Reading mode: Light Dark

What lens was the 1 system missing for you?

Go to last post
R

Ryan Ly

Leading Member
Messages
820
Reaction score
95
Location
Brisbane, AU
So we're not going to get anymore new 1 system gear but we can still ponder on what could have been. So what type of lenses were you disappointed that we didn't get before the system got discontinued?

Personally, I would have liked an 8.8-50mm f/4-5.6 VR as an alternative to the 10-100mm VR. These are my favorite kind of lenses and would have liked a small form factor variant on the 1 system.

A 13mm f/1.8 VR would have been pretty sweet too. The 10mm is a bit slower than I'd like an the 18.5mm is a bit longer. 13mm would have been a 35mm FF equiv. Perfect for a walk around prime.
 
A macro! A macro! A macro!! Any macro!! :)

I still love using the N1 system for macro/close ups and I've settled on mostly using the J5 + FT1+ 60mm Micro but I would have loved a dedicated macro lens.
 
Ryan Ly said:
So we're not going to get anymore new 1 system gear but we can still ponder on what could have been. So what type of lenses were you disappointed that we didn't get before the system got discontinued?

Personally, I would have liked an 8.8-50mm f/4-5.6 VR as an alternative to the 10-100mm VR. These are my favorite kind of lenses and would have liked a small form factor variant on the 1 system.

A 13mm f/1.8 VR would have been pretty sweet too. The 10mm is a bit slower than I'd like an the 18.5mm is a bit longer. 13mm would have been a 35mm FF equiv. Perfect for a walk around prime.
Click to expand...
..10mm f/1.8.. :-)

..Cheers..
 
Ryan Ly said:
So we're not going to get anymore new 1 system gear but we can still ponder on what could have been. So what type of lenses were you disappointed that we didn't get before the system got discontinued?

Personally, I would have liked an 8.8-50mm f/4-5.6 VR as an alternative to the 10-100mm VR. These are my favorite kind of lenses and would have liked a small form factor variant on the 1 system.

A 13mm f/1.8 VR would have been pretty sweet too. The 10mm is a bit slower than I'd like an the 18.5mm is a bit longer. 13mm would have been a 35mm FF equiv. Perfect for a walk around prime.
Click to expand...
I agree that a 13mm (35mm equivalence), f/1.8 would have been sweet even without VR. My only prime lens for my SLR film camera back in the day was a 35mm f/2.0 which got a lot of use. It was particularly good for group shot due to virtually no distortion even to the edges. Little wonder why the 35 mm prime was the number one choice of photo journalists back in the day before zoom lenses were any good.

The excellent 10-100mm non PD is glued onto one of my V2s and it works great in good light. However, a 9-37mm (24+100mm equivalence) constant f/2.0, (or even 2.8), would have been awesome with the J5s sensor in less than ideal lighting conditions. At the 100mm end this lens would have had very good subject isolation as well.

I feel the lack of a large aperture mid range zoom lens was one of the biggest factors holding back the N1 system from the beginning to its end. All other serious ILC camera system offer such a lens because they are very desirable.

As an aside, I wish the 70-300mm CX had a more reliable build quality and had a lower price (less than $600). Perhaps if Nikon had gone with a plastic shell and put better wiring in the 70-300CX both of my wishes would have come true! ;-)
 
I'd would love to have seen a...
  • 12 or 13mm f/2 or faster prime
  • 8.8-27mm kit lens (love to have a 24mm wide in a kit lens)
  • 24mm f/2.8 macro
  • 150mm f/2.8 prime
  • 8.8-74mm f/4 (24-200mm equiv.). The 12-100/4 Olympus lens in MFT is great (if a bit pricey).
Look at the micro 4/3rds or Fuji systems for lens inspirations. They have (especially MFT) well filled out lens options.
 
Ryan Ly said:
So we're not going to get anymore new 1 system gear but we can still ponder on what could have been. So what type of lenses were you disappointed that we didn't get before the system got discontinued?

Personally, I would have liked an 8.8-50mm f/4-5.6 VR as an alternative to the 10-100mm VR. These are my favorite kind of lenses and would have liked a small form factor variant on the 1 system.

A 13mm f/1.8 VR would have been pretty sweet too. The 10mm is a bit slower than I'd like an the 18.5mm is a bit longer. 13mm would have been a 35mm FF equiv. Perfect for a walk around prime.
Click to expand...
I personally am pretty satisfied by the range of lenses offered, but I wish some of them had faster apertures. I'd have really liked a reasonable sized 9-36 f2.8, or perhaps an f2~3.5

Also I don't understand the technical rationale for limitation to center-point AF when using the FT-1.
 
For my use there’s nothing really important missing from the system. Wide, macro (30-110mm with an extension tube), long tele and short tele are all excellent. Fast mid range zooms are an obvious omission but with the 18.5 or 32mm prime the need is debatable.

A native 50mm F2 macro with VR would have been fun, or a high quality 50-200 F4 with fast AF, VR and a focus limiter. I’d have doubtless paid good money for either but it’s debatable whether they are needed. Sometimes less is more!

More reliability across the board would have been nice though - I do think Nikon let that slide to an unacceptable level with N1 lenses.
 
dougjgreen1 said:
Ryan Ly said:
So we're not going to get anymore new 1 system gear but we can still ponder on what could have been. So what type of lenses were you disappointed that we didn't get before the system got discontinued?

Personally, I would have liked an 8.8-50mm f/4-5.6 VR as an alternative to the 10-100mm VR. These are my favorite kind of lenses and would have liked a small form factor variant on the 1 system.

A 13mm f/1.8 VR would have been pretty sweet too. The 10mm is a bit slower than I'd like an the 18.5mm is a bit longer. 13mm would have been a 35mm FF equiv. Perfect for a walk around prime.
Click to expand...
I personally am pretty satisfied by the range of lenses offered, but I wish some of them had faster apertures. I'd have really liked a reasonable sized 9-36 f2.8, or perhaps an f2~3.5

Also I don't understand the technical rationale for limitation to center-point AF when using the FT-1.
Click to expand...
The answer to the limitation to center point focus only with the FT-1 adapter apparently will remain a mystery and a point of contentious debate since Nikon never directly addressed the issue. Was it really a technical issue or did Nikon cripple it to encourage the purchase of native N1 lenses? We may never know.

Personally I came around to the conclusion that Nikon crippled it, just like they crippled the use of manual focus (no focus aids), and no aperture priority auto exposure with other brands of adapted lenses which other mirrorless system employ.. It will be interesting to see how Nikon deals with this issue with their new FF mirrorless system. ;-)
 
jonikon said:
dougjgreen1 said:
Ryan Ly said:
So we're not going to get anymore new 1 system gear but we can still ponder on what could have been. So what type of lenses were you disappointed that we didn't get before the system got discontinued?

Personally, I would have liked an 8.8-50mm f/4-5.6 VR as an alternative to the 10-100mm VR. These are my favorite kind of lenses and would have liked a small form factor variant on the 1 system.

A 13mm f/1.8 VR would have been pretty sweet too. The 10mm is a bit slower than I'd like an the 18.5mm is a bit longer. 13mm would have been a 35mm FF equiv. Perfect for a walk around prime.
Click to expand...
I personally am pretty satisfied by the range of lenses offered, but I wish some of them had faster apertures. I'd have really liked a reasonable sized 9-36 f2.8, or perhaps an f2~3.5

Also I don't understand the technical rationale for limitation to center-point AF when using the FT-1.
Click to expand...
The answer to the limitation to center point focus only with the FT-1 adapter apparently will remain a mystery and a point of contentious debate since Nikon never directly addressed the issue. Was it really a technical issue or did Nikon cripple it to encourage the purchase of native N1 lenses? We may never know.

Personally I came around to the conclusion that Nikon crippled it, just like they crippled the use of manual focus (no focus aids), and no aperture priority auto exposure with other brands of adapted lenses which other mirrorless system employ.. It will be interesting to see how Nikon deals with this issue with their new FF mirrorless system. ;-)
Click to expand...
The fact that there ever was an FT-1 acknowledged that some may want to use Nikon lenses other than native CX on their N1 bodies so why limit the available focus points ? It certainly would have been a selling point for Nikon if multiple points could be used with a fast long lens. I have always felt that due to the extension of the FT-1 that the points outside of the center became less reliable for focus so they didn't allow it, but I have no knowledge to back that up. Regarding manual focus lenses, if one used the FT-1 with a manual Nikon lens, then you got focus confirmation and aperture priority. They just crippled use of dumb adapters and other brand/mount lenses. I believe Nikon wished to have as much compatibility with Nikon products as possible but arrogantly refused to acknowledge that some may want to adapt other brands. I really wouldn't be surprised if Nikon carried that forward to their FF ML, which would be a shame.
 
Paul Pasco said:
jonikon said:
dougjgreen1 said:
Ryan Ly said:
So we're not going to get anymore new 1 system gear but we can still ponder on what could have been. So what type of lenses were you disappointed that we didn't get before the system got discontinued?

Personally, I would have liked an 8.8-50mm f/4-5.6 VR as an alternative to the 10-100mm VR. These are my favorite kind of lenses and would have liked a small form factor variant on the 1 system.

A 13mm f/1.8 VR would have been pretty sweet too. The 10mm is a bit slower than I'd like an the 18.5mm is a bit longer. 13mm would have been a 35mm FF equiv. Perfect for a walk around prime.
Click to expand...
I personally am pretty satisfied by the range of lenses offered, but I wish some of them had faster apertures. I'd have really liked a reasonable sized 9-36 f2.8, or perhaps an f2~3.5

Also I don't understand the technical rationale for limitation to center-point AF when using the FT-1.
Click to expand...
The answer to the limitation to center point focus only with the FT-1 adapter apparently will remain a mystery and a point of contentious debate since Nikon never directly addressed the issue. Was it really a technical issue or did Nikon cripple it to encourage the purchase of native N1 lenses? We may never know.

Personally I came around to the conclusion that Nikon crippled it, just like they crippled the use of manual focus (no focus aids), and no aperture priority auto exposure with other brands of adapted lenses which other mirrorless system employ.. It will be interesting to see how Nikon deals with this issue with their new FF mirrorless system. ;-)
Click to expand...
The fact that there ever was an FT-1 acknowledged that some may want to use Nikon lenses other than native CX on their N1 bodies so why limit the available focus points ? It certainly would have been a selling point for Nikon if multiple points could be used with a fast long lens. I have always felt that due to the extension of the FT-1 that the points outside of the center became less reliable for focus so they didn't allow it, but I have no knowledge to back that up. Regarding manual focus lenses, if one used the FT-1 with a manual Nikon lens, then you got focus confirmation and aperture priority. They just crippled use of dumb adapters and other brand/mount lenses. I believe Nikon wished to have as much compatibility with Nikon products as possible but arrogantly refused to acknowledge that some may want to adapt other brands. I really wouldn't be surprised if Nikon carried that forward to their FF ML, which would be a shame.
Paul Pasco said:
--
Best regards,
Jon
Click to expand...
--
Regards, Paul
Lili's Dad
Click to expand...
Other mirrorless systems allow the selection of focus points outside of the center point without issue even when using dumb adapters. Some of these adapters (Olympus OM for example), are longer than the FT-1 adapter. Now that I have had some experience with other mirrorless cameras I just don’t buy the excuse that this issue was merely technical. Even Thom Hogan tried to get Nikon to explain why only the center point could be used with the FT-1, but Nikon never responded to his inquiries, so like you, he gave Nikon the benefit of the doubt and speculated that there must have been a technical reason for the center point only. But if this were true, then Nikon should have explained why only the center point could be used and N1 users would have at least have known they were not being toyed with by Nikon.

You may think allowing more AF points with the FT-1 would have helped N1 camera body sales and perhaps you are right, but alternatively, maybe Nikon wanted N1 customers to buy only the N1 lenses that they had spent so much R&D money developing. We weren’t in that Nikon management meeting so we will never know.

I hope some day someone with the technical skill to hack th FT-1 firmware does so and disables the command that locks the focus point to the center only when it is attached to a N1 body. Then we could find out the answer to this question once and for all and put it to rest.

--
Best regards,
Jon
 
Last edited:
jonikon said:
Paul Pasco said:
jonikon said:
dougjgreen1 said:
Ryan Ly said:
So we're not going to get anymore new 1 system gear but we can still ponder on what could have been. So what type of lenses were you disappointed that we didn't get before the system got discontinued?

Personally, I would have liked an 8.8-50mm f/4-5.6 VR as an alternative to the 10-100mm VR. These are my favorite kind of lenses and would have liked a small form factor variant on the 1 system.

A 13mm f/1.8 VR would have been pretty sweet too. The 10mm is a bit slower than I'd like an the 18.5mm is a bit longer. 13mm would have been a 35mm FF equiv. Perfect for a walk around prime.
Click to expand...
I personally am pretty satisfied by the range of lenses offered, but I wish some of them had faster apertures. I'd have really liked a reasonable sized 9-36 f2.8, or perhaps an f2~3.5

Also I don't understand the technical rationale for limitation to center-point AF when using the FT-1.
Click to expand...
The answer to the limitation to center point focus only with the FT-1 adapter apparently will remain a mystery and a point of contentious debate since Nikon never directly addressed the issue. Was it really a technical issue or did Nikon cripple it to encourage the purchase of native N1 lenses? We may never know.

Personally I came around to the conclusion that Nikon crippled it, just like they crippled the use of manual focus (no focus aids), and no aperture priority auto exposure with other brands of adapted lenses which other mirrorless system employ.. It will be interesting to see how Nikon deals with this issue with their new FF mirrorless system. ;-)
Click to expand...
The fact that there ever was an FT-1 acknowledged that some may want to use Nikon lenses other than native CX on their N1 bodies so why limit the available focus points ? It certainly would have been a selling point for Nikon if multiple points could be used with a fast long lens. I have always felt that due to the extension of the FT-1 that the points outside of the center became less reliable for focus so they didn't allow it, but I have no knowledge to back that up. Regarding manual focus lenses, if one used the FT-1 with a manual Nikon lens, then you got focus confirmation and aperture priority. They just crippled use of dumb adapters and other brand/mount lenses. I believe Nikon wished to have as much compatibility with Nikon products as possible but arrogantly refused to acknowledge that some may want to adapt other brands. I really wouldn't be surprised if Nikon carried that forward to their FF ML, which would be a shame.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest some pro- level CX lenses (a la 32mm f1.2)...

First, a 26-74 f2.8 or f4 VR (smaller 70-200 equivalent with fantastic AF for sports shooters)

Next, an 8.8mm tilt- shift, or at least an F adapter that can do a similar job.

18mm f1.2, or even f1.0!

110mm f4 or 150mm f4 (300 / 400+ equivalents)

8.8-1111mm. (Heck, if they can do it for the P1000, why not?? Okay, this one is obviously a joke.)
 
I don't know much about optical/size limitations, but here it is.

a. 10mm 1.8 or faster

b. 10-25mm 2.8 or 1.8-3.5

c. 25-70 mm 2.8 or 1.8-3.5

d. 10-100mm 1.8-3.5

e. In general, more reliable build quality.
 
dougjgreen1 said:
jonikon said:
Paul Pasco said:
jonikon said:
dougjgreen1 said:
Ryan Ly said:
So we're not going to get anymore new 1 system gear but we can still ponder on what could have been. So what type of lenses were you disappointed that we didn't get before the system got discontinued?

Personally, I would have liked an 8.8-50mm f/4-5.6 VR as an alternative to the 10-100mm VR. These are my favorite kind of lenses and would have liked a small form factor variant on the 1 system.

A 13mm f/1.8 VR would have been pretty sweet too. The 10mm is a bit slower than I'd like an the 18.5mm is a bit longer. 13mm would have been a 35mm FF equiv. Perfect for a walk around prime.
Click to expand...
I personally am pretty satisfied by the range of lenses offered, but I wish some of them had faster apertures. I'd have really liked a reasonable sized 9-36 f2.8, or perhaps an f2~3.5

Also I don't understand the technical rationale for limitation to center-point AF when using the FT-1.
Click to expand...
The answer to the limitation to center point focus only with the FT-1 adapter apparently will remain a mystery and a point of contentious debate since Nikon never directly addressed the issue. Was it really a technical issue or did Nikon cripple it to encourage the purchase of native N1 lenses? We may never know.

Personally I came around to the conclusion that Nikon crippled it, just like they crippled the use of manual focus (no focus aids), and no aperture priority auto exposure with other brands of adapted lenses which other mirrorless system employ.. It will be interesting to see how Nikon deals with this issue with their new FF mirrorless system. ;-)
Click to expand...
The fact that there ever was an FT-1 acknowledged that some may want to use Nikon lenses other than native CX on their N1 bodies so why limit the available focus points ? It certainly would have been a selling point for Nikon if multiple points could be used with a fast long lens. I have always felt that due to the extension of the FT-1 that the points outside of the center became less reliable for focus so they didn't allow it, but I have no knowledge to back that up. Regarding manual focus lenses, if one used the FT-1 with a manual Nikon lens, then you got focus confirmation and aperture priority. They just crippled use of dumb adapters and other brand/mount lenses. I believe Nikon wished to have as much compatibility with Nikon products as possible but arrogantly refused to acknowledge that some may want to adapt other brands. I really wouldn't be surprised if Nikon carried that forward to their FF ML, which would be a shame.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Yes. 13mm f1.8 or faster.

10mm f2.8 is not attractive at all as f2 pancake lens are readily available for other APSC system. For 1" sensor, lens faster than f2 shall be provided to keep the competition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tord S Eriksson
DeepSeek is coming!
Replies
13
Views
398
Richard Dutton
R
H
  • Question Question
New Zealand: Olympus vs Fujifilm for my particular scenario
2
Replies
28
Views
781
Asherax
Asherax
H
  • Question Question
New Zealand: Olympus vs Fujifilm for my particular scenario
2
Replies
20
Views
158
Ocoloy
Ocoloy
Skraaal
Moving to the Nikon Z mount system, all in after my D850 was stolen.
2 3
Replies
48
Views
3K
PHXAZCRAIG
PHXAZCRAIG
H
  • Question Question
What lens to buy
Replies
11
Views
121
BasilG
B

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top