Lighter, smaller, high-quality FX lenses

HankK · Jun 16, 2013

I continue to be impressed wtih the D600 but would like to see more small, light weight, high-quality to the edge lenses. I would use my camera a lot more it the total kit was smaller and lighter. The newer 50mm G lenses and even my 50mm f1.8D can do the job to the edges. The present, smaller 35mm, 24mm, and 20mm D lenses are weak performers especially at the edges. The newer Nikon and Sigma f1.4 lenses are beasts. For me, I do not need anything below f2.8 or f3.5 or even f4. I know that some users require f1.4 or f1.2 for their applications but I think there is a also a group that, like myself, do not. I wonder if Nikon will update these smaller primes.

As a side note, I now have some physical limitations that require me to use a monopod for camera support and as a cane but for some time I have been searching for ideal smaller kit. In the end, nothing compares to FX. And yes, I have thought about the Sony RX-1 and now thinking of the newer R version but I am stuck with one focal length and I would not be able to use the wonderful Nikon flash system.

--

Hank K
Nikon D600, Fuji XE-1, Coolpix A, Samsung NX20 (former D800E, 5DM2, RX100, GH2 Kit, and Fujifilm X100 shooter)

brightcolours · Jun 16, 2013

HankK said:
HankK wrote:

I continue to be impressed wtih the D600 but would like to see more small, light weight, high-quality to the edge lenses. I would use my camera a lot more it the total kit was smaller and lighter. The newer 50mm G lenses and even my 50mm f1.8D can do the job to the edges. The present, smaller 35mm, 24mm, and 20mm D lenses are weak performers especially at the edges. The newer Nikon and Sigma f1.4 lenses are beasts. For me, I do not need anything below f2.8 or f3.5 or even f4. I know that some users require f1.4 or f1.2 for their applications but I think there is a also a group that, like myself, do not. I wonder if Nikon will update these smaller primes.

A few lenses for you to consider:

Nikon 35mm f1.4 AI-s. I know that might sound odd, but it is sharp from corner to corner when you stop it down to f2.8, and it is not a "monster" like the AF-S 35mm f1.4 or the Sigma 35mm f1.4. Only weighs about 380 grams, and is about the size of your 50mm f1.8!
Voigtländer 20mm f3.5 SL II. Very contrasty lens, its only real vice is strong vignetting wide open. Super compact pancake design and truly lovely build quality. Stop it down and you have a lovely performing ultra wide angle. MF only (like the AI-s above).
Voigtländer 40mm f2 SL II. Compact pancake design with rather lovely optics. MF only, lovely machined metal build. might be too close in focal length to your 50mm.

I think that that 35mm and 20mm above are very worthwhile to check out.

noirdesir · Jun 16, 2013

brightcolours said:
brightcolours wrote:

brightcolours said:

HankK wrote:

I continue to be impressed wtih the D600 but would like to see more small, light weight, high-quality to the edge lenses. I would use my camera a lot more it the total kit was smaller and lighter. The newer 50mm G lenses and even my 50mm f1.8D can do the job to the edges. The present, smaller 35mm, 24mm, and 20mm D lenses are weak performers especially at the edges. The newer Nikon and Sigma f1.4 lenses are beasts. For me, I do not need anything below f2.8 or f3.5 or even f4. I know that some users require f1.4 or f1.2 for their applications but I think there is a also a group that, like myself, do not. I wonder if Nikon will update these smaller primes.

Click to expand...

A few lenses for you to consider:

Nikon 35mm f1.4 AI-s. I know that might sound odd, but it is sharp from corner to corner when you stop it down to f2.8, and it is not a "monster" like the AF-S 35mm f1.4 or the Sigma 35mm f1.4. Only weighs about 380 grams, and is about the size of your 50mm f1.8!

Voigtländer 20mm f3.5 SL II. Very contrasty lens, its only real vice is strong vignetting wide open. Super compact pancake design and truly lovely build quality. Stop it down and you have a lovely performing ultra wide angle. MF only (like the AI-s above).
Voigtländer 40mm f2 SL II. Compact pancake design with rather lovely optics. MF only, lovely machined metal build. might be too close in focal length to your 50mm.

If you include MF lenses, I think several Zeiss primes would qualify as being relatively compact and optically very good, incl. the 21 mm f/2.8, the 25 mm, 28 mm, and 35 mm f/2.

breivogel · Jun 16, 2013

I think that the 85/f1.8, 28/f1.8, and 18-35 G Nikons all meet this need. IMHO, the 18-35 is better than the heavy, large 16-35VR - other than not having the VR and a touch less wide.

Some folks complain that the lightweight lenses are "plasticy" and feel cheap. That is the tradeoff for lighter weight. I don't mind too much if the optics are first rate and it sure is nice when you are hiking.

Tom Ames · Jun 16, 2013

85mm 1.8 G
50mm 1.8 G
28mm 1.8G should get you far. They are new, light, affordable and sharp.

It would be nice and needed I agree, if Nikon added a 20mm 1.8G or 18mm 1.8G to their line of primes.

If you want light zoom the new 24-85VR is quite good I have heard.
And the new 18-35G lens is already mentioned in post above..

pluton · Jun 17, 2013

breivogel said:
breivogel wrote:

Some folks complain that the lightweight lenses are "plasticy" and feel cheap. That is the tradeoff for lighter weight. I don't mind too much if the optics are first rate and it sure is nice when you are hiking.

The reason the Nikon 35/G is so big is because it's autofocus. Take away the need for a motor, circuits, microprocessor, and a gearbox and it could be made significantly smaller in diameter, although not, unfortunately, in length. At the same time, the plastic exterior has been designed to give it a very comfortable feel and the manual focus action is excellent.

Ray Ritchie · Jun 17, 2013

I don't understand that argument. The 35mm f/1.8G lens (a DX lens, but AF-S) is only a little bigger than the old 35mm f/2 (an FX lens), and pretty close to the same weight. Comparing screw-drive AF lenses to AF-S lenses at the same focal length across several focal lengths, it seems the AF-S motor adds maybe half an inch of length. It's hard to determine how much weight it adds because the old screw-drive lenses often have more metal in their construction, but it can't be more than a couple of ounces. The 35mm f/1.4G lens is huge and heavy, but I think it's primarily because of the size of the glass it contains, not because of the autofocus motor and attendant mechanism.

fpapp · Jun 17, 2013

brightcolours said:
brightcolours wrote:

Voigtländer 40mm f2 SL II. Compact pancake design with rather lovely optics. MF only, lovely machined metal build. might be too close in focal length to your 50mm.

I second the Voigtländer 40mm! I recently got one to use with my D700 and D300 (more with the D700).

It is my new favorite lens for walking around and when I want to travel light!

YRUNVS · Jun 17, 2013

I second the recommendation for older nikon MF glass, or 3rd party MF glass. They aren't all winners but on a quality / (weight * cost) basis there are some very attractive options. I only have the 55 3.5 micro-nikkor and 105 2.5p but these two compare favorably to their more modern counterparts. I haven't compared weight to the modern lenses I have, but size-wise they are positively tiny. Focusing is much easier than I imagined with positive infinity stops and the dot and arrows of the focusing system.

brightcolours · Jun 17, 2013

Ray Ritchie said:
Ray Ritchie wrote:

I don't understand that argument. The 35mm f/1.8G lens (a DX lens, but AF-S) is only a little bigger than the old 35mm f/2 (an FX lens), and pretty close to the same weight. Comparing screw-drive AF lenses to AF-S lenses at the same focal length across several focal lengths, it seems the AF-S motor adds maybe half an inch of length. It's hard to determine how much weight it adds because the old screw-drive lenses often have more metal in their construction, but it can't be more than a couple of ounces. The 35mm f/1.4G lens is huge and heavy, but I think it's primarily because of the size of the glass it contains, not because of the autofocus motor and attendant mechanism.

Exactly, it is the design/choice of the glass elements which make it big and heavy. The old 35mm f1.4 had a design which concentrated on smaller size. And my EF 35mm f2 also is the same size and weight as the 35mm f1.8 DX.

Ray Ritchie said:
--
Ray
My blog: http://www.rritchie.com/wordpress

Windancer · Jun 20, 2013

HankK said:
HankK wrote:

As a side note, I now have some physical limitations that require me to use a monopod for camera support and as a cane but for some time I have been searching for ideal smaller kit.

Hank

This is just a small sidenote to your original question.....

A very good friend of mine had the misfortune of having polio as a child and is now confined to a wheelchair. He takes some utterly wonderful shots. Over the years he has had Canon, Olympus, Pentax and Nikon systems. I do mean systems, as he had GAS (gear aquisition syndrome) something awful.

His last system was a Canon which was very heavy and awkward for him to use, but in the past couple of years he has gone to the Olmpus 4/3 system and his work is very outstanding. It never ceases to amaze me at the images he comes up with.

Just a thought.......

Terry

--
Graham Fine Art Photography
http://www.pbase.com/windancer
Remember, it's not the CPU that's in your camera that makes great images, it's the one located about 4" behind the viewfinder that does.
Disclaimer: This e-mail is intended to impart a sense of humor. Given e-mail's inability to carry inflections, tone and facial expressions it may fail miserably in its intent. The sender acknowledges the limitations of the technology and assigns to the software in which this message was composed any ill feelings that may arise. ;-)

A Owens · Jun 20, 2013

HankK said:
HankK wrote:

I ....would like to see more small, light weight, high-quality to the edge lenses. ..... For me, I do not need anything below f2.8 or f3.5 or even f4......

--

That is exactly what the G series Nikon lenses are. An 18-35, a 50 and a 70-200/4 cover a lot of requirements with little weight and reasonable price.

pipee · Jun 20, 2013

Not exactly high quality, but very sharp, and has the fastest focus I have ever seen:

Nikkor 28-80 3.3-5.6g

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-80mm-g.htm

narddogg81 · Jun 20, 2013

HankK said:
HankK wrote:

I continue to be impressed wtih the D600 but would like to see more small, light weight, high-quality to the edge lenses. I would use my camera a lot more it the total kit was smaller and lighter. The newer 50mm G lenses and even my 50mm f1.8D can do the job to the edges. The present, smaller 35mm, 24mm, and 20mm D lenses are weak performers especially at the edges. The newer Nikon and Sigma f1.4 lenses are beasts. For me, I do not need anything below f2.8 or f3.5 or even f4. I know that some users require f1.4 or f1.2 for their applications but I think there is a also a group that, like myself, do not. I wonder if Nikon will update these smaller primes.

As a side note, I now have some physical limitations that require me to use a monopod for camera support and as a cane but for some time I have been searching for ideal smaller kit. In the end, nothing compares to FX. And yes, I have thought about the Sony RX-1 and now thinking of the newer R version but I am stuck with one focal length and I would not be able to use the wonderful Nikon flash system.

--

Hank K
Nikon D600, Fuji XE-1, Coolpix A, Samsung NX20 (former D800E, 5DM2, RX100, GH2 Kit, and Fujifilm X100 shooter)

i would like to see a 15mm or 16mm f4 rectilinear prime lens for FX, with low distortion and good resolution to the edges.

HankK · Jun 20, 2013

Terry,

Thanks for the thoughts. With the monopod as camera support, cane, and balance mechanism for me , I am left with one hand operation of the camera. This has eliminated manual focus lens for me.

You are right in that the weight and bulk of the D600 even with the lightest lenses is at my limit. I only use it for relatively short distances/times from my vehicle. The problem is that the D600 just produces such great images with so much DR, detail, and low noise.

Maybe by the end of the year, some newer APS-C system will come closer. The present Fuji is not there but maybe a newer sensor version will be.

Again thanks and your guidance is great input.

Jose Rocha · Jun 21, 2013

pipee said:
pipee wrote:

Not exactly high quality, but very sharp, and has the fastest focus I have ever seen:

Nikkor 28-80 3.3-5.6g

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-80mm-g.htm

What?? That lens may be sharp but that's the only plus I find in it. It was my very first lens. Of everything you said I cannot remotely agree with you on AF speed, I will not say it's the lousiest lens ever, but I assure you it's worse than average consumer lens. Even my 50mm 1.8G has faster AF...

All Bushs Fault · Jun 21, 2013

HankK said:
HankK wrote:

I continue to be impressed wtih the D600 but would like to see more small, light weight, high-quality to the edge lenses. I would use my camera a lot more it the total kit was smaller and lighter. The newer 50mm G lenses and even my 50mm f1.8D can do the job to the edges. The present, smaller 35mm, 24mm, and 20mm D lenses are weak performers especially at the edges. The newer Nikon and Sigma f1.4 lenses are beasts. For me, I do not need anything below f2.8 or f3.5 or even f4. I know that some users require f1.4 or f1.2 for their applications but I think there is a also a group that, like myself, do not. I wonder if Nikon will update these smaller primes.

As a side note, I now have some physical limitations that require me to use a monopod for camera support and as a cane but for some time I have been searching for ideal smaller kit. In the end, nothing compares to FX. And yes, I have thought about the Sony RX-1 and now thinking of the newer R version but I am stuck with one focal length and I would not be able to use the wonderful Nikon flash system.

--

Hank K
Nikon D600, Fuji XE-1, Coolpix A, Samsung NX20 (former D800E, 5DM2, RX100, GH2 Kit, and Fujifilm X100 shooter)

Leonard Shepherd · Jun 23, 2013

HankK said:
HankK wrote:

HankK said:
The present, smaller 35mm, 24mm, and 20mm D lenses are weak performers especially at the edges.

These lenses seem to be about 25 year old 1980's optical designs; so it is not surprising corner performance is not the highest.

Updates are likely to be bigger, part to accommodate an in lens motor, and part to make a tele centric optical design which works better on digital a possibility.

Another similar era lens is the 180mm f2.8.

pipee · Jun 23, 2013

Jose Rocha said:
Jose Rocha wrote:

Jose Rocha said:

pipee wrote:

Not exactly high quality, but very sharp, and has the fastest focus I have ever seen:

Nikkor 28-80 3.3-5.6g

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-80mm-g.htm

Click to expand...

What?? That lens may be sharp but that's the only plus I find in it. It was my very first lens. Of everything you said I cannot remotely agree with you on AF speed, I will not say it's the lousiest lens ever, but I assure you it's worse than average consumer lens. Even my 50mm 1.8G has faster AF...

Lighter, smaller, high-quality FX lenses

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Tom Ames

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Active member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Active member

Keyboard shortcuts