts like LX7, EX2 or X10.

3 upvotes
JacquesBalthazar
By JacquesBalthazar (Sep 13, 2012)

The whole debate, and associated negativity, around Nikon 1 format/range is quite odd to me. It is what it is and does quite a few things very well. I find it better than anything else that I have tried with that type of footprint in terms of reactivity, speed and AF performance. It is really cool in terms of "capturing the moment", especially when things are moving around. The 1" sensor performs really well, and the increased DoF is a blessing in many cases. It is a great step up from "compact" sensors, not a replacement for FF, APS or even m4/3.
It is also a fantastic focal length "mutiplier", bringing very good quality for angles of view that were only achievable with super expensive or superbad tele alternatives, especially when you bolt on Nikkor AFS lenses/zooms: the 100mmm f2.8 VR macro becomes an extremely good 270mm f2.8 VR macro for example!
Inversely there is low capability on the WA side. The interfaces, etc, could be improved. But the system is far from a dud overall.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 13, 2012)

"there is low capability on the WA side...."

Oh, yeah. Your fisheye, ultra-wide, and wide angle perspectives will all have on thing in common:

10mm = 27mm wide in FF 135 terms.

But for birds and sports, this is indeed a great system!

0 upvotes
Waldman Jordaan
By Waldman Jordaan (Sep 13, 2012)

Well done Nikon - the classic 50mm. It should be very usable, even wide open. The pricing is spot on too. I'm sure this lens will sell like hot cakes. :)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
iudex
By iudex (Sep 13, 2012)

Yes, this is the first lens for Nikon 1 that makes sense.

3 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 13, 2012)

I think the two kit zooms make sense, just not the big superzoom and the slow 10mm prime.

0 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (Sep 13, 2012)

Too little, too late...

4 upvotes
Nic Walmsley
By Nic Walmsley (Sep 13, 2012)

is the consensus now that the small sensor of system 1 was a mistake, given what is happening with the competition?

2 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 13, 2012)

Finally! Should have launched with this instead of the silly 10mm f2.8.

5 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Sep 13, 2012)

The 10 mm/2,8 is definitely a mistake that makes no sense.

6 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (Sep 13, 2012)

yeah but to have the equivalent max aperture for this lens shouldnt you stop it down 2.6 stops?

so wouldnt that 1.8 lens be a ~f5 lens ? and the 2.8 an f6? so there are not that many differences i guess, besides the f2.8 beeing sharper i guess

0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Sep 13, 2012)

f1,8 and f2,8 is the same difference of 1,33 EV no matter the sensor size. So it is a huge difference.
P.S. Do you guys calculate FF DOF equivalence even when talking about APS-C sensored cameras? Because I never read complaints that a f2,8 lens for APS-C is slow, only f4,8 equivalent (and this f1,8 on 2,7crop is f4,5 on FF).

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 13, 2012)

It gets a bit tiresome to read all the equivalency because it's not like it matters all that much once you own a camera that this fits on. All that matters is it's the first fast lens for CX and it is a nice focal length.

Everybody likes that pesky Sony RX100 with it terrible f4.9-13.4 zoom lens.

3 upvotes
Yves P.
By Yves P. (Sep 13, 2012)

Your title is wrong, not a 10.5, an 18.5 mm

4 upvotes
Suhas Sudhakar Kulkarni
By Suhas Sudhakar Kulkarni (Sep 13, 2012)

The title says "Nikon creates 10.5mm F1.8 fast prime lens"
But the details are about 18.5mm
Did they announce two lenses?

4 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Sep 13, 2012)

More expensive than 50mm 1,8. Nikon always like that, overrated overpriced product LOL

4 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 13, 2012)

miniaturization is never cheap.

2 upvotes
MichaelEchos
By MichaelEchos (Sep 13, 2012)

Not when the apertures are also decreased. This lens should be 3 times cheaper.

2 upvotes
Florent Chev
By Florent Chev (Sep 13, 2012)

Brand New product more expensive that an old classic sold by dozens of thousands… such LOSERS!

2 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 13, 2012)

That's right, how much would you guys pay for 50mm f/4.9 full frame lens? Cause that's what this 18.5/1.8 essentially is :).

It would be a lot more interesting, had it been 18.5 f/1.0 or at least f/1.2 so that it was at least comparable to a full-frame 50 f/2.7-3.2. A small camera with excellent autofocus of Nikon 1 and the low light and DoF capabilities of 18.5/1.0-1.2 lens could have actually been quite interesting.

5 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (Sep 13, 2012)

@ppastoris: exactly, thats what i was wondering too

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 13, 2012)

Okay, but it is also an 18mm f1.8. Since we want to compare everything to full frame, a 18mm f1.8 for full frame would cost a bazillion dollars. At some point the comparisons become meaningless because it isn't the same.

And besides, we know what a FF camera this size would cost, and it isn't $500+$200 lens.

1 upvote
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 13, 2012)

tkbslc, 18mm f1.8 full-frame lens would also have 2.7x larger imaging circle, and just to get that in perspective, that's 7x larger by the area. All in all this lens is designed to give the same angle of view as 50mm full-frame lens, or 33mm APS-C lens, or 25mm (m)4/3. It makes much more sense to compare this lens + its respective camera to 50 f/4.9 + full-frame, 30 f/3.5 + APS-C, or 25 f/2.4 + (m)4/3.

1 upvote
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 13, 2012)

inevitable crafts studio , I'm guessing (and it's just a guess) that it turns out to be still too expensive to make high-quality f/1.0-1.2 lenses even with the benefit of a small imaging circle of a 2.7x crop. Also such a lens may be quite large and heavy b/c of the extra elements required to fix aberrations that come with the low F-numbers, negating the benefit of a small sensor/short focal length.

All in all, with the sensor prices falling I would guess that the industry will move towards using larger sensors and slower lenses. A good example is the newly announced SONY RX-1.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 13, 2012)

deleted

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 13, 2012)

"Nikon always like that, overrated overpriced product"

WARNING: Canon trolls have been sighted!

0 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Oct 26, 2012)

Why everyone bashing Nikon labelled as Canon troll, ah, those who labeling are Nikon trolls LOL no wonder! @Francis Carver
I use D700 and D7000 at studio and didn't like it, I use iMac at work (studio) and didn't like it more than my Windows PC at home. You are the Nikon troll! I am not Canon fans.

0 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Oct 26, 2012)

@Francis Every single Nikon lens is pricier than Canon counterpart except for a few rare lenses, I don't know, is it because Nikon lenses has some Canon license fee on it or Nikon just greedier than Canon LOL

0 upvotes
JacquesBalthazar
By JacquesBalthazar (Sep 13, 2012)

No VR?

0 upvotes
nosnoop
By nosnoop (Sep 13, 2012)

No IS?
Can't use it for low light video then....

1 upvote
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (Sep 13, 2012)

please tell me your beeing sarcastic, and if not, please tell me how you would put vr in such a tiny lens

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (Sep 13, 2012)

for $190....not bad...

3 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Sep 13, 2012)

More expensive than the full frame lens, LOL

7 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Sep 13, 2012)

Now we are talking. Just 10 more lenses like that and you will catch up to the competition.

6 upvotes
micksh6
By micksh6 (Sep 13, 2012)

They have to make lenses 1 stop faster than micro4/3 lenses to catch up. This had to be F1.0 to catch up with PanaLeica 25mm F1.4.

To DPR: What is "Zoom method - Rotary (extending)" in specs? Focus method, maybe?

6 upvotes
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (Sep 13, 2012)

Let's be realistic here. The Panasonic 25mm F/1.4 is a 540$ lens. The Panasonic 20mm F/1.7 is a 360$ lens. This one is 180$. Apples to oranges.

5 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (Sep 13, 2012)

no its not apples and oranges, its just apples, more expensive ones, and less expensive ones

all three are meant to be a fast prime lens

just because someone charges more doesnt mean everyone else is out of its class

4 upvotes
bg2b
By bg2b (Sep 13, 2012)

The Panasonic 20mm might have a MSRP of $360, but the street price is about $250, or if you're OK with one that someone has split a kit, then $200. The Nikon is likely to sell at MSRP for a while, and it won't have such a 2x price advantage until it drops to around $100-$125.

But in any case, the 20 won't fit on a N1. The real question is still whether Nikon will push the system or not. If they do, I think it's perfectly viable. So far the indications haven't been so good, but this is at least a positive step.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
zebarnabe
By zebarnabe (Sep 13, 2012)

It's good to live in the US >.>

In my country the MSRP is 500€ for the 20mm f/1.7, forget about street price as here the lens isn't sold in any store, you have to order it directly from Panasonic. However, I got it for 315£ (around 400€) from the UK to avoid issues with customs (from US would be cheaper, but customs would make it cost around 600€ after taxes).

Thing is, 50mm f/1.8 Mark II from Canon costs 80~90€, it is a crappy lens (use one, you get what I mean, build quality is far from the best), but for the price it is really, really good.

Nikon 1 System looks good enough, but it is missing the maturity of micro four thirds or the extra quality on the NEX cameras.

This lens is more expensive mainly because it has tighter tolerances in the manufacture process, it has to resolve detail for smaller photosites. The price is right (assuming it performs well) and the lens makes a lot of sense. How much a 18.5mm f/1.8 would cost in FF? Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX DG costs over 500€...

0 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (Sep 13, 2012)

@ bg2b
Where do you live? On eBay the cheapest 20mm f/1.7 is $380.96 w/free shipping and I don't know any camera that have 20mm f/1.7 as kit.

BTW, is X-E1 available in your area for $600?

1 upvote
bg2b
By bg2b (Sep 13, 2012)

Doh! Sorry, my mistake; I was looking at prices for the 14mm.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 13, 2012)

You must be living somewhere in the EU -- world's most expensive place for everything, and most expensive to do business in, period. That may explain the horrendous EU prices in €.

0 upvotes
marzal
By marzal (Sep 14, 2012)

As Nikon are far superior to every other make on the planet, there is NO competition

0 upvotes
Darklings2
By Darklings2 (Dec 14, 2012)

People here saying Nikon1 is crap is like me saying any photographer that cares about FPS is crap and they CBF (continuous burst fire ;) learning the art.

It is merely subjective to my interests.

I have the J1... personally I think it has one of the best Mic setups internally, esp over any DSLR on the market. It handles 6400 with minimal noise, 3200 iso with almost non (iso reduction on but it looks great/ you don't notice any algorithms going on)

I'm actually thinking of buying another to use this lens with on a tripod filming gigs while I do my thing:

https://vimeo.com/54543116

Mostly because the D7000 is horrible in low light, Nikon needs to kill the Red cast in firmware. It is unusable at higher iso's needed at gigs.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 116