Road mapped (and not) lenses
-
#1. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
ericbowles Nikonian since 25th Nov 2005Wed 10-Oct-18 03:06 AMFor most Nikon users, the priority should be the lenses that benefit from low weight or improved optics with the new mount. I don't see an optical or weight benefit for longer lenses.
The current S-Roadmap is focused on the lenses that deliver premium optical quality. Mirrorless lenses and bodies that are light weight would be a "me too" choice. Nikon went for optical benefits that are uniquely mirrorless, and the lens roadmap supports that position.
I'd like to see a set of small, light lenses that use a 52mm or 56mm filter. I'm thinking updated versions of many of the 1970-s Ai lenses. With the larger mount, it may be a 62mm filter size, but much smaller in any event.
Those lenses included some that were very sharp but still small enough to fit in your pocket. I'd like to see ultralight materials in those lenses.
On the more traditional side, a 105mm f/2.8 macro lens seems pretty obvious. I could see adding a 70-200 f/4 to compliment the 24-70.
Overall, the roadmap is pretty good. You can produce exotic fast lenses at f/1.2 or f/1.4, but they will be big lenses with a limited market. Having a usable f/1.8 lens that is sharp across the entire frame seems fine compared to an f/1.4 version that requires being stopped down for sharp images. The slower lenses proposed are cheaper, smaller and lighter, but still deliver a usable f/1.8. I see two separate paths for lenses - small and light lenses that are slower, and fast lenses that are bigger due to limits of physics.Eric Bowles
Director - Nikonians Academy
Nikonians Team Moderator
My Gallery
Workshops and Private Instruction
Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera-
#2. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 1
Strada_Facendo Nikonian since 06th Jun 2017Wed 10-Oct-18 04:14 AMZ mount offers the same benefit for telephotos as DX does for F mount: you don't see the image periphery, so aberrations that vary with distance from the optical axis have less effect on the image."Sharpness is a bourgeois concept"; Henri Cartier-Bresson
-
#3. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 2
ericbowles Nikonian since 25th Nov 2005Wed 10-Oct-18 04:22 AMPerhaps another way to look at the mount benefit for longer lenses is that the light is already coming from a narrow field of view so it is not being "bent" to reach the sensor. In relative terms, the amount light is bent for the F-mount does not materially vary with the Z-mount for long lenses, but it is very different for wide lenses. Of course, there is no cropping the outer area as with a DX sensor.Eric Bowles
Director - Nikonians Academy
Nikonians Team Moderator
My Gallery
Workshops and Private Instruction
Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera-
#44. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 3
freqflyerfred Nikonian since 14th Mar 2009Sat 23-Feb-19 05:28 AM | edited Sat 23-Feb-19 11:32 AM by freqflyerfredI built this list of lenses to get a better idea of how the F and Z mounts compare in size, weight and price. I am.happy to move to slightly bigger Z primes in order to get Z zooms that are smaller. The 24-70 is 1/4 shorter and lighter, we will have to wait and see about the other f/2.8 zooms.
File size:296388 bytesFile date:Sat 23-Feb-19 05:26 AMDate/Time:Fri 22-Feb-19 02:22 PMResolution:1200 x 1447JPEG Quality:80Comment:Screenshot======= IPTC data:=======
Attachment#1 (jpg file)
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
View my website: FredCrowden.com.
Flying less and photographing more.
-
-
-
#50. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 1
Attachment#1 (jpg file)
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
View my website: FredCrowden.com.
Flying less and photographing more.
-
#51. "Roadmap Update as of October 10, 2019" | In response to Reply # 50
freqflyerfred Nikonian since 14th Mar 2009Tue 22-Oct-19 09:54 AMThe roadmap below includes Nikon's recent announcement, which is linked in Eric Bowles forum post at:
https://www.nikonians.org/forum/topic/478-671-671/updated-z-lens-roadmap
The list below adds filter size, price, dimension and weight.File size:324009 bytesFile date:Tue 22-Oct-19 09:52 AMDate/Time:Tue 22-Oct-19 12:30 AMResolution:574 x 900JPEG Quality:98Comment:Screenshot======= IPTC data:=======City:Record vers.:4
Attachment#1 (jpg file)
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
View my website: FredCrowden.com.
Flying less and photographing more.-
#52. "RE: Roadmap Update as of October 10, 2019" | In response to Reply # 51
ericbowles Nikonian since 25th Nov 2005Wed 23-Oct-19 07:03 AMNice post, Fred. The chart you posted really shows how much lighter the APS-C lenses are than the already light 14-30 and 24-70 f/4.
It looks like the one remaining lens for 2019 is the 70-200 f/2.8 S - a staple for many photographers.
My main concern about the way this lineup is evolving is the use of so many filter sizes. The primes alone are using 62mm, 67mm, 72mm, and 82mm filters. For DX add the 46mm filter. If you have any FX glass, you probably have some 77mm filters as well. I already own most of these filter sizes, but I really would prefer not to have to carry multiple filter sizes with me or use step-up rings.Eric Bowles
Director - Nikonians Academy
Nikonians Team Moderator
My Gallery
Workshops and Private Instruction
Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera
-
#6. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
Compact and light. To be used as a portrait wide open and landscape stopped down. Can also be used as a candid street lens.
I think 1.8, although if it can deliver great bokeh at 2.8 and get more compact and lighter, then 2.8 should be great. Nice size elements to take advantage of the larger photosites of the Z6 and to work in low light. That's why I thought 1.8 would be the target for a low light 105.
Better resolving than the current 105/1.4. I mean, after all, we are looking at a new world, right?
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
Dennis in Colorado
Photography: 100% technical, 100% art. It takes a photographer to blend them into an image.
Comments and critiques always welcome on any photo I post.
-
#8. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 6
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Tue 16-Oct-18 07:41 PMI'm gambling there won't be a Z-105mm in the early going and that a purchase of the 105mm f/1.4 F-mount will be a nice way to deal with my fast short telephoto need. I've wanted that lens since it was released and am using the purchase of my upcoming Z 6 as my justification (currently I only have DX cameras, sold my FX cameras in 2016/17). I've long wanted to pair up my existing 58mm f/1.4G with the 105E as a great portrait shooting set on an FX camera!
I've also got sitting on my desk the 105mm f/2.5 - it's such a beautiful little lens. I forget how to tell if it is AI or AIS, but am raring to try it with focus peaking. I wasn't very good at "green-dot manual focussing" so it hasn't seen much use.
I wonder what the road mapped 85mm f/1.8 price is going to be? I have high hopes it will be killer sharp and keen to know if it will be a bokeh-monster like Nikon has been doing of late.
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
#16. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 8
DJSmith Registered since 12th Sep 2018Thu 18-Oct-18 09:07 AMI haven't pulled the trigger on the 105/1.4 F mount yet. I have the 85/1.4 and I'm hard press to spend that much. Even though I like that short telly. I have a 105/2.8 and that will have to do for now. But, If I was dreaming, I figured that a Z mount 105/1.8 would be lighter and the same capabilities. The bukah is the 24-70/f4 S line is really nice, for an f4.Visit my Nikonians gallery.
Dennis in Colorado
Photography: 100% technical, 100% art. It takes a photographer to blend them into an image.
Comments and critiques always welcome on any photo I post.
-
#7. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
Some kind of functionality that would be available in Z-mount but not F- is what is required. Perhaps the slower 24-70/f4 would do the trick; with IBIS it is probably more effective in dim, dark museums and cathedrals where I am often stuck shooting at ISO 6400 and higher. Ditto a short macro such as my current 60/f2.8 AFS Micro today. I'd be happy with a 35mm Micro-Nikkor too - yes on FX as my requirements for these micro lenses are NOT nature-based. Similarly, even my 200/f4 Micro-Nikkor could use some IBIS help; it certainly has no VR of its own.
Tilt/shift lenses are a royal pain to use on DSLRs due to the fiddly nature of having to meter unshifted and untilted, then reset the tilt and shift. I don't know for sure, but I would think that with a mirrorless and WYSIWYG EVF, this will be far more straightforward to use, especially with focus peaking.
Of course all of these are nice-to-haves, not must-haves. I seem to have gotten along with these obsolete DSLRs for quite some time, and even with outmoded, "low-performing" and even DX lenses.
_____
Brian...
-
#9. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 7
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Tue 16-Oct-18 07:48 PM | edited Tue 16-Oct-18 07:49 PM by KnightPhotoHi Brian, That 14-30 might be filter friendly, and sharper than the 16-35 f/4. We'll see in 2019.
One other lens I bought a while ago, the 8-15 zoom as I wanted a single lens that could be used as fisheye on DX or FX, will have that nice circular fisheye capability that I have never had the benefit of trying yet (I had sold my FX cameras before I got the 8-15). Looking forward to trying my 8-15 out and always admired your fisheye and circular fisheye work!
It is going to be very interesting to see what the size and weight of the road mapped three f/2.8 kings will be. At least in the case of the 14-24 there ought to be a size and weight benefit. The other two, not so sure, it's going to be an interesting comparison!
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
#10. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 9
blw Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Wed 17-Oct-18 04:03 AM> That 14-30 might be filter friendly, and sharper than the 16-35 f/4
In general, I don't upgrade lenses to get better optical performance. It is very rare that my skills exceed the performance of my lenses, so I see little benefit in such upgrades. If I do it, the difference in performance has to be huge. The only two that I've done were from the 70-300 AF G (the $120 version) to an 80-200/f2.8 AFS and from the 50/f1.8 AFD to the Sigma 50/f1.4 ART. Those are both pretty big jumps and even the latter didn't really need to be done, it was also a matter of f/1.4 and a strategic decision to use the 50mm perspective to replicate the look of vintage images.
> the 8-15 zoom
Yep, I now have that one too. Of course, it's an F-mount, and thus will not play any role in tempting me to a Z. It clearly works very nicely on my D500/810/850 so a Z would have to offer something even more - and as above. that doesn't include optical performance.
> always admired your fisheye and circular fisheye work!
Why thank you! I have not used it so much recently, due to the nature of what I've spent my time shooting this year, but my intention is to go back to it over the fall and winter.
> It is going to be very interesting to see what the size and weight of the road mapped three f/2.8 kings will be
I'm not expecting there to be much, if any at all. The trend these days is toward much bigger glass, for optical performance reasons. Since the S-series lenses are designed for optimal performance, I expect complex optical formulations for these lenses. They simply cannot be less than top notch. All that glass weighs, which is why the S-series 35/f1.8 Z weighs more than the 35/f1.4 F. The simple fact that the lens mount is so big means that the designers have ample reason to use elements that big, with the attendant implied weight.
The old Nikkor 105/f1.8 that I used to have was a pretty big chunk of glass, but the new 105/f1.4 AFS weighs almost twice as much and takes a filter that's a full 20mm bigger, despite the use of lighter weight materials. The Sigma 105/f1.4 is even larger than the Nikkor. The fact that there is almost certainly a 70- or 100mp Z8 out there means that optical demands are increasing, not decreasing.
I agree that superwides can be made in smaller form factors due to the short flange distance, but if I look in my bag, that doesn't help so much. I doubt that the 24-70 is going to be much if any smaller, and the 70-200 is probably going to be bigger for the reasons above. If I had to guess, I'd say that the sum of weight of the three f/2.8 kings will be greater than the current three. And lenses like the 58/f0.95 or the Canon 28-70/f2 aren't going to do anything to lighten the load.
To get weight reduction, photographers are going to have to compromise on format (APS-C or smaller), image quality (24mp not 45 or 70-100) or aperture, or some combination of those._____
Brian...-
#11. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 10
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Wed 17-Oct-18 06:46 AMAgree with your comments.
For me, so far the 14-30 and 24-70 being f/4 are very attractive as a one-two combo. Huge range coverage, presumably more than sharp enough for my needs, and for everyday use f/4 is sufficient and a good choice by Nikon.
It will be very interesting if Nikon also releases some f/2.8 primes too. I think there would be a following, i.e. enough sales to justify given the compact nature of the Z 6 and 7 cameras. I hope Nikon sees this as a growth area, I think it definitely would be for many shooters. Personally I'm keeping an eye out for a range of AI/AIS models (24 f/2.8, 85 f/2, plus more) that I will be able to actually focus using either focus peaking and/or split/screen or zoom to focus.
I think Z looks promising for "Art-like maybe even Otus-like" sharpness without the dreadful size/weight/cost penalty, while still producing the wonderful bokeh their recent F-mount designs have been excellent for. I.e. character lenses that also are in the very good to excellent optical IQ ballpark.
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
#12. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 10
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Wed 17-Oct-18 06:56 AMAlso one of these days I'm going to pick up a D5500/5600/5700 and the 3 AF-P prince's: 10-20, 18-55, and 70-300 DX. Our local rep stepped me through the marvellous touch screen capabilities of the 5500 series (e.g. using touch to move AF point while still looking through the viewfinder). He is a great and positive thinker about how to wring everything out of these little marvels. I'll be seeing him again this Sunday, big local photography show and he is going to try and bring in the 500PF (there's only one with Nikon Canada right now).
Those PFs are, for me, a marvel and I sold my 500 f/4G and money growing in the stock market in anticipation of the 600PF. I think Nikon really gets it, one less stop was a great choice in combo with the PF benefits. My 300PF is a wonder and will go nicely with a 600PF big brother.
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
#13. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 12
blw Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Wed 17-Oct-18 10:54 AM> D5500/5600/5700 and the 3 AF-P prince's: 10-20, 18-55, and 70-300 DX.
I have those three also. I find that as long as I'm working by myself, the do wonders. Assuming I don't need f/1.4 DoF or something, I seriously doubt that anyone is ever going to know that I used a bunch of $200 lenses. I have found, though, that they actively lose me credibility amongst other pros, as if one must have a 24-70f/2.8 and 70-200/f2.8 to actually turn in professional results.
Combined with a 40/f2.8 AFS Micro-Nikkor and a Metz M400 flash, I can literally put my D500, four lenses and a flash into the Retrospective 5 bag that I originally bought for my mirrorless outfit. A D5600 or D3500 would make it even smaller, but at the cost of different control systems. I have finally gotten my two main cameras back onto essentially identical control systems (D500, D850) and I would rather carry the difference in weight between a D5600 and D500 than change. If you remember the old Virginia Slims commercial, I'd rather fight than switch... So I feel like I've got the small-and-light thing licked, thus I don't need a mirrorless to do it._____
Brian...-
#14. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 13
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Wed 17-Oct-18 09:50 PM | edited Wed 17-Oct-18 09:54 PM by KnightPhotoThanks Brian, maybe I'll try the 3 AF-P princes on my D500's, appreciate your insights above. The 18-55 AF-P is a little pricey locally when bought standalone, so I've mentally always been waiting for a good used deal on a D5x00 with 18-55 AF-P.
Digressing hugely, my perfect camera would be a "hybrid DSLR" that has all the features of mirrorless when used in live view with IBIS - on-sensor PDAF - and an optional add-on EVF, yet with the mirror down operates in traditional DSLR mode with its superior off-sensor PDAF - no EVF and I'm assuming would not support IBIS in that mode which would be an OK concession.
I would prefer a couple identical cameras in my bag that could operate as a "mirrorless" or "as a DSLR" upon my choosing. Failing that I'm going to own both DSLR and mirrorless for their strengths. I'd rather own fewer cameras and more lenses though
But I'll take what I can get which for me is going to be the two D500 I already own and an upcoming Z 6 which I've pre-ordered. Am really looking forward to the Z 6.
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
#15. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 14
blw Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Thu 18-Oct-18 03:26 AM> The 18-55 AF-P is a little pricey locally when bought standalone
I got mine as a Nikon refurb - $99. Can't beat that with a stick. In fact, I got all three of them as Nikon refurbs - $249 for the 10-20 and $179 for the 70-300, all three at B&H. Under $530 for the set of three, and I got the 40/f2.8 AFS Micro for around $250 used, probably from KEH. It was the most expensive of the lot!_____
Brian...
-
-
-
-
-
#53. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 7
Ahem Z 6 and 85/28 PC E - i had shooted in A-Mode and with flash (SU-800) with shift and tilt. And totally forgotten about locking the exposure. Got good shots.
Will test that with my 24 PCE too. With the D850, M-Mode,metering the scene and shift/tilt then... i have the impression, with the Z series those lenses make fun to use.
Best regards
Dieter
#17. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
Nikon’s available S-series lenses and their three-year roadmap are not a big incentive for me. I know that lens choices are a very personal thing, but I would be orders of magnitude more excited about the Z cameras if I could buy a native 24-120 lens. A 24-70 does not thrill me, nor do most of the nuanced wide aperture primes – perhaps the Noct ☺. At this point I have no intention of replicating my 2.8 trio in the S-series. If I was just starting out and my business required them, I might be thrilled.
I personally think a 24-120 would have a broader appeal, possibly drawing in some new Nikon shooters. I notice Canon has their 24-105 RF available for their FF mirrorless. I would think the smaller, lighter Z series is an opportunity to appeal to an extended audience. That appeal to the new crowd seems dependent on native lens offerings. Why not open it up?
David
Visit my SmugMug gallery
-
#18. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 17
ericbowles Nikonian since 25th Nov 2005Thu 18-Oct-18 02:21 PMWell, the 24-70 f/4 Z-mount lens Nikon has released is 25% lighter than the Canon 24-105 f/4 RF.
I've ordered the 24-70 f/4 because it is reported to be much sharper than my 24-70 f/2.8 and it is a solid kit lens to use the mirrorless system fully. I also have the primes covered with F-mount lenses for now - and I'm not a heavy user of primes.Eric Bowles
Director - Nikonians Academy
Nikonians Team Moderator
My Gallery
Workshops and Private Instruction
Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera
#19. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
Other than that, I am interested to see what the 2.8 zooms are like in terms of size. Is it worth replacing/duplicating my current F-mount f/4 lenses? Is it worth duplicating the 24-70 f/4 S that I am really enjoying as a "walkaround" lens?
#20. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
For me, the attraction would be equal or better IQ to my DSLRs in a lighter package. Mounting a F-mount 70-200 f/2.8 via the F-mount adapter on a Z doesn't really do much for weight savings.
So a good range of wide rooms, wide primes, standard rooms and telephoto and long zooms, plus a circular and rectangular fisheye. Then I'll sell everything else I have.
I will be interested to see what Sigma comes up with for the Z. I do love my F-mount Art lenses, but I think it would be a handholding nightmare to put one on a Z.
Mick
"The difference between a professional photographer and other photographers is the pro doesn't show you the bad shots."
Web Site: http://www.mickklassphoto.com
My Nikonians Galleries: https://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/117796
See my portfolio.
#21. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
>curious about whether/when the following will come:
>- 70-200 f/4 and/or 70-300 fx.x-f/5.6;
>- 105mm portrait lens and at what f-stops? Same for 135mm.
>And a faster than f/1.8 85mm.
Out of all the F-mount lenses, I would imagine that the FX 70-300 AF-P probably works the best on the Z cameras. It's got electronic aperture control, stepper motors, focus by wire, and was built to be used on hi-res cameras. It might be enough to just adapt that one for now.
-
#23. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 21
>>On the "not on the roadmap yet" side of things,
>I'm
>>curious about whether/when the following will come:
>>- 70-200 f/4 and/or 70-300 fx.x-f/5.6;
>>- 105mm portrait lens and at what f-stops? Same for
>135mm.
>>And a faster than f/1.8 85mm.
>
>Out of all the F-mount lenses, I would imagine that the FX
>70-300 AF-P probably works the best on the Z cameras. It's got
>electronic aperture control, stepper motors, focus by wire,
>and was built to be used on hi-res cameras. It might be enough
>to just adapt that one for now.
I bought the 70-300 AF-P for my Z7 and really like it so far.
#22. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
For tele, I need to get something, as my only tele lens at the moment is DX-format. I'm torn between picking up a used 70-200/4 or a 70-300 AF-P. The former could serve double-duty on my D90, the latter is less expensive and the stepper motor probably focuses somewhat better on the Z-series.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#24. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
One of the few Zeiss Milvus lens I do not own yet is the 15/2.8. B&H recently dropped the price $400 through early January so I may opt for it since I can also use it on my D850.
Curious what the price point on the Nikkor 14-30/4 will be?
The Arkansas Nikonian
-
#25. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 24
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Wed 28-Nov-18 07:48 PMYes the 14-30 f/4, if as good as the other S-line lenses, should be a dealmaker of a lens. Size of the mockup looks very promising and it appears to also take filters.
Even that 24-70 f/2.8 mockup size and weight look very promising.
The interesting thing about the f-mount 14-24 f/2.8G is that it is known to have focus shift that focusses further back than your selected AF point if you are stopped down. However on the Z-cameras, they focus at the shooting aperture (unlike DSLRs which focus at the wide-open aperture) through f/5.6. This should have the effect of giving you more of a desired result on the Z as compared to the D850 when shooting stopped down. Not sure if that would improve your corners but it would be interesting to experiment between your D850 and Z-camera and see for yourself.
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
#26. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 25
gtm Registered since 17th Feb 2002Thu 29-Nov-18 04:30 AMAgree with your assessment Steve, If I use my 14-24/2.8 for landscape using the 850 I stay in the f/8 range and fine tune my focus manually using focus peaking in live view, 14mm is my most used focal length, I am just wandering on the Z7 if the new 14-30 will test better optically,
Any guess on the price point?GARY
The Arkansas Nikonian-
#27. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 26
MSullivan Registered since 10th Jun 2017Thu 29-Nov-18 05:57 AMI hope they don't make it too crazy expensive. Surely it'll cost more than the 24-70 f/4 which retails for $999, and the Sony 12-24 f/4 is $1,649, so I'd guess somewhere in between.-
#28. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 27
ericbowles Nikonian since 25th Nov 2005Fri 30-Nov-18 04:43 AMThe original 14-24 f/2.8 retailed for $1899. The replacement will likely have some new features - such as the focus by wire and probably the ability to program the focus ring for other functions. It won't have VR because you will have IBIS. I would expect a nice update in the optical coatings and number of ED elements. The 14-24 was known as one of the sharpest wide lenses from anyone when it was released, but the big advantage is optical performance in difficult conditions - protection from flare and CA. The new Nikon version will probably be 20% lighter than the current 14-24. Optically - the 14-30 should be the sharpest ultrawide zoom from any manufacturer across the frame and in the corners. That's a big step given the performance of the 14-24, but the ultrawide lenses and fast lenses have the biggest benefit of the new mount.
I expect a price closer to $2199 to $2299, but it could be a little higher. That's in the range of the 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 lenses. I don't think you can compare it to an f/4 lens since normally those lenses are 40% less expensive than f/2.8 alternatives.Eric Bowles
Director - Nikonians Academy
Nikonians Team Moderator
My Gallery
Workshops and Private Instruction
Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera-
#29. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 28
gtm Registered since 17th Feb 2002Fri 30-Nov-18 05:22 AMThanks Eric.
My understanding is a 14-30/2.8 is also in the pipeline. That would not interest me if there is no noticeable improvement on resolution since I’ll be in the f/8 range for this ultra wide. The 14-30/4 would be sufficient. I agree with the price range.GARY
The Arkansas Nikonian -
#30. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 28
MSullivan Registered since 10th Jun 2017Fri 30-Nov-18 06:27 AMThe Z 14-30 coming in 2019 is also f/4, so wouldn't it be appropriate to compare it to the f/4 Sony? The Z 14-24 f/2.8 isn't due till 2020.-
#31. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 30
ericbowles Nikonian since 25th Nov 2005Fri 30-Nov-18 06:34 AMI agree - the 14-30 f/4 would be comparable to the Sony and the Nikon 16-35, while the 14-24 f/2.8 would be a step up from the current 14-24.
There is a big difference in weight and size for the current lenses, but both are optically pretty good. The 14-24 is excellent. I would expect to see Nikon continue to differentiate these lenses.Eric Bowles
Director - Nikonians Academy
Nikonians Team Moderator
My Gallery
Workshops and Private Instruction
Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera-
#32. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 31
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Fri 30-Nov-18 06:48 AMIt seems like all Nikon Z shooters have their eye on the 14-30 f/4Z. I hope Nikon's initial production run is a big one!
The mockup picture size looks very nice!
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
-
-
-
-
-
#33. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
Throw two or three of these in your bag with a Z6 and a small 70-200 f4Z, and you can walk around a European city all day without getting tired or drawing attention to yourself, and you can shoot inside of dark cathedrals and virtually anything else you might encounter.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#34. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
I'm finally done with my "fire-sale" and I no longer have a DSL camera except for the D5500-IR, but it doesn't count - it is a specialty camera. Therefore, my Z7 is the only interchangeable lens camera I have. I can only use my F-mount lenses with the Z7 and the FTZ adapter. It is convenient for me to get Z-Mount lenses. However, I'm not going to purchase the new and upcoming Z lenses without having a need for them.
I have the Z 24-70 and the Z 35. I have also pre-ordered the Z 14-30 and paid for. I'm interested, at this time, in the Z 24 and Z 85 and probably a Z 70-200 f/4, if Nikon comes out with it
I have the AF-S 20mm f/1.8G and the AF-S 28mm f/1.8G. I do not know about getting the Z 24, which would be between the AF-S 20 an AF-S 28. The only reason, I can see, is to have a wide prime to use without the adapter. Another possibility, since I'm converting to Z-Mount is to get Z 24 and sell the AF-S 28. I do not think I will ever sell my copy of the AF-S 20, which I consider my top F-Mount lens. To have the 20, 24, 28, 35, 50, 85 might be too many primes. It also depends on the Z 24 price and weight.
I will get the Z 85 and sell my copy of the Tamron AF-S 85 1.8 VC. I ill not have a Z-Mount and F-Mount lenses of the same focal distance and same f aperture.
I'm interested in a probable future Z 70-200 f/4 that I believe is coming. Nikon has already announced a f/2.8 Z-Mount trilogy: the Z 14-24, Z 24-70, and Z 70-200 just like their F-Mount f/2.8 trilogy. Nikon offers an F-Mount f/4 trilogy: the 16-35, 24-120, and 70-200. They already have 2/3 of an F/4 Z trilogy: the 14-30 and 24-70. IMHO, the Z 24-70 f/4 is a matter of time before it is announced. However, I'm very happy with my Tamron AF-S 70-300 VC f/3.5-5.6. I used it a lot for table-top photography handheld. It is 100 mm longer and one aperture slower at the longer focal distances, but a a bit faster at the shorter ones. I have to think about this one. It all depends on the reviews, weight and price.
Other future lenses depends what Nikon announces. One thing to keep in mind is that I can only use one lens at a time and I did not "clean up my closet" in a fire sale to start another collection of lenses I barely use. Therefore, If I get the 70-200, I will have to sell the Tamron 70-300. In other words, if I get a new Z-Mount lens, I will have to sell its AF-S counterpart that I have.
Best regards,
Hektor
My Blog: Hektors Blog
My Photo Album: Hektors Photos
My Nikonians Album: My Galleries
Nikonians is our Safe Port and Home in the World Wide Web - Participate as a Full Family Member.
Nikon Z7 - Leica Q - Nikon Z50
Member since 2007 - Previous User Name: Ramesses (2035 posts) A combined total of 3163+ posts and counting.
"Photography is like a box of chocolates; you never know what you're gonna get." Forrest Gump.
-
#35. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 34
torwood Registered since 05th Dec 2010Thu 31-Jan-19 04:19 PMI can kind of understand using F-mount lenses with the adaptor on a Z camera - it's a smaller FX package than an FX F-mount camera. But, for me, the whole point of ever going to mirrorless is to get the smallest possible FX system - and that means Z-lenses for everything except ultra-tele. Plus, with Z-mount, they should be able to create some uniquely small lenses for FX in wide angles.
I have just about exactly what I want in DSLR F-mount right now - but FX is too big to carry when I travel, so I still need a DX system - and nobody makes small fast wide primes for light weight travel shooting in dark buildings. Z seems likely to solve that problem, eventually. Fast DX Z would be even smaller,...and I think it's coming, again, eventually.Visit my Nikonians gallery.
-
#36. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 35
Hektor Nikonian since 07th Jan 2008Thu 31-Jan-19 08:34 PM | edited Thu 31-Jan-19 09:32 PM by HektorRyan:
The Z-Mount lenses are not that light, because the Z cameras are full frame. In order to have a light camera and lenses, it has to be a DX system like the Fuji XF. The only way to go light with Nikon is with the DX system. My AF-S 50mm f/1.8G SE with the FTZ adapter is lighter than the Z 50mm f/1.8 S lens. That is why, at this time, I'm not purchasing the Z 50. In addition, I do not use the 50mm focal length that much. I rather use the 35mm, instead.
I just sold my Fuji X-T2 system with all the 9 lenses. What I hate is to duplicate lenses with the same focal length. I just sold the AF-S 18-35 in anticipation of the Z 14-30, the AF-S 24-85 when I got the Z 24-70, and the Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC when I got the Z 35. I'm thinking of selling my Tamron 85mm f/1.8 VC, with time, in anticipation of the coming Z 85.
I am very happy with what I have now:
Leica Q - Typ 116
Fixed Focal Length Lens
Leica Summilux 28mm f/1.7 ASPH
Nikon Z7
Zoom Lenses
Nikkor Z 14-30mm f/4 S (Pre-Ordered ~ April 30)
Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/4 S
Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD
Prime Lenses
Nikkor AF-S 20mm f/1.8G ED N
Nikkor AF-S 28mm f/1.8G ED N
Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.8 S
Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.8G SE
Tamron SP 85mm f/1.8 Di VC USD
Fisheye Lens
Sigma DG 15mm f/2.8 EX
Macro/Table-Top Lenses
Nikkor AF-S Micro 105mm f/2.8G ED VR
Sigma DG 50mm f/2.8 EX Macro
Sigma DG 70mm f/2.8 EX Macro
Sigma DG 150mm f/2.8 EX APO Macro
Nikon D5500-IR / 715nm - No Pass Filter
Lenses
Nikkor AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8G
Nikkor AF-S DX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VRII
Nikkor AF-S DX 18-200 f/3.5-5.6G ED VRII
Nikon Coolpix P900
Fixed Focal Length Lens
Nikon T 4.3-357mm (35 mm: 24-2000mm) f/2.8-6.5
I have enough lenses. The only additional focal length, is the Z 135mm if Nikon will come out with one. I always wanted a 135mm prime. During my film days, I had the Canon AE1 and A1 with only three lenses and I did not need anything else: the 24mm, the 50mm, and the 135mm.
When it comes to the D5500 - Infrared camera, the DX 35mm, the DX 18-55mm, and the 18-200mm are the only lenses I use with the camera. The 35mm and 18-55 are very light, but if I need a bigger range, I use the 18-200. Not all lenses are good for IR, primarily due to hot spots and other problems like focus shift. The three I have are very good lenses for IR. I tried shooting IR with the AF-S 28mm with mixed results.
I consider the Macro/Tabletop lenses and accessories a complete different system. The lenses are set - not any new ones. For the last 7 years I have been purchasing accessories like lighting, flashes, focusing rails, etc. What I have is amazing, if I may say so. I have yet to sell any of my Macro/Micro lenses or any of the accessories.The main reason is because as I get older, I'm not able to get out as much. I am 70 now; I have to start shooting more inside the house. I'm ready for it and then some .
I changed my mind. I will list my Tabletop system; I might get in trouble for it - wrong forum One thing led to another in this discussion
Tabletop/Macro Photography Accessories
Tripods & Heads
Gitzo GT1541 (Series 1) Mountaineer 6X Carbon Fiber
RSS BH-30 Pro: Compact Ballhead&B2-40-LR Clamp
Gitzo GC3320 Series 0-3 Tripod Holster
Gitzo GT-3541LS (System 3) Systematic 6X Carbon
Gitzo GS3310GS Compact Geared Column
Markins Q-Ball M10 Tripod Ball Head
Markins Q-Ball M20 Tripod Ball Head
Manfrotto 405 Pro Digital Geared Head (QR)
Manfrotto 460MG 3D Magnesium Head with RC2 QR
Manfrotto 200PL Quick Release Plate
Speedlights & Flashes
Nikon R1C1 Wireless Close-Up Speedlight System with commander
Nikon SB-200 remote flash (2)
Sigma EM-140 DG TTL Macro Ringlight Flash
Focusing Racks/Rails
Novoflex Castel-Cross-Q Focusing Racks
Kirk FR-1 Focusing Rail w/ Arca-Type Quick Release
Macro Accessories
Sigma 1.4x DG EX APO Teleconverter
Canon 77mm 500D Close-up Lens
Nikon PB-6 Bellows
Kenko Auto Extension Tube Set AF (12, 20, 36mm)
Interfit Portable LED Studio Table Kit
Photek Digital Lighthouse (15 x15 x 23")
Impact One Floodlight Umbrella Kit
Impact One Floodlight without Umbrella
Savage LED Studio Lamp - 30W (2)
Raya 25W LED Daylight Bulb (2)
Smith-Victor White Plexiglass for Shooting Table
Smith-Victor White Frame for White Plexiglass
SHW Mobile Laptop Stand Desk
Pro Gel Variety Filter Pack 12 x 12" (2)
Smith-Victor 20" Cloth Rainbow Pak Assorted Sweeps
Bessey Steel Spring Clamp (Black, 1 & 1/4 x 1") (2)
Bessey Steel Spring Clamp (Black, 2 & 1/4 x 2") (2)
Impact CC-123 Hook Beak Duo Flex Clamp
Best regards
HektorMy Blog: Hektors Blog
My Photo Album: Hektors Photos
My Nikonians Album: My Galleries
Nikonians is our Safe Port and Home in the World Wide Web - Participate as a Full Family Member.
Nikon Z7 - Leica Q - Nikon Z50
Member since 2007 - Previous User Name: Ramesses (2035 posts) A combined total of 3163+ posts and counting.
"Photography is like a box of chocolates; you never know what you're gonna get." Forrest Gump.-
#39. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 36
Hektor Nikonian since 07th Jan 2008Fri 01-Feb-19 02:55 PMHi:
There is a couple of things I forgot to mention. I do not have a 1.4 lens anymore. With my XT-2 system I had 4 lenses of 1.4 or more: the 16mm, 23mm, 35mm, and the 56mm with 1.2. I'm interested in the upcoming 50mm 1.2; it all depends on size, weight, and price.
I really do not care for the 50mm. I do not consider it my normal lens; I prefer a 42mm. Well, I'm not the only one. Thom Hogan wrote the same thing. According to him, the field of view of a 42mm is the normal field of view for most people. The only reason, he wrote, that lens manufacturers use a 50mm 1.4 is because it is the length of field to make a very fast lens of high quality at a low cost. He also recommends to use a 35mm instead of the 50mm. If I cannot have a 42mm, my lens of choice is the 35mm.
Thom Hogan also recommends to use wide angle lenses to shoot very close to the subject - "you get the get the best perspective that way." That is how I use my wide lenses for two reasons. Firstly, I agree with Thom Hogan. Lastly, since most of my shooting is handheld travel photography, I eliminate most of the people that get in the way of my photos.
Best regards,
HektorMy Blog: Hektors Blog
My Photo Album: Hektors Photos
My Nikonians Album: My Galleries
Nikonians is our Safe Port and Home in the World Wide Web - Participate as a Full Family Member.
Nikon Z7 - Leica Q - Nikon Z50
Member since 2007 - Previous User Name: Ramesses (2035 posts) A combined total of 3163+ posts and counting.
"Photography is like a box of chocolates; you never know what you're gonna get." Forrest Gump.-
#40. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 39
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Fri 01-Feb-19 08:53 PM | edited Fri 01-Feb-19 08:54 PM by KnightPhotoHi Hektor,
i'm quite interested in the 35S. Alas I broke down and pre-ordered the 14-30 now so I'll wait on getting the 35mm until I've dealt with other priorities or the stock I bought for my "camera gear fund" has enough surplus profit to cover the 35mm.
I've never shot a 35mm prime but have owned nearly every other focal length from 20mm primes to the excellent 180 Nikkor. I'm keen to see what the 35mm focal length will be like as a prime lens. I need to lock my 24-70S at 35mm and give it a whirl.
On paper at least, I aspire to something like a 20-35-58-105 combo as a prime lens set.
The size, weight, and price of the Canon 50 f/1.2R has me scared off (it's $3,000 Canadian dollars).
I do find it intriguing that some are prognosticating that Nikon will go with an f/1.2 prime lens set and an f/1.8 lens set (at least initially). I'm likely to favour the f/1.8 lens set as they are more practical on the size/weight/cost side of things.
I'm also sorely tempted by some of the Samyang focal lengths, their 135mm f/2 manual focus lens is quite a bargain and I've heard good things. It's only in F-mount currently, but maybe if I dawdle long enough Samyang will bring it out in Z-mount and then no need for the FTZ adapter. And Samyang have an 85mm f/1.2 but they don't make that in F-mount. Of all the Sigma Art's I have not been tempted (too big), except by their 135mm f/1.8 which is comparatively svelte for the Art line.
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
-
-
#37. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 35
Nikon introduced DX as the only format for digital. At the time, the quality and cost of sensor production made DX a viable option. But DX has subsequently evolved into two versions - a compact camera with interchangeable lenses like the D5X00 series and D3X00 series - and prosumer models like the D500 and D300 that are about the same as their FX counterparts. Lenses for DX have similarly split into small and light consumer lenses, and pro/prosumer lenses that include both large and medium sized models.
In mirrorless, the mount is larger which implies a larger lens - at least a larger mount. But it can still be very light in FX format - such as the Z6/7 and 24-70 lens. There is little doubt that Nikon can produce a DX format camera, but there are a lot of options. The question in my mind is why you need a DX format for lighter weight. The body can't get much smaller and still be ergonomically attractive - which means DX has limited opportunity to save much weight with a smaller sensor and keeping the current mount. You could make smaller lenses, but they need to work on a large Z mount or with an adapter. I can't see another mount being in the future.
Another option is using DX lenses on an FX mirrorless body. The camera automatically does the cropping, you can use the EVF and the frame is filled, and the DX lens lineup is filled with good light-weight lens options. The lenses can be F-mount lenses like we have today, or DX lenses for Z-mount which simply have a smaller image circle.
I also look at the Nikon 1 system as being a viable option. It provides a small mount that is enough smaller than DX to work with smaller bodies, and you could use the existing native lenses, the existing FT1 adapter or possibly a future ZT1 adapter. All this can have many of the existing technologies in a smaller format. That's a possible path to a light system without another new mount. And remember, the Nikon 1 series dropped the EVF and made it an optional accessory which saved a lot of cost on the base model.
All of this disregards the real objective of Nikon with mirrorless. They redesigned the entire system to have faster and sharper lenses with fewer artifacts. Optically there is little difference on the longer end between F-mount and Z-mount designs - they are both excellent. But at the wider end, there is a big difference. The weight advantage is not the primary differentiating factor in Nikon's strategy - or they would have kept a small mount.
Eric Bowles
Director - Nikonians Academy
Nikonians Team Moderator
My Gallery
Workshops and Private Instruction
Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera
-
#38. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 37
torwood Registered since 05th Dec 2010Fri 01-Feb-19 05:40 AMAll true. But, DX is not a viable option for the kind of travel I want to do. I need a fast, small, wide angle prime or zoom - like a 20 f1.8 equivalent for DX (12 or 13mm f2.8), that I can use in old dark buildings. Also, a 50mm f1.8 DX could be pretty small, like the 35 DX.
Nobody makes those lenses, and they won't, because Nikon and Canon see DX as an entry consumer system or a wildlife/sports camera for advanced shooters. Therefore, they will only make consumer variable aperture zooms for the entry crowd, and let the advanced distance/action (re: D500) shooters use FX teles. And, from a sales standpoint, I think they are right. I'm just SOL. So, I'll have to carry my D750 and a 20 f1.8FX, or buy a Z FX camera and get the same lens. That just means fewer other lenses go in the bag.
BTW, Hektor, when I was a student in Europe in the 1980s, I carried a Canon AE1 and three lenses: 28 f2.8, 50 f1.8, and a 70-200 f4 zoom, and I never imagined that I needed anything else (except maybe a few more mm on the wide end).Visit my Nikonians gallery.
-
#41. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 38
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Fri 01-Feb-19 09:04 PM | edited Fri 01-Feb-19 09:06 PM by KnightPhotoRyan, I wonder if Nikon would dare to produce some manual focus small light primes for the Z-system? I'd be tempted if cost was decent and/or if cost was slightly higher but image quality was nearly as high as what we have seen with the S-line, especially on the wide-angle side where manual focus can be forgiving. And of course manual focus on the Z-cameras is the best we've had it since the days of film SLRs.
E.g. 20mm f/3.5, 28mm f2.8, etc. Maybe unambitious in lens speed but small and sharp and perhaps decently priced.
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
#42. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 41
torwood Registered since 05th Dec 2010Tue 05-Feb-19 12:26 PMAs my eyes deteriorate, I struggle more and more with manual focus. I use it only on macro these days, since the subject fills the viewfinder and is a little easier for me to see.
What I really need/want is a fast, small, wide prime for DX. The equivalent of 20mm f1.8 (but I could live with f2.8 if it made the lens smaller). I could also live with a 24mm f2.8 equivalent. I want it for shooting in dark cathedrals and churches in Europe without jacking up the ISO. Canon has made a 22mm f2 for the DX-M bodies. It's about 3/4" deep. I'd be happy with three times that depth for a 13mm f2.8 DX.
As I said above, though, nobody would buy it except for a few of us. Most advanced amateurs and pros don't mind carrying around fast FX systems, and the snap-shooters have no idea why their photos are blurry/noisy when they shoot those interior shots with their 18-55 f4-5.6, or at ISO 6400+.Visit my Nikonians gallery.
-
#43. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 42
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Tue 05-Feb-19 08:34 PMI realize you are talking primes. I do love my Tokina f/2 14-20 if you want fast and wide on DX. Great lens for those special situations...
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
#48. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 42
KnightPhoto Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Wed 06-Mar-19 08:26 PMNow that Nikon has shown the mockups at CP+ show it's pretty obvious that the f/1.8 primes are not built for small (although I expect their weight will be decently low enough). Nikon has taken an interesting tack on the f/1.8 S-line prime lineup, aside from the 85mm f/1.8S they appear to be big, lightweight, middling expensive, but am willing to bet all are going to be tack sharp. I was taken aback at the size of the 20mm f/1.8S. I'll probably still get it though.
I don't think anyone expected this particular design paradigm for the f1/8S lineup. And judging from the 50mm f/1.2S the f/1.2 S-Line offerings are going to be godawful big, expensive, heavy, and likely unparalleled image quality.
So that leaves:
- a possible non-S-line set of smaller/slower f/2.8 primes? I think Nikon gets the attraction and will do it - lenses designed to be small, light, and reasonably affordable;
- where does that leave f/1.4 primes? Total speculation but they could go with offering some small, light, affordable f/1.4 lenses like the current 50mm f/1.4G. Given the Z-mount advantages they could possibly outperform their f/1.4G equivalents too. Or as some people postulate, f/1.4 are not a priority because having f/1.8 and f/1.2 lineups are sufficient - it will be interesting to see what develops in the coming years.
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians BlogVisit
-
-
-
#45. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
https://petapixel.com/2019/01/08/this-is-nikons-updated-mirrorless-lens-roadmap/
Dunno if this adds anything to the discussion; I wanted to know when a native 70-200mm would be available for my Z6, and it looks like it won't be long. How much? Heh, well considering what the 14-30mm F/4 is going for, I can imagine the 70-200mm f/2.8 will carry a hefty price tag.
I have decided that the Z system is the only camera I will use from here on out. It feels like the future to me, and I am enjoying my Z6 more than any camera I've yet owned (going back to the Canon AE-1 in 1977), so I'm in for the long haul. I only hope that Nikon will keep the firmware updates coming for the Z6/7 and not leave us early adopters behind as they release new bodies in this system. One can always hope....
-
#46. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 45
William Rounds Nikonian since 25th Mar 2011Tue 05-Mar-19 10:52 PMWhat if Nikon made a smallish DSLR with a Z mount? A sort of Df with the best properties of a D850.Visit my Nikonians gallery.
-
#47. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 46
Eh, I'm done with flapping mirrors and pentaprism views. The size and ergo of the Z6 is fine for me. Lenses are the next project.
I know there are some excellent DSLRs and lenses out there (I've owned a couple), but mirrorless is the future, and I cannot wait to see if Nikon will produce the glass and additional bodies that signals the next phase in this pastime. I mentioned it in another thread, but I still remember the first time I loaded film into my Canon AE-1. What I felt was genuine excitement, and shot as much celluloid as I could to get into the darkroom. I feel some of that now.
-
#49. "RE: Road mapped (and not) lenses" | In response to Reply # 0
G
On the "not on the roadmap yet" side of things, I'm curious about whether/when the following will come:
- 70-200 f/4 and/or 70-300 fx.x-f/5.6;
- 105mm portrait lens and at what f-stops? Same for 135mm. And a faster than f/1.8 85mm.
I was quite surprised to see the S-line f/2.8 three kings already on the roadmap, given that their f-mount counterparts are stellar and all work great on the FTZ. I asked Thom Hogan about this and he surmised the S-line 3 kings will be released for use on the expected Z9 camera prior to the 2020 Olympics (high frame rate, top of the line).
Personally I don't need superteles in the Z-mount as I prefer the F-mount ones for equal use on a DSLR and Z cameras.
What are your must-haves from the roadmap and future lenses?
Best regards, SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog
Visit