Previous news story    Next news story

In pictures - Nikon's large and pricey AF-S 58mm F1.4G

By Andy Westlake on Oct 17, 2013 at 04:00 GMT
The AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G: a distinctly premium lens
1 2 3 4 5 7

The AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G: a distinctly premium lens

The 58mm F1.4 is not designed as a mass market product. It's aimed at professionals and discerning amateurs, quite likely shooting with a full frame SLR like the 36MP D800 or the new 24MP D610. Users of DX format SLRs should find it works well as short telephoto 'portrait' lens.

[Note that these images were taken at a press event, where we didn't have control over the lighting - hence the magenta and green cast you'll see in some of these shots]

51
I own it
104
I want it
1
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 111
ChristianFLee
By ChristianFLee (5 months ago)

I REALLY like it. Took some test shots and did-up a brief (subjective) review with sample photos (night portraits): http://christianlee.ca/review-nikon-58mm-f1-4g/

1 upvote
Shutterlouse
By Shutterlouse (5 months ago)

Very excited about this lens. For those who don't get it, I can't help them, they don't shoot material that needs it. But the samples I've seen suggest that this is the first lens I've seen for D800 that actually looks like an MF shot. And that makes it cheap in comparison to MF.

0 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (6 months ago)

Well done to Nikon for adding yet another item for me to LUST after. Of course glass like this is meant only for 1: BRAG value. 2: The few photographers who will make full use of it (few - many others will buy but never unbox) this comes close on the heels of my other LUST LENS the new ZEISS. Actually it would make much more sense for me (as I'm primary a Canon user) for Canon to update their 50 1.4 with better glass and IS (YES PLEASE ! ) and it should sell for far far less than the new Nikkor or ZEISS. Of course if Canon really do want to follow with a BRAG lens what about a new improved 50 1.2 L with FASTER AF and IS ? Now that would turn a few heads my friends.....

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
HeyItsJoel
By HeyItsJoel (6 months ago)

I think I read somewhere that 58mm is closer to 'normal' point of view than 50mm. Can someone confirm or deny this?

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
noirdesir
By noirdesir (6 months ago)

The only aspect in which 58 mm is closer to 'normal' is that it is the focal length for which it is the easiest to design a lens on a Nikon F-mount in front of a FF sensor. The reason the Noct was 58 mm was that it was easier to design a high quality lens at 58 mm than at 50 mm.

1 upvote
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (6 months ago)

Normal enough for me... ;-) fits perfectly between 35 and 85.

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (6 months ago)

Conventionally, a 'normal' lens is considered to have a focal length equal to the sensor diagonal - for full frame, that's actually 43mm. So 58mm is obviously further from this than 50mm. Of course, every photographer has their own preference - there's nothing inherently 'right' about choosing 43mm, 50mm, or 58mm.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

there are several boundaries around the term "normal lens"
one important factor is lens design & manufacturing level (wide angles used to be very difficult to make before and it still costs more and performs worse for focal-length < back-focus-distance, among other reasons).

so I agree with noirdesir that a "normal lens" may be better expressed as one of "best cost performance" and this is a major motivation behind "normal premium f/1.4" ... profit.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Paul Guba
By Paul Guba (6 months ago)

Is it me or is this site becoming like yahoo? Why did an article that essentially provide no information need to be 7 pages long.

2 upvotes
HeyItsJoel
By HeyItsJoel (6 months ago)

...and you read all 7 pages of it. :)

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

it's good that we can have much better image quality at f/1.4, now we need much better, much more accurate auto-focus at f/1.4, too.

a hybrid dual-pixel and contrast AF sounds good to me -- mirrorless.
(only a fraction of shots will use contrast AF for self-learning auto micro-adjustment).

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
MikeF4Black
By MikeF4Black (6 months ago)

Just ordered one; trading in the 50 Makro-Planar. The 58 fits in perfectly between 35 and 85.

1 upvote
mgblack74
By mgblack74 (6 months ago)

That's going to look great on my D3s. Because , you know, that's what it's all about. Can't wait to use it too.

0 upvotes
Michel F
By Michel F (6 months ago)

Ok so when is the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART coming out then ?

4 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

I'm also expecting one but 58/1.4 is real now.

0 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (6 months ago)

Why so much empty space inside?

It appears as if it could have been made into a pancake, yet...

1 upvote
Karl Summers
By Karl Summers (6 months ago)

I suppose you could call it a 'built-in hood'?

0 upvotes
Clueless Wanderer
By Clueless Wanderer (6 months ago)

I have a zeiss 50mm makro that has this same super sunken front element. The focusing ring on the zeiss turns somewhere in the region of 300 degrees (guestimation) from start to finish allowing for more accurate manual focussing. ..Going on the look of this lens, maybe it also has that focusing capability, hence the sunken front element.

http://www.amt.tv/zeiss-makro-planar-t-50mm-f-2-zf-2-lens-for-nikon-f-mount-cameras

0 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (6 months ago)

I like the sunk front element, same design as the 50mm f/1.4G, allows me to use it without a filter, and even without a lens hood in some cases (although the larger element here would be more likely to catch flare). Then again, with a $1,700 lens, I'm not sure I'd have the confidence to leave a filter off.

1 upvote
Joseph
By Joseph (6 months ago)

Why do you want to put a low quality UV filter on such a fine lens??

1 upvote
Albino_BlacMan
By Albino_BlacMan (6 months ago)

Why are you assuming the filter is low quality and not a nano-coated B+W filter?

0 upvotes
Karl Summers
By Karl Summers (6 months ago)

I bet this would make an excellent pano lens. I'll wait for some reviews first.

0 upvotes
tornwald
By tornwald (6 months ago)

All the new Nikon lenses are so ugly. and plastic

2 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (6 months ago)

thats for sure no plastic ;)

0 upvotes
Hwirt
By Hwirt (6 months ago)

Nice lens.

1 upvote
rsf3127
By rsf3127 (6 months ago)

Rokkor 58mm 1.4 + adapter + NEX-7(used) = less than 1000 USD

Rokkor 58mm 1.4 + adapter + Sony A7 = the price of this lens alone.

1 upvote
Vladik
By Vladik (6 months ago)

Seriously dude, Nikon had gone berserk! Canon who is insane, selling their Gem of a lens 50mm, 1.2 for 1400$$.

Out of control!

3 upvotes
kirbysdl
By kirbysdl (6 months ago)

So just to be clear, the size of the lens is dictated purely by ergos right? The front element of the lens looks like it's halfway down the length of the lens. The optical formula would probably be achievable in half the size, but they wanted a beefy MF ring and useful distance scale window.

(Don't take this as a flame. I'm just interested in design considerations and trade-offs).

1 upvote
breakingglass
By breakingglass (6 months ago)

Not really. Really fast 50mm lenses are susceptible to flaring. By recessing the front element, the lens architecture creates its own hood.

I use a 55mm f/1.2 a lot, and without a hood attached it can be a pig.

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Scripps23
By Scripps23 (6 months ago)

If Nikon wanted to make this new lens in the tradition of the retired Nikon 58mm "Noct" lens, as its press release states, then it should have made it an f/1.2 lens. To charge almost $1,700 for a 58mm f/1.4 lens when you can buy a Nikon 50mm f/1.4 lens for $439.00 is a joke! This new $1,700 lens will certainly separate the rational photographers from the fools and obessed collectors.

7 upvotes
moizes 2
By moizes 2 (6 months ago)

Agree, with one only fix - 1.4G is not any good, of every respect. CA, coma and geometrical distortions are hunting it. Soft, needs 2-3 clicks. Should 58 be cheaper - why not!

1 upvote
photogeek
By photogeek (6 months ago)

Except Nikon's 50mm f/1.4 only gets sharp by the time it reaches f/2.8, so one could argue it's really a f/2.8 lens by Leica standards.

3 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (6 months ago)

Wow, lets start with the fact that this lens and the Nikon 50 1.4 only share one thing in common.
They are both manufactured by Nikon.

After that, their is no comparison = optically, center to edge performance, color rendition, sagital coma correction, bokeh, micro contrast.

To have a lens go down to 1.2 just to satisfy your sad idea of how wide a lens has to open for it to be worth it for you is not how they design optics.

If this lens performs remotely to the level that they claim.
It will be the best 50 focal range lens other than the Zeiss 1.4 that was just announced at $4000.

BTW the 50 1. 2 Noct was priced at around $1700 20 years back which would be close to double the price of this new lens in todays dollars.

Comment edited 59 seconds after posting
8 upvotes
noirdesir
By noirdesir (6 months ago)

To charge $1700 when Zeiss is only charging $4000 is simply outrageous.

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

the Zeiss lens could be really better if the MTF cures are real.

but even for the same lens design and make, the image quality can be much better if fine tuned (what behind Leica/Zeiss), and there are selected Nikkor lenses for pros.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
aarif
By aarif (6 months ago)

I want a 50mm f1

0 upvotes
Leandros S
By Leandros S (6 months ago)

You might be interested in http://is.gd/RhMDi3

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

give it time, say 10 years.

0 upvotes
falconeyes
By falconeyes (6 months ago)

Well, the Nikon 1.4/58 has 9 elements (2 asph), the Zeiss 1.4/55 has 12 elements (1 asph, 6 ED). The published ZEISS optical MTF figures quote MTF for 40 lp/mm to stay at or above 50% across the entire image field and for *ALL* apertures (before diffraction hits), right into the corners. That's quite stunning and probably not matched by the Nikon.

OTOH, the Nikon has AF, is cheaper and may still be good enough to bring true medium format quality to the D800E. Will be interesting to watch :)

UPDATE:

Looked up MTF figures on Nikon USA website: I was correct, it cannot compete with the ZEISS. Nikon publishes MTF at less challenging 30 lp/mm to be down to 25% in the corners. So wide open, the Zeiss seems to be *much* better in the corners.

The main difference is: the Nikon still is a rather traditional symmetrical design while the ZEISS is a rather challenging retrofocus design.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
sharkcookie
By sharkcookie (6 months ago)

When I shoot in very low light I find it almost impossible to manual focus a fast prime correctly. I have started photography way before the AF times, the concept of manual focusing isn't unfamiliar to me :) But when it comes to shooting in low light, accurate focus at f/1.4 is a hit an miss. Having AF makes an immense difference. You have to keep in mind, and I'm talking about real world shooting here, that the Zeiss can only outperform other lenses when you nail focus. Just a tad off and your $4000 advantage is out of the window. For the kind of work I do, AF is a key factor. That's why for me the Nikon wins. Others have different priorities and shoot other subjects.

9 upvotes
rsf3127
By rsf3127 (6 months ago)

Use focus peaking then.

0 upvotes
nonuniform
By nonuniform (6 months ago)

What focus peaking? You mean the non-existing focus peaking on the D800?

5 upvotes
PatMann
By PatMann (6 months ago)

For what I will use the lens for, live view will work just fine.

0 upvotes
ethanolson
By ethanolson (6 months ago)

May I point out that everyone has missed the boat here. Yes, it works with FF but on an APS-C crop sensor it's coming in at 87mm equivalent... a perfect portrait lens. Also, with coma correction and a 9-bladed aperture it pretty much makes perfect sense in that scenario. Until now, Nikon hasn't had a good answer for portrait on crop sensors.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
Leandros S
By Leandros S (6 months ago)

That was actually stated in the article, http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/10/17/nikon-invokes-spirit-of-noctilux-with-58mm-f-1-4g-premium-lens

3 upvotes
Clueless Wanderer
By Clueless Wanderer (6 months ago)

Maybe Im wrong, but if you got this kind of money for a lens, then you would have enough money to be on FF.

2 upvotes
PatMann
By PatMann (6 months ago)

@clueless - It would cost me about $15k to switch to FX, and it would take a hand truck to carry the gear. Sorry, I like my compact and lightweight system, and this lens will be great for it. I do wish they would bring out a couple of wide primes though - that monster 24mm makes no sense on DX.

0 upvotes
Clueless Wanderer
By Clueless Wanderer (6 months ago)

Ohh... Ahhh.. you got a stack of DX lenses don't you? My bad.

I forgot that when I jumped to FF I had one DX lens and two FF so it was just a case of buying an FF body and selling that one DX lens.

0 upvotes
PatMann
By PatMann (6 months ago)

I have three DX lenses: 12-24, 17-55 and 16-85. Replacing those plus the camera is about half the total, and I don't have an action camera unless I spend a lot more. It's the FX lenses I'd have to replace that will cost the other 2/3. 300 f/4 to 500 f/4, $8,400. 85 1.8 to 135 1.8, $1300. 50 f/1.4 to 85 f/1.4, $1600. 60 f/2.8 to 105 f/2.8, $900. The weight is more than double on all but the 17-55 replacement. My tripod and ball head would also require a major upgrade.

Not gonna happen.

0 upvotes
Prophecies
By Prophecies (6 months ago)

I fail to understand why you'd need to replace your FX lenses if you make the switch to full-frame. You'd just need to sell your DX lenses, no?

0 upvotes
mike kobal
By mike kobal (6 months ago)

sure, this will be a special lens and I would not be surprised if it will perform better then the recently announced 4k Zeiss. Heck, of course it will perform better, much better in fact, it has AF!!!! But people, when where you out shooting last, longing for a 58mm or 55mm lens? I thought so.
Now if this were a 50mm 1.2, I would be standing in line to get one. Don't be fooled and think 55/58mm is close enough to the FOV of a 50mm, it is not.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
moizes 2
By moizes 2 (6 months ago)

That is why I prefer 58 - for its narrower DOF, compare to 50. And yes, Zeiss will be better wide open, color/contrast - out of questions. You get what you pay for. Nikkor will be close to the King as much as possible, in quality, but for the less money. And yes, again, AF is making it all for me, personally. I've no choice, simply like this.

3 upvotes
jadot
By jadot (6 months ago)

Personally, I usually Shoot an 85 1.4 on one body and a 35 1.4 on the other. I'd happily drop the 85 for this Focal Length - it could easily be a replacement for the way I shoot. It could even be more versatile in some situations.
Thanks for your concern, but I'm not 'fooled' into thinking anything other than a 58mm lens is a 58mm FOV.

If I need a 50mm I've got a 1.8 D somewhere - it's an awesome every day lens, but other than that the 35mm takes over the walk around duties.

And I'm more than glad that this was never going to be a 1.2 lens. [Conjecture]: More expense, more weight, less DOF, less IQ, more aberrations. No thanks.

I know people that W**k on about the Canon 1.2 but in reality it's a pig to nail focus on real people in real situations. I'd rather have a 1.4 or even a 1.8 in focus than another file for the trash bin.

1 upvote
jadot
By jadot (6 months ago)

So before you presume that Nikon fluffed an opportunity to make a lens that fits your ideal of the right sounding statistics on a more expensive and exclusive lens, spare a thought for the more grounded of us who actually want the best lens for the job.

If this lens is anywhere close to being as refined as the original Noct Lens, with AF, it's likely going to be the one to beat for some time to come. To me, it's been a long time coming, and 58mm works.

If, however, you just want 50 1.2 (why?) then just get a Mk3 and stick a Canon on it.
Capiche?

1 upvote
Joachim Gerstl
By Joachim Gerstl (6 months ago)

Wow! f1.4!

1 upvote
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (6 months ago)

I'd love to have this lens ...

1 upvote
Zoron
By Zoron (6 months ago)

When Sigma update their 50mm 1.4 Art series with OS....this lens is going down!!

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Lea5
By Lea5 (6 months ago)

Why? Not everybody here is an old man with shakey hands, who needs a stabi-lens.

3 upvotes
Ovarland
By Ovarland (6 months ago)

price, and maybe even better IQ

0 upvotes
moizes 2
By moizes 2 (6 months ago)

To Zoron. Listen, why not? I do not think 50/OS combo is possible, no room, but 55-60 would be nice.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
moizes 2
By moizes 2 (6 months ago)

To Lea5. Not everybody, but some really needs. So, speak for yourself. You already have a choice.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (6 months ago)

When the light gets low enough, everybody is an old man (or woman) with shaky hands.

3 upvotes
Michel F
By Michel F (6 months ago)

Leave the OS out and sell it for less than a grand. That will really hurt the Nikon 58mm.

0 upvotes
Leandros S
By Leandros S (6 months ago)

It allows manual aperture setting on the lens (images 4 and 5)? Or is that just faked for illustration at the press event?

0 upvotes
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (6 months ago)

I see nothing "fake" about any of the images. It's a G-type lens, and therefore has no aperture controls on the lens itself. It's controlled from the camera.

6 upvotes
CarVac
By CarVac (6 months ago)

You can move the aperture by manipulating the lever on the back.

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (6 months ago)

Yes, in image 4 I just pulled the aperture open with the lever.

2 upvotes
Rumle
By Rumle (6 months ago)

I would have loved if anyone with hands on could comment on the build quality and material choice of this lens. also AF speed is something i'd like to know more about.

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (6 months ago)

It's built just like Nikon's other recent primes, such as the 50/1.4. AF speed seemed fine, not blisteringly quick but not horribly slow either. Difficult to get a meaningful feel for this in a few minutes at a press event, though.

5 upvotes
Rumle
By Rumle (6 months ago)

Thanks a lot though.
Too bad, if they wanna create Legends. they should really start manufacture the the lens-bodies so they actually look good in 10-15 years. I mean ditch the plastics.

3 upvotes
Mato34
By Mato34 (6 months ago)

Green/magenta tint from side to side??? You shot with a Nex!! :D

5 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (6 months ago)

Hahahahaha! Well spotted!

1 upvote
xiod_crlx
By xiod_crlx (6 months ago)

the lens could be way more compact without this huge plastic shell

but... it must look BIG for a BIG price... perhaps =)

still, it looks sigma 50\1.4 is even bigger

1 upvote
xiod_crlx
By xiod_crlx (6 months ago)

$1.7k?

more than 50\1.4+105\2 DC or 50+85 1.4 combo?

voigtlander! where is your AF for your $400 58\1.8 ?

0 upvotes
DigitalPlatonist
By DigitalPlatonist (6 months ago)

The front element is deeply recessed. Doesn't that mean they could have made the whole package a lot smaller?

1 upvote
wlad
By wlad (6 months ago)

yes, but it would be unusable without a lens hood

2 upvotes
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (6 months ago)

Indeed that is the reason

1 upvote
EssexAsh
By EssexAsh (6 months ago)

No 3. seriously, how hard would it of been just to give it a wipe.

2 upvotes
epo001
By epo001 (6 months ago)

Hey Mr Magoo, those are reflections. Seriously, how hard would it be to look before making inane comments? Also look at some books on writing English, the word is "have", also questions end with "?".

4 upvotes
LukeDuciel
By LukeDuciel (6 months ago)

The MTF of the Nikon new "noct" has nothing exciting compared to Zeiss Otus 55mm.

Not sure why Nikon built this thing. Probably for the loyal fans?

The Nikon MTF:
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/singlefocal/normal/af-s_nikkor58mmf_14g/index.htm#photo1

Zeiss MTF: http://lenses.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/downloadcenter/datasheets_otus/otus_1455.pdf

2 upvotes
wlad
By wlad (6 months ago)

It has AF.

10 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (6 months ago)

The Nikon clearly has LESS astigmatism according to those MTF charts. The dotted lines track the solid lines very well, unlike the Zeiss charts.

The Zeiss contrast is great for both lines but the resolution lines show quite a lot of astigmatism.

3 upvotes
Peter KT Lim
By Peter KT Lim (6 months ago)

The Zeiss 'World best standard lens' cost 4K no autofocus. The Nikon AFS 58mm cost more than 1K with autofocus. You choose.

8 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (6 months ago)

And than there's 50 f/1.4 which is also brilliant and runs for 290 quid. You choose.

Comment edited 12 seconds after posting
1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

the MTF curves of 55/1.4 are very impressive but we have to see tests to be sure. it's good they can be tested on a same body. also Nikon provide good pro service but not Zeiss or Cosina or Sony.

btw,
nikon 50/1.4 primes are okay lenses, not too good or too bad.

1 upvote
Scorpius1
By Scorpius1 (6 months ago)

Why buy it??it has A.F and weighs only 385grams... and it's less than half the price..

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Joseph
By Joseph (6 months ago)

The AFS 50 1.4G is just a so-so lens (I have owned one).

If this new 58 performs as promised I will seriously consider it - it will be a good complement to my kit.

1 upvote
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (6 months ago)

Where's the market for this lens?
The 50mm costs around €300 This new 58mm lens is about € 1600 and the 85mm sells for €1300,00.

Buy the 50 and the 85 together (perfect companions) and you have two excellent lenses for the same amount as you would buy the 58mm only.....

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Rumle
By Rumle (6 months ago)

make the same argument about Leica lenses. fact is they sell pretty well (for some thing in that price range, that is).

The market is there, believe me.
If the autofocus is not as slow as the 85mm 1.4 and if the buildquality is less flimsy than the 50mm 1.4 then I'd get one right away.

EDIT: also, it doesn't matter if this lens sell well. It's also important to have lenses that cater the high end market.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
GodSpeaks
By GodSpeaks (6 months ago)

To answer your question, I will buy it to use in the studio when shooting natural light. Pricey, yes, but it fills a gap in my lens lineup.

5 upvotes
ScottnLaguna
By ScottnLaguna (6 months ago)

This is supposed to be better than the classic "noct", a lens that sells in the $3500 used range. Dreamy bokeh and resolution to make D800 happy. Sounds worth the money if so. I am glad Nikkor/Nikon shows off in this way. This is going to be a winner.

9 upvotes
samhain
By samhain (6 months ago)

Photos 3,4 & 5 show all kinds of dust specs in the lens (and on the body).

What's up with that? I wouldn't buy a used lens on eBay with all those specs, let alone a new $1700.

That doesn't look good...

0 upvotes
PixelMover
By PixelMover (6 months ago)

What doesn't look good is commenting on posts without reading them first; they clearly stated that these pictures were taken at a press-event. So obvioulsy many people handled these lenses and they got dirty and dust on them. The 'specs' you see in image 3 are actually light point reflections in the glass. Well done for not paying attention to anything and jumping to conclusions. Canon will send you a t-shirt.

20 upvotes
moizes 2
By moizes 2 (6 months ago)

It is kind of special Art - to come and rain on the parade...

0 upvotes
samhain
By samhain (6 months ago)

@pixelmover Yes, I read that. And yes, obviously some are light reflections. But some of those look like they are 'inside' of the glass. Forgive me, I didn't realize that dust specs could get inside of a lens due to it being at a press conference.

If those were the pics of a lens on eBay, would you buy that lens?. I bet you wouldn't..

@moizes2 it was just an observation, not trying to rain on your Nikon parade. I like the lens. If I shot Nikon, I'd get it.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Khun_K
By Khun_K (6 months ago)

stick to Zeiss Apo-Distagon, this is not much different from the old 50/1.4 anyway

2 upvotes
RussellInCincinnati
By RussellInCincinnati (6 months ago)

This is a brilliant idea if the lens is super. Awfully fun to see it compared (or just as well, comparably tested so that we can make up our comparison), as others mention, with the new Zeiss 55/1.8, the Otus Zeiss 50/1.4, the best Leica 50's, the venerable Canon 50/1.4 and the Nikon 50/1.4 G, the Zeiss 50/2 macro and the old Zeiss 50/1.4, Sigma 50/1.4, Sony or Minolta AF 50/1.4, even the new Fuji 56/1.2 APS lens etc.

1 upvote
Zoron
By Zoron (6 months ago)

$1700??....does it come with a $1000 voucher?

0 upvotes
benbammens
By benbammens (6 months ago)

Free D600

1 upvote
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (6 months ago)

Do you demand a $4000 voucher when buying a top $5500 Leica lens?

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (6 months ago)

benbammens - Nikon already dumps that faulty camera from warehouses? ;)

0 upvotes
dgrizzle
By dgrizzle (6 months ago)

Agreed on comparison reviews with Zeiss and any other super lenses out there. What I read about the Otus made a very good case that the DSLR, especially the new breed of extreme resolution sensors, has supplanted medium format, and thus require a new standard of optical design. From that standpoint, and considering the resolution of Nikon's flagship DSLR, lenses of this caliber must be designed and built to an equal standard surpassing anything associated with 35mm film cameras, and thus have to be priced accordingly. This lens, and more like it, are inevitable, and important to secure Nikon's reputation as a pinnacle brand.

2 upvotes
LiveFromPhilly
By LiveFromPhilly (6 months ago)

How fast does it focus? I like my 50mm f/1.4 but it's super slow compared to...well, just about every other lens I've used.

0 upvotes
leschnyhan
By leschnyhan (6 months ago)

Well, it's not cheap, but it's a real bargain compared to the new $4000 Zeiss "Otus" 55mm f1.4. I'd love to see a comparative review that puts these two head-to-head. (And for fun, perhaps a few other new lenses in the same approximate focal length. Perhaps the just-announced 55mm Zeiss f1.8 for the full-frame Sony E-mount, and maybe the updated Leica Noctilux 50.)

4 upvotes
Zoron
By Zoron (6 months ago)

doesn't look special at all....it should come with new design pro looking gold plated special edition bling bling

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Ben Ramsey
By Ben Ramsey (6 months ago)

"doesn't look special at all"

Well, it's not a 150-500 f/2.8...

0 upvotes
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (6 months ago)

Maybe Nikon should hire you as a "pro" designer.

1 upvote
Zoron
By Zoron (6 months ago)

Classic Ben.....

They should Alp...

0 upvotes
mgblack74
By mgblack74 (6 months ago)

Japan

0 upvotes
zombinator
By zombinator (6 months ago)

Where is it made?

1 upvote
Faisalee
By Faisalee (6 months ago)

Earth, for sure :)

0 upvotes
Total comments: 111