Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
iljitsch Senior Member • Posts: 1,094
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

p5freak wrote:

Also, i think using FF lenses on DX make no sense, when there is a DX alternative. FF lenses are huge and heavy.

It's not a law of nature that full frame lenses are much bigger and heavier than DX lenses. A big frustration for me when I got my D90 was that the camera and the lenses were so much bigger than the film stuff I used in the 1980s and 1990s.

And even our beloved 35 mm f/1.8 DX is slightly bigger and heavier than the 50 mm f/1.8 AF-D.

And in the case of the lens at hand, the Z 40 mm f/2, full frame = big doesn't apply. This lens is light and small compared to pretty much anything except the DX kit lenses. So then why not get a full frame lens? Worst case it's slightly better on DX because the corners, which are always the weakest part of any lens, are cropped off. Best case, you get to use it with a full frame camera (or sell it to someone with a full frame camera) at some point in the future.

For some types of lenses it seems pretty straightforward to make a good and non-huge full frame version, even with a decent aperture, so why make a separate DX version? I think that's mainly the case for focus lengths that are a bit larger than the flange distance (so used to be 50 mm, but now perhaps starting at 20 mm) upto modest tele, such as 105 mm.

Also: economics of scale. The number of people buying Z lenses isn't nearly the number of people buying F lenses at its peak. So I'm not holding my breath for a 105 mm f/2.8 DX. If you want that lens, you're going to have to get the FX version. The same is probably true for the < 28 mm fast primes: sales are almost certainly too small for DX versions, even though for wide it would probably make technical sense to have separate smaller DX versions.

We now have nice 16-50 and 50-250 DX lenses and FX-but-DX-appropriate 28 and 40 mm primes. Add something with a bit more zoom range, such as 16-140 DX and the main thing we really need is a Z DX ultrawide, such as a Z version of the AF-P 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6G D VR. I'm pretty sure Nikon will point at the Z FX lenses for Z DX shooters who want anything other than that, and it's always an option to use the FTZ with an F lens, or pretty much any lens ever with a cheap passive adapter for the kinds of photography that can do without AF and aperture control.

And we're starting to see third party options with AF support. Tamron for instance already has a bunch of lenses for other mirrorless APS-C cameras such as Sony E mount. Nikon isn't making it easy for them to make Z mount versions of their lenses, but once they do, they'll adapt their existing lenses for the Z mount and we have many more options.

 iljitsch's gear list:iljitsch's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon Z fc Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow