Why do lenses with large aperures cost so much more than lenses with smaller apertures? I am just wondering why lenses with larger apertures costs more than another lens with a...

nauticalmike

I am just wondering why lenses with larger apertures costs more than another lens with a slightly smaller aperture? for example a 50 f1.4 vs a 50 f1.8.

RichardTaylor Loc: Sydney, Australia

Large pieces of glass can be very expensive. Also they may be better mechanically constructed with faster focussing and weather sealing.

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

With lenses -- you generally get what you pay for --- Faster lens = ++$$ = Higher quality lens

nauticalmike

RichardTaylor wrote:

Large pieces of glass can be very expensive. Also they may be better mechanically constructed with faster focussing and weather sealing.

But since everything is automated once the machinery is set up to produce a particular lens does it really cost that much more to produce? I am just baffled why one lens can cost $5,000 and another may cost $400 when they both take tack sharp photo's, but one just needs a bit more light to do it.

twowindsbear

Here's my WAG on that subject: First off, economies of scale - more 'slower' lenses are made, therefore the per unit price for R&D & such is spread over more units. Next, a 'faster' lens uses a bigger chunk of glass for the elements, may have more elements, may have more exotic - read expensive - types of glass. Since all of these items are 'bigger' the mount & focusing elements & such needs to be more robust and more expensive. And marketing could be involved. Some brands, Canon comes to mind, have a line of 'premium' lenses that bring higher prices than their non-premium line. Perhaps manufacturing tolerances are higher, more elements & such are rejected out right, or are 'good enough' to use in non-premium lenses.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

The large aperture (more light let in) needs a much wider lens, bigger chunks of expensive photo quality glass, more grinding, bigger body to hold it, etc
Plus these beasts are big and heavy so most casual photographers (snap shooters) won't carry that much around so they sell/build fewer and reverse economy of scale also makes them more expensive. There fore most of them are built only in the upscale premium lines of lenses which also have tighter tolerances and weather sealing added on. This all adds up to make them even more expensive.

nauticalmike

I could see all of the aforementioned reasons making a lot of sense in the olden days when they would have had to be hand polished and the technology wasn't there to consistently make good quality optically perfect glass, but today can't they pretty much automate the entire process and make perfect glass in as large of a size as they want to, not to mention that they could use strong durable polymers to reduce the weight and cost of the lens bodies if they wanted to?

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

"I am just baffled why one lens can cost $5,000 and another may cost $400 when they both take tack sharp photo's, but one just needs a bit more light to do it."

Nauticalmike:
Consider yourself one happy fortunate fellow if you can't see the difference between the $5,000 vs the $400---- Most if not all of the rest of us are totally screwed since we can !!!!

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

nauticalmike wrote:

I am just wondering why lenses with larger apertures costs more than another lens with a slightly smaller aperture? for example a 50 f1.4 vs a 50 f1.8.

I own the Nikon 50mm f1.8. It is less expensive than the 50mm f1.4. However, as an amateur photographer, I can still do well with the f1.8, rather than spend extra money for the f1.4. Zoom photo lenses are a different story. If you can afford the f2.8 zoom lenses, you begin with an advantage over the slower lenses. The 70-200mm f2.8 lens, is unsurpassed as a sports action lens. And one of the most popular in all Brand names.

Fotomacher Loc: Toronto

mas24 wrote:

I own the Nikon 50mm f1.8. It is less expensive than the 50mm f1.4. However, as an amateur photographer, I can still do well with the f1.8, rather than spend extra money for the f1.4. Zoom photo lenses are a different story. If you can afford the f2.8 zoom lenses, you begin with an advantage over the slower lenses. The 70-200mm f2.8 lens, is unsurpassed as a sports action lens. And one of the most popular in all Brand names.

Let me add my 5 cents (pennies were discontinued in Canada some years ago...). “Faster” lenses are built to professional standards, which means they have to work all the time in all conditions. It is not just the aperture - these lenses have more metal in the construction and will have the new lead free solder sealed better to prevent “whiskers”. There will also be better coatings on the glass elements to reduce flare, ghosting and improve contrast. As an advanced amateur with some sales to my credit, I buy the best glass I can afford and will opt for used whenever possible to get pro level lenses vs consumer glass for the same price. My 50mm is a AF 50mm f/1.4D which is made in Japan and bought used at least 10 years ago.

Hank Radt

Couple videos on how lenses are made:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovxtgj4SsiI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4BOLIa_3lw

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

nauticalmike wrote:

I could see all of the aforementioned reasons making a lot of sense in the olden days when they would have had to be hand polished and the technology wasn't there to consistently make good quality optically perfect glass, but today can't they pretty much automate the entire process and make perfect glass in as large of a size as they want to, not to mention that they could use strong durable polymers to reduce the weight and cost of the lens bodies if they wanted to?

No!

Watch, listen, and learn: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkBOsTVfpdA

Why does a Maserati, or Tesla cost so much? Why does fine jewelry cost so much? Why do top bin electronic components (CPUs) cost so much? It's in part the materials, in part the cost of manufacture, it's in part the yield of top quality parts, the cost of running the business, and in part the size of the market. It's Business 101.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

nauticalmike wrote:

But since everything is automated once the machinery is set up to produce a particular lens does it really cost that much more to produce? I am just baffled why one lens can cost $5,000 and another may cost $400 when they both take tack sharp photo's, but one just needs a bit more light to do it.

*************************************************************************
You are in the fortunate position of not needing to buy the more expensive of the lenses, as you get the 'Tack Sharpness' with the cheaper version. Count your blessings, as there are many who feel they have to spend the extra money to get the results they require.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

nauticalmike wrote:

I am just wondering why lenses with larger apertures costs more than another lens with a slightly smaller aperture? for example a 50 f1.4 vs a 50 f1.8.

Why do 1 carat diamonds cost more than 1/2 carat ones? Answer, cause they is more glass and it costs more to cut them, same with lenses, more and bigger glass, costs more to manufacture them.

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

Canon has a very nice PR video on the making of their lenses at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkBOsTVfpdA&t=368s

It is pretty interesting - made me think: "Oh - wow".