Rumor: Nikon 58mm f/1.4G

[LKaven]

Rumor sites are buzzing with the expected announcement of a Nikon 58mm f/1.4G.  From the rumors, this will be an expensive lens (over $2200) and is supposed to be a "no compromise" optical design.  Comparisons with the Zeiss Otus are imminent.  We'll see.

[Niels_Patrick]

Good morning,

new NIKON 58 1,4 annaunced:

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/10/17/nikon-af-s-nikkor-58mm-f1-4g-lens-announcement.aspx/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NikonRumors+%28NikonRumors.com%29&utm_content=FaceBook

Now the discussion can start:
Battle of the primes  best 50mm lens to buy....

What do you thing?

[Niels_Patrick]

Price will be 1.719,00 EUR (official nikon website)

[henrikfoto]

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/singlefocal/normal/af-s_nikkor58mmf_14g/index.htm


Not very impressive..

I will wait for the new Zeiss. Does anyone have the MTF for it?

[henrikfoto]

Found it:

http://www.zeissimages.com/mtf/otus/otus_1455.pdf

This is fantastic.. It makes the new Nikon look like a joke😄

[BernardLanguillier]

Found it:

http://www.zeissimages.com/mtf/otus/otus_1455.pdf

This is fantastic.. It makes the new Nikon look like a joke😄

Maybe, but Nikon lens designers have been focusing on rendering more than on technical specs. Also, you are comparing lenses costing 1,600 US$ vs 4,000 US$ and weighting 350 gr vs 970 gr.

For my needs, the Zeiss appears to be a better option because I am into live view focusing on tripod and after the highest possible level of quality, but as a generic lens for AF applications the Nikkor is probably a very nice lens and I like the look of the Nikon samples.

Regards,
Bernard

[Ellis Vener]

Time will tell. Henrick, time will tell . In the mean time $1699 (Nikon 58mm f/1.4G)  vs  $3,990.00 (Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus Distagon T* Lens for Nikon F Mount) = A pretty large difference. Assuming there is a qualitative difference in image quality and construction, how large will it have to be to justify  the extra $2,300?
Having used a few ZE and ZF lenses I know from experience that Zeiss makes amazing lenses. I am not arguing that.

[Vladimirovich]

Having used a few ZE and ZF lenses I know from experience that Zeiss makes amazing lenses. I am not arguing that.

they also make flops like Touit 32 mm f/1.8

[henrikfoto]

Have anyone here used the new  135mm zeiss with D800(e)?

[LKaven]

I think the Otus has a special place in Zeiss' stategic plan.  The lens is manufactured with its helical on heavy-duty bearings, and having a long focus throw.  With a basic lens assembly made on one manufacturing line, the lens can be outfitted for both cine and still use depending upon what kind of barrel is fitted.

[kers]

The Zeiss has no AF.
At f1,4 a good and swift autofocus may be very important with many types of photography.
It makes the Nikkor more flexible to use.
And now we wait for the 1,4 58mm sigma ART lens...
then let the battle begin!

[NancyP]

And, for the budget manual focus aficionado, we may have a Samyang 50mm f/1.4. I suspect the astrolandscape shooters are viewing this with interest, because Samyang designs have been better than other manufacturers' designs with respect to coma. No gull wings for us, please! It would be nice to have a lens that would be free of coma and sharp to the corners at f/2 to f/2.8.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... It makes the new Nikon look like a joke😄

Hmmm.... how?

[Vladimirovich]

Hmmm.... how?

Heavy is good, heavy is reliable. If it doesn't work you can always hit them with it. (c) B"tB"Y

[henrikfoto]

Hmmm.... how?

Obviously I haven't tested them, but from the curves it should be a clear difference between these lenses.
Also from having a lot of Nikon and Zeiss lenses I am sure the building quality is very different.

To my taste Nikon made better lenses many years ago, but of course the af is getting better.

[Hulyss]

Obviously I haven't tested them, but from the curves it should be a clear difference between these lenses.
Also from having a lot of Nikon and Zeiss lenses I am sure the building quality is very different.

To my taste Nikon made better lenses many years ago, but of course the af is getting better.

I agree. This morning when I seen this announcement I was curious, but after reading the specifications, seen the lens construction and the few samples, I was not that excited. Well... not excited at all. To my eyes, it look like a basic lens at a not so basic price. I know there is work to design such lens but ... all this propaganda around make me feel sick.

The Zeiss, who aim excellence, even if his price point is much higher, do not joke with your money. Since the abandon of Renesas sensor and this sort of joint venture with Sony, Nikon lost a lot to my eyes. The only G lens left I kept is the 85f1.8G (having owned the 1.4G). Nikon does good performance Lenses and Body but the magic is gone since the D700/3S era. My D700 just shine and I have load of fun with manual and AF-D glasses. You find a mojo you can't find any more in modern formulas. In +, AFS-G lenses are not that sexy. AFD design was so more serious, aperture ring, metal, weight ... Sold the D800 and AFS-G lenses.

Since the D700/3S era, Nikon lost a lot IMHO. The company might have some sort of problems after all. It is hard for a "nikkonist" to say and realize that, but I say it. I do not want to move but the D700 (who is new) might have soon a little brother, the A7r, even though it is not a reflex. Zeiss ZM work well on this little thing. Had on the top the use of NOVOFLEX BALPRO T/S... well... you get it.

Of course this is only my opinion, a bit sad, and I might be very wrong. But it is what I feel since some years now.

Here is some examples of the A7r with SonyZeiss 55/1.8 lens and the last is with  Distagon T* 4/18 ZM (credit photo to Brian Smith):





Zeiss ZM 18mm :

[BernardLanguillier]

To my eyes, the D800 doesn't feel as nice as the D3/D3x mostly because of choice of body materials, in particular grip rubber. Now the previous one was causing many recalls due to adhesive problems it seems.

As far as lenses go... I don't agree. The 24mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.4 clearly have the same kind of magical look found on the Sigma 35mm f1.4 for example. Besides they are clearly best in class in terms of measured performance as well.

Now on the external look, they may not feel as premium as they should considering the level of quality.

But basically, I feel that we have underestimated by an order of magniture perhaps the real impact of the earthquake / tsunami / Thai floods is still having on Nikon. I guess they had to prioritize investments focused on recovery and long term business continuity over product development.

Cheers,
Bernard

[kers]

Because of the AF mechanism Nikkors have some lightweight moving parts and you can move focus beyond infinity.
What i do like about Zeiss is the fact that you can turn the focus and find infinity were it stops. very easy.
On the other hand AF saves me a lot of images.
I just let my nikkor 24 f1,4 fall more than 3m on some rocky pavement and the leaves of the aperture were the only parts broken- ( flying around on the inside)
I was surprised nothing else was damaged. Maybe i was lucky but I think build quality is not easy to predict from the outside.
For sure you cannot hammer nails in the wall with a d800 body like you could do with an F2, but the nikon bodies i used ( FE-F8008-F100-D2x-D3- D3x-d800e) almost never let me down... the last three always worked flawlessly - with the d800e i only had to finetune AF for all of my lenses- instead Nikon should have taken care of that.
Since the MTF of the new 58mm Nikkor does not seem to impress i am curious to see what makes the lens so special that Nikon dares to rave about it - I am sure they know what they are talking about and MTF is not the whole story.  We will see a lot of testing soon...
It is an important lens for Nikon to show they can serve the photographers coming from medium format.  Their reputation as a premium lens maker is at stake.

[BernardLanguillier]

Since the MTF of the new 58mm Nikkor does not seem to impress i am curious to see what makes the lens so special that Nikon dares to rave about it - I am sure they know what they are talking about and MTF is not the whole story.  We will see a lot of testing soon...

The Zeiss 55mm f1.4 has obviously defined new standards about how good a 55mm DSLR lens can be wide open (it remains behind the level of quality of super tele lenses though, but those cost even more and only open at 2., but the MTF of the 58mm f1.4 is still very good in absolute terms.

Besides, you are totally correct that this is just a small part of the picture, and one that is probably rather irrelevant for such a lens designed to be shot wide open and for which the look of OoF areas is the key factor. Let's face it, the far corners will be OoF 99.9% of the time in images shot at f1.4 anyway.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Fine_Art]

Found it:

http://www.zeissimages.com/mtf/otus/otus_1455.pdf

This is fantastic.. It makes the new Nikon look like a joke😄

Seems a little over-enthusiastic. The top primes from any manufacturer are pretty amazing.

Do you have any reason to think the new nikon will be inferior to the 85 1.8G, a $700 lens?

The nikon in the field: Yes, I said it.