This lens makes me think long and hard about saving up for the new mirrorless Nikon. It will supposedly be announced post the camera release.
Okay, I'll bite: why? Does that extra stop-and-a-half or so make that much difference in what you shoot? Particularly since today's digital chips can do a pretty good job at high ISO settings....
dsiner wrote:
This lens makes me think long and hard about saving up for the new mirrorless Nikon. It will supposedly be announced post the camera release.
Nikon does make a 58mm 1…4.
It's 1and 1/6 stop faster than 1.4. Good for bragging right.
fastest lens on the block!
ELNikkor wrote:
fastest lens on the block!
Then you will see Canon will beat it with an f/0.77 lens. Sony would stay with f/1.4 as their fastest. I have seen a Sony 0.77 lens but that doesn't count as it was on a Sony thermal imaging camera.
BebuLamar wrote:
It's 1and 1/6 stop faster than 1.4. Good for bragging right.
Yeah, there are those for whom cameras are more like jewelry - ostentatious showing of wealth...alas, I imagine most passers-by wouldn't be able to tell anyway. Best to get a Leica Monochrome and really show your stuff, no?
ELNikkor wrote:
fastest lens on the block!
Or in the camera bag gathering lint.
bpulv
Loc: Buena Park, CA
dsiner wrote:
This lens makes me think long and hard about saving up for the new mirrorless Nikon. It will supposedly be announced post the camera release.
For the most part, an f/0.95mm lens is a gimmick. Back in the late 60's either Leica or Nikon (I don't remember which) introduced an f/0.95mm lens. It was very heavy and very expensive considering that one gained only 1/3 stop over an f/1.2 lens of a similar focal length prime lens that was smaller and weighed little by comparison. The price difference between the two lenses was a couple of thousand dollars (like 8-9 thousand dollars in today's inflated dollar). In those days you were limited to the ISO of the film you had in your camera, so although such a lens did have an application, it was extremely limited. Today, with the high range of ISO on a digital camera, I can only dismiss an f/0.95mm lens as a sales gimmick.
Yes its for some bragging rights, and a little more bokeh . You can use a third-party f 0.95 lens on Sony cameras right now, but it is a manual focus lens. Nikon will want something to separate themselves from the pack, coming right out of the gate with their new fullframe mirrorless system. But that can be quickly matched by Canon and Sony releases. It is all good, and we all win with real competition. Cheers
bpulv wrote:
For the most part, an f/0.95mm lens is a gimmick. Back in the late 60's either Leica or Nikon (I don't remember which) introduced an f/0.95mm lens. It was very heavy and very expensive considering that one gained only 1/3 stop over an f/1.2 lens of a similar focal length prime lens that was smaller and weighed little by comparison. The price difference between the two lenses was a couple of thousand dollars (like 8-9 thousand dollars in today's inflated dollar). In those days you were limited to the ISO of the film you had in your camera, so although such a lens did have an application, it was extremely limited. Today, with the high range of ISO on a digital camera, I can only dismiss an f/0.95mm lens as a sales gimmick.
For the most part, an f/0.95mm lens is a gimmick. ... (
show quote)
But today there is a trend of having picture with no depth of field. I guess trying to distinguish from having a large camera vs the phone.
bpulv wrote:
For the most part, an f/0.95mm lens is a gimmick. Back in the late 60's either Leica or Nikon (I don't remember which) introduced an f/0.95mm lens. It was very heavy and very expensive considering that one gained only 1/3 stop over an f/1.2 lens of a similar focal length prime lens that was smaller and weighed little by comparison. The price difference between the two lenses was a couple of thousand dollars (like 8-9 thousand dollars in today's inflated dollar). In those days you were limited to the ISO of the film you had in your camera, so although such a lens did have an application, it was extremely limited. Today, with the high range of ISO on a digital camera, I can only dismiss an f/0.95mm lens as a sales gimmick.
For the most part, an f/0.95mm lens is a gimmick. ... (
show quote)
It was Canon who made the 0.95 lens for their rangefinder cameras, it looked great but it was a lousy performer.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.