Nikon 50mm f 0.95 : Who wants this thing?

We are seeing innovation from only few players in the market and I applaud Nikon for bringing such a lens at least to show others what is be possible and keep manufacturers on their toes.

But I fail to see usage besides very specific niches (note here, ME, so let me know what could be used for).

To my usages (maybe not to yours): It is a huge lens, with astronomic price, most likely very difficult ergonomics, manual focus (must be very hard to pin point focus if not in a tripod) and I don't think it will balance very well. But those are my opinions and I might be wrong.

So then I thought... Do people even want fast lenses like this? Or maybe even faster right? Just because I don't need does not mean there is no market for it.

So how about this little pool

1. UYou are right: it is not a lens for everyone. But then neither is a fisheye lens or an 800mm f/5.6.

So yes it is a niche lens. And those who really can make use of it will.

Are you complaining because you cannot afford it?

practical uses

-astronomical photography

-film making

-night time photography

--
Ellis Vener
To see my work please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
Or on instagram @therealellisv

Ellis Vener said:

1. UYou are right: it is not a lens for everyone. But then neither is a fisheye lens or an 800mm f/5.6.

Click to expand...

Totally.

Ellis Vener said:

So yes it is a niche lens. And those who really can make use of it will.

Click to expand...

I am really waiting for someone to make some short video clips with it. Must have crazy background separation.

Ellis Vener said:

Are you complaining because you cannot afford it?

Click to expand...

Not really complaining, maybe it came out this way but in no way I meant it as such.

As I said, it is not for me but it might be for some people. Being able to afford has nothing to do with it. Like, I am not able to afford to have a private helicopter but I understand why rich people have it you know?

Ellis Vener said:

practical uses

-astronomical photography

-film making

Click to expand...

I guess this is the one I would see most used if it is possible to do some focus rack somehow.

Ellis Vener said:

-night time photography

Click to expand...

It is great you gave some examples.

Rich Evans said:

Ellis Vener said:

1. UYou are right: it is not a lens for everyone. But then neither is a fisheye lens or an 800mm f/5.6.

Click to expand...

Totally.

Rich Evans said:

So yes it is a niche lens. And those who really can make use of it will.

Click to expand...

I am really waiting for someone to make some short video clips with it. Must have crazy background separation.

Rich Evans said:

Are you complaining because you cannot afford it?

Click to expand...

Not really complaining, maybe it came out this way but in no way I meant it as such.
As I said, it is not for me but it might be for some people. Being able to afford has nothing to do with it. Like, I am not able to afford to have a private helicopter but I understand why rich people have it you know?

Rich Evans said:

practical uses

-astronomical photography

-film making

Click to expand...

I guess this is the one I would see most used if it is possible to do some focus rack somehow.

Rich Evans said:

-night time photography

Click to expand...

It is great you gave some examples.

Click to expand...

As soon as I get my hands on one I will.

Rich Evans said:

Must have crazy background separation.

Click to expand...

This is a misconception. It's a 50mm F/0.95. This means it has a 53mm aperture. Yes, it will have quite a lot of background separation...

...when a picture is taken from very close to the subject, or when heavily cropped & enlarged.

This has roughly the same aperture as a 105mm F/2 lens, but with a wider angle. So if you're more than a few steps away from your subject, the background separation will be apparent, but not extreme.

Here's a rough idea of what level of background separation to expect from this lens:

• https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/01/canons-ultra-rare-lenses-using-the-canon-50mm-f1-0l/

Rich Evans said:

We are seeing innovation from only few players in the market and I applaud Nikon for bringing such a lens at least to show others what is be possible and keep manufacturers on their toes.

But I fail to see usage besides very specific niches (note here, ME, so let me know what could be used for).
To my usages (maybe not to yours): It is a huge lens, with astronomic price, most likely very difficult ergonomics, manual focus (must be very hard to pin point focus if not in a tripod) and I don't think it will balance very well. But those are my opinions and I might be wrong.
So then I thought... Do people even want fast lenses like this? Or maybe even faster right? Just because I don't need does not mean there is no market for it.
So how about this little pool

Click to expand...

Perfectly content with my Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 with a speed booster on my Sony A6300. That works out to approx. 60mm at f/1.0. And it didn't break the bank.

In 1961 Canon sold their 50mm 0.95 lens. (for a rangefinder camera)

About 19.000 were made.

I don't recall reading about customers being forced to buy them at gunpoint.

On EBay from $1000 to over $3000.

beatboxa said:

Rich Evans said:

Must have crazy background separation.

Click to expand...

This is a misconception. It's a 50mm F/0.95. This means it has a 53mm aperture. Yes, it will have quite a lot of background separation...

...when a picture is taken from very close to the subject, or when heavily cropped & enlarged.

This has roughly the same aperture as a 105mm F/2 lens, but with a wider angle. So if you're more than a few steps away from your subject, the background separation will be apparent, but not extreme.

Click to expand...

Just to elaborate on this a bit more, there's a mixup between DOF and BG blur. BG blur, per any particular framing is dependent (assuming the BG is far enough away to reach maximum blur) solely on the entrance pupil. The larger the aperture, the more you can blur the BG. So beat is correct, 50/.95=53mm. I have used a 100mm f/2 which is 50mm of aperture which is similar to what the Nikon will produce per subject framing.

This means, any lens that has around a 50mm aperture, if you frame a subject the same way and with the BG sufficiently in the distance, will reach this same amount of BG blur. One easy example is a 70-300 kit lens, which at 300mm and f/5.6, has about 53.5mm of aperture.




100/2=50.




300/5.6=53.5. Not the same subject but the framing is similar, showing the aperture's effect on BG blur.



Now to be technical, that 300mm f/5.6 doesn't have the same "amount" of blur, but effectively and visually, it does. It technically has less blur but it's magnified more. The same thing happens when cropping a photo in post, or when shooting with a smaller sensor. The result is, the BG "looks" to be the same blurriness.

As for DOF, ie the portion of focal plane that's considered "sharp", it's dictated by the F stop at any particular framing. An easy way to think of it is, the F stop determines how thin the DOF is, the aperture determines how far it goes from sharp to blurry.

--
"You taught me hate, I'll teach you fear..." -

Rich Evans said:

We are seeing innovation from only few players in the market and I applaud Nikon for bringing such a lens at least to show others what is be possible and keep manufacturers on their toes.

But I fail to see usage besides very specific niches (note here, ME, so let me know what could be used for).
To my usages (maybe not to yours): It is a huge lens, with astronomic price, most likely very difficult ergonomics, manual focus (must be very hard to pin point focus if not in a tripod) and I don't think it will balance very well. But those are my opinions and I might be wrong.
So then I thought... Do people even want fast lenses like this? Or maybe even faster right? Just because I don't need does not mean there is no market for it.
So how about this little pool

Click to expand...

Start over. Don't ask if we want it and then not give that as a choice.

these lenses will be doa because of the size, wieght, and price.

at first, i couldn't understand why they are focusing on this when they need to improve their 24-120 and 28-300.

then i realized that they trying to distract people from the bad performance some of their other lenses

these super fast lenses are adored by t the every thing out of focus but one eye lash on the model is the rage now, Although blurred backrounds are a useful tool its a tool thats also way over used and you can do a lot of background blur even with an f2

but what is interesting about these super fast lenses is that at f2 its at its best as opposed more sedate apetures like f4 and f5.6 now that is interesting

Ah, just another troll or a troll by a different non-name.

d i s p l a y n a m e said:

these lenses will be doa because of the size, wieght, and price.

Click to expand...

as if they expect to sell more than a handful. It’s a bragging rights lens.nn

d i s p l a y n a m e said:

at first, i couldn't understand why they are focusing on this when they need to improve their 24-120 and 28-300.

then i realized that they trying to distract people from the bad performance some of their other lenses

Click to expand...

No, they’re showcasing what their new mount can accomplish.

Rich Evans said:

We are seeing innovation from only few players in the market and I applaud Nikon for bringing such a lens at least to show others what is be possible and keep manufacturers on their toes.

But I fail to see usage besides very specific niches (note here, ME, so let me know what could be used for).
To my usages (maybe not to yours): It is a huge lens, with astronomic price, most likely very difficult ergonomics, manual focus (must be very hard to pin point focus if not in a tripod) and I don't think it will balance very well. But those are my opinions and I might be wrong.
So then I thought... Do people even want fast lenses like this? Or maybe even faster right? Just because I don't need does not mean there is no market for it.
So how about this little pool

Click to expand...

This reads like one of those reviews that Ken Rockwell would do.

stevo23 said:

d i s p l a y n a m e said:

these lenses will be doa because of the size, wieght, and price.

Click to expand...

as if they expect to sell more than a handful. It’s a bragging rights lens.nn

stevo23 said:

at first, i couldn't understand why they are focusing on this when they need to improve their 24-120 and 28-300.

then i realized that they trying to distract people from the bad performance some of their other lenses

Click to expand...

No, they’re showcasing what their new mount can accomplish.

Click to expand...

yea, they're trying to do that. but who really cares? i mean, their fx mound has already produced some great halo lenses like 200 f/2 that nobody but a few can buy.

what they should be doing is elevating the quality of their more mainstream optics. how many people like to be the proud owner of a superzoom whose quality everyrone laughs about for probably performing worse than an RX10IV?

Rich Evans said:

We are seeing innovation from only few players in the market and I applaud Nikon for bringing such a lens at least to show others what is be possible and keep manufacturers on their toes.

Click to expand...

What do you view as innovation?

Previously you mentioned both Panasonic and Olympus don't innovate when they actually do. So if you discredit them, who else are you discrediting?

Now creating a 50mm 0.95 sounds exiting on paper, but if you look at the actual images of this lens mounted on a Z camera, it look more like a studio camera with it tripod mount then something you would want to take with you on the street. For me the new Canon 50mm 1.2 looks more productive.

Rich Evans said:

But I fail to see usage besides very specific niches (note here, ME, so let me know what could be used for).

Click to expand...

It has a tripod mount, it's long, we haven't seen the lens hood mounted to it yet? So it must be a studio lens because Full Frame usually use as a studio camera or landscape.

Rich Evans said:

To my usages (maybe not to yours): It is a huge lens, with astronomic price, most likely very difficult ergonomics, manual focus (must be very hard to pin point focus if not in a tripod) and I don't think it will balance very well. But those are my opinions and I might be wrong.

Click to expand...

You're often wrong when it comes to photography.

As long you got a sturdy tripod and you attach the lens to the tripod instead of the camera, there less chance of the tripod tipping over forward.

Rich Evans said:

So then I thought... Do people even want fast lenses like this? Or maybe even faster right? Just because I don't need does not mean there is no market for it.

Click to expand...

Just like M43 and APC-S. Irony.

Rich Evans said:

So how about this little pool

Click to expand...

I would love a fast 50 mounted on a Full Frame camera.

d i s p l a y n a m e said:

stevo23 said:

d i s p l a y n a m e said:

these lenses will be doa because of the size, wieght, and price.

Click to expand...

as if they expect to sell more than a handful. It’s a bragging rights lens.nn

d i s p l a y n a m e said:

at first, i couldn't understand why they are focusing on this when they need to improve their 24-120 and 28-300.

then i realized that they trying to distract people from the bad performance some of their other lenses

Click to expand...

No, they’re showcasing what their new mount can accomplish.

Click to expand...

yea, they're trying to do that. but who really cares? i mean, their fx mound has already produced some great halo lenses like 200 f/2 that nobody but a few can buy.

what they should be doing is elevating the quality of their more mainstream optics.

Click to expand...

They are/will. This is only the beginning, they’re beating their chest.

d i s p l a y n a m e said:

how many people like to be the proud owner of a superzoom whose quality everyrone laughs about for probably performing worse than an RX10IV?

Click to expand...

?

d i s p l a y n a m e said:

these lenses will be doa because of the size, wieght, and price.

at first, i couldn't understand why they are focusing on this when they need to improve their 24-120 and 28-300.

then i realized that they trying to distract people from the bad performance some of their other lenses

Click to expand...

Brilliant assessment. Not.

Professional portrait photographers will eat this thing up. I am interested to see to what effect.

AwesomeIan said:

Professional portrait photographers will eat this thing up. I am interested to see to what effect.

Click to expand...

Me too. If it performs along the lines of the classic Noct but even better in all respects, I would like to see that.