< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon: “this is not the last lens announcement we’ll be making this year”

Pin It

Dpreview has an interview with Robert Cristina (Manager of professional products, Europe) and Ludovic Drean (Product Manager for lenses, Europe). Drean said:

 "If even 5% of the D40, D50, D60, D80, D90 owners buy this lens, that's a huge number," - this pretty much explains why this lens was released - it has a huge financial potential for Nikon. He also said: "this is not the last lens announcement we'll be making this year."

I know, this is obvious but somehow I got the feeling he was referring to prime DX lenses.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Shaun

    I know a really fast and wide prime for FX, like a 24mm f/1.4, would be large and expensive. Do the advantages of DX design and construction allow something like a 24mm f/1.4 DX lens to be made at an affordable price?

    that would be nice

    • http://www.tian.co.za Shen

      I think a 24mm f/1.4 is hard to do whether DX of FX.

      It’s useful to look at the Leica 25mm f/1.4 for FourThirds to see what they need to cover a 2x crop factor.

      http://www.dpreview.com/news/0703/07030703leica50mmsumm.asp

      A DX 24mm f/2.0 would probably be cheaper than the AiS though, should Nikon decide that there’s money to be made there.

    • Tom

      I’m hoping for a fast DX tele zoom – 45-140 f2.8 VR.

      His comments don’t give much away but they do give me hope that it’s gonna be a good year….

      • http://www.xanga.com/cameratalk Camera Talk Blog

        I’d love to see THAT lens from Nikon.

        I’m just not interested in switching from my small, light Sigma 50-150 to the big heavy 70-200 VR if I add FX to my bag.

        So Nikon will either need to make the DX equivalent, or an FX 70-200 f/4 VR that is as sharp as Canon’s…

        =Matt=

    • http://bonzo.com Bonzo

      Will we ever see
      -135 f2 VR
      -200mm f2.8 VR
      -300mm f4 VR

      ??!??

      • peter

        135/1.8 afs – yes
        200/2.8 VR – no. not with the 200/2 VR available which is arguabley the best lens nikon has ever made.
        300/4 VR – yes

        i’d also add:
        80-400 afs VR
        200/4 afs VR macro
        24/2.8 afs
        35/1.4 afs
        85/1.4 afs

        these are “must haves” and will be all with us within the next 18-24 mnths.

  • David

    Drean says: “we plan to increase the offering. The prime lenses were definitely something that was missing.”

    Not lens but lenses so I agree , more prime DX´s to come.

    • http://www.xanga.com/cameratalk Camera Talk Blog

      Yeah, THIS was the more interesting news.

      I mean, it’s pretty much a given that they’re not going to just release this one lens in all of 2009. More lenses will come. So the “this is not our last lens announcement” was hardly a shocker. It was the “we plan to increase the (DX prime) offering” statement that really interested me!!!

      If they come out with a 16mm, 17mm or 18mm f/1.4 or f/1.8, I might be able to stick with DX for MANY more years! Sigma did a 20mm f/1.8 pretty affordably… (although it is an 82mm threaded beast!)

      =Matt=

  • JWV

    I heard yesterday from my Nikon NPS-dealer in The Netherlands that in de last quarter of 2009 Nikon wil announce a totally redesigned Nano coated AF-S VRII 70-200mm G for professional FX use.

    • David Olsen

      I hope your right but I heard exactly the opposite … no new 70-200 this year

    • http://www.xanga.com/cameratalk Camera Talk Blog

      When you look at how well the 70-200 performs for center sharpness on FX, and how HAPPY most working professionals are, (the ones who are working so much that they don’t have the time to come online and complain!) …then you begin to realize how un-likely a 70-200 2.8 update is. I mean I’m all in favor, but I’m just skeptical…

      =Matt=

  • Andrew

    if nikon makes another DX prime i just might switch to canon. at least they care about their professional users

    • Eric

      What’s so wrong with giving DX users a piece of the action? Nikon’s been working on all sorts of pro lenses (14-24, 24-70, long tele primes, PC, micro), while all DX users have gotten were just 18-something kit lenses. Pro users just got their 50mm, so it makes perfect sense to give DX users an inexpensive 50mm equivalent of their own.

      Nikon’s made it clear that they’re redoing the classic prime lenses. Just be patient, I’m sure we’ll see fast pro glass along with great value DX lenses.

    • d40-owner

      Please let us know your pro-photo website, so we can check the kind of pictures you usually take, and understand your photo field?
      Then, can you please detail what lens you need and don’t have, but Canon does?
      When I say “need”, I mean there is no way to take a given picture, no matter how expensive any lens may be, for your usual pro photos.
      Otherwise, this is just meaningless rant.

    • http://nikonkrab.multiply.com/ HDZ

      I think Nikon really care pro!!

      Because their never make a lot of over-price lens.

      Canon don’t care pro but Canon care how much they get money from pros. :)

      • Pablov

        Not really.

        If Canon didn’t care about Pro, they wouldn’t have made so many L lenses in a much wider range and options than Nikon.

        Canon is well ahead Nikon range of lenses.
        Not all Canon lenses are better than Nikon’s, but many are.
        However I refer more about the wider options in primes and zooms that Canon have in Full Frame format.
        And many times even cheaper than Nikon’s

        • http://micahmedia.com Micah

          The 17-40 and 16-35 Canon lenses have inferior build and IQ compared to the 17-35 and 14-24 Nikon.

          Canon’s 1.2 lenses don’t focus worth a damn without live view.

          Nikon does lack some more recent fast primes, but I suspect they’re just low priority because the market for them is small. They’re popular with the people that haven’t used them, and with people stuck on film.

          The thing that I see as missing that’s needed is a decent mid-range zoom for FX. The 24-120 is barely passable on the 12mp FX sensor. On a 24mp sensor it’s going to look like the soft porridge it has always been.

          Out of curiosity, does anybody have a shot from a D3x with a 24-120? It would be a good laugh to pixel peep such an image.

          • Pablov

            Nikon lacks modern primes and some modern Zooms too.

            the 24-120 is something I always wanted and claimed for an improved version, but its actual quality is too poor for the price it has, It’s even ridiculous that Nikon had offered the D700 (pro camera) with the 24-120 lens as a kit (due to the poor IQ of the lens)…

            I’m always speaking about modern lenses, I’m not taking in account old ones, because the range is different and obviously wider.

            Nikon doesn’t have a f4 line either, wich is very useful despite what some “pro” could say. It’s cheaper than f2.8, still keeping high quality

            I know those two zooms you mentioned are better than Canon versions, but the Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS (for instance) and even the “70-200 f4L IS USM” are better than Nikon 70-200 f2.8G, sharper indeed.

            Of course both manufacturer have good lenses, and not so good too.

            So, Nikon is lacking fast modern primes, and also some zoom ranges or alternatives (like an f4 line)

            The AF problem with Canon f1.2 might be a camera related issue too (AF system), not only the lens fault I guess.

            Anyway I don’t like so fast 1.2 or even 1.4 lenses, they usually have lot of softness and vignetting at wide aperture, so I couldn’t use them that fast, I would need to stop them down.

        • AdamJ

          Without a doubt the new Nikon 24-70 f/2.8G is worlds ahead of Canon’s 24-70 f/2.8L lens. The lens is simply sharper wide open, and across more of the frame. I’ve used multiple copies of both, on various full-frame bodies and there is no question.

          Nikon’s 14-24 is by far the sharpest UWA lens for full frame as well, even the new Canon 16-35L II isn’t as sharp across the frame.

          And compare the 85s – While the Canon 85/1.2 is faster, I’d take the sharpness and bokeh of the Nikon 85/1.4 @ 1.4 regardless of the Canon is at 1.2 or 1.4. Add that the Canon 85/1.2 is a good $800 more expensive, yet focuses slower, again I think Nikon has the better lens in this focal length.

          Canon has the market on the f/4 series of pro lenses, the Canon 24-105 f/4L will walk all over the Nikon 24-120.

          But in the end I’d rather have the top of the line be better then the competition while have less lens choices, then have the mid-grade lenses be better then the competition while having more lens choices.

  • low

    awesome! more lens is a good sign. whether for dx or fx. some of the fx users though need to take a chill pill, sheesh. fx primes will come…patience grasshopper.

  • Jack

    Man, people have no patience. Nikon will most likely release all the lenses you want, but you may have to wait a little while. These things take time and Nikon primary concern is to make a profit.

  • Mike

    Sounds like a lot of refreshes are coming then.

    14-24, 24-70 2.8 is here for a while, 70-200 sounds like it’s in need of a FX refresh (I don’t know how those F6 users make a living with that lens! ;-) ).

    Prime lenses and zooms above 200mm are new and VR.

    17-55 is newish and doing the job, but low priority for Nikon to refresh that.

    70-300 VR is new and great

    PC-E lense are new, 105 VR is new.

    50 1.4G is new for FX/DX
    35 1.8 DX

    So where does that leave us? An 80-400 redo, 85mm prime redo (i.e. AFS).
    Maybe a faster 50mm? What about the DC lenses -?105 and 135? Wide angle primes are ancient. 16mm fisheye? Hmm I think that’s too specialized, too low priority.

    What’s the most realistic? 85mm primes? 80-400 VRII AFS? What about something exotic for DX that compliments the 14-24 in FX. Like a 9-18 2.8. 14mm on FX is wider than 10mm on DX. I think we may see some DX focused lenses this year. As the interview says the D40/60/80/90 represent 80% of their DSLR business. How about a new 16-70 f/4 or a 16-60 f/2.8. Something newer, wider, faster!

    • jsmyth

      Hmm, I like the sound of a 16-70mm f/4

      • http://micahmedia.com Micah

        Yeah, that would be nice. But the 16-85 is actually quite sharp and an acceptable build. Have you checked it out?

    • http://www.xanga.com/cameratalk Camera Talk Blog

      Mike, I like your style of thinking. You should subscribe to my CameraTalk blog!

      Hoping for more fast primes and f/4 zooms in 2009!

      =Matt=

  • Anonymous

    I think the 300mm AF-S f/4 prime updated to VRII would be the kicker. For both DX and FX use too!

  • Jimmy

    Yeah, now that I bought an AF-S 50mm….

  • Vautrin

    Another !@#$%^&*!!! DX lens! Utterly worthless. FX only, please!!!

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

      Must continue to tell myself, “Don’t Feed The Trolls!”

  • David

    If we’re talkin’ primes, give me the 9mm DX prime to go ultrawide like the 14-24 for FX!
    And for cryin’ out loud could they finally get around to the updated 80-400 – geez, even Sigma has 150-500 that isn’t screwdrive! How about mathcing them but with better quality!

    • RThomas

      Indeed, I have the Sigma 150-500 and I would very much prefer a Nikon version of this lens as surely the quality control would be better.

  • MattM

    I really don’t understand how this is hard for FX people to understand. Pro buyers are a small market. I’m sorry to tell you that but it’s true. As mentioned in the interview, they only need 5% of DX users to turn a good profit, and they’ve probably already got that from preorders alone. I would be stupid NOT to release more DX primes. This is a good company were talking about here, I mean, if AIG or Lehman Bros made camera gear then you should expect to see tons of FX gear to appease the gearheads and the fanboys to keep morale up while the company burns. In the mean time entry level users are very limited with the number of AF-S lenses they can use, and entry level users make up significantly more of the user base than pro. Better bodies can take older glass, and older glass works just fine. Get over it. If you have a hard time taking pictures with the current gear on the market then I suggest you learn how to take better pictures.

    • http://photobychriswalter.com Chris Walter

      Well said.
      I check this site religiously I try to live by the mentality “f*** gear”
      Seriously what did people do 50 years ago? Take sucky pictures?

    • Tom

      I think there is something in the psychology of owning a top-of-the-range-whatever that makes people think they are the most important customer.

      It seems to me that the flagship DSLR is something akin to a racing car, when most people buy a saloon. The racing car is important because it affects the saloon design in time, but it’s the saloon sales that fund the racing car development.

      I really hope FX owners will realise that DX sales are important to the future development of FX and be happy when Nikon releases a good product, regardless of it’s DX or FX designation. Good products are good for ALL of us.

      If you want to complain, why not whine about the 24-120 VR which is a real pig and not good for anyone.

      And it’s FX. :-)

      • Jason

        What you’re talking about is called the halo effect – it’s why car manufacturers make supercars. We all take a look at reality and buy our little family car, but we tell ourselves it’s made by the same people as make the great XYZ . . .
        Now a reality check for gearheads. Have a look at the equipment used by this year’s Wildlife Photographer of the Year winners. Apart from the remote camera setups, I know I’ve got better gear than most of them – so what’s holding me back now? Hmm, must think of something to sing very loudly while I stick my fingers in my ears . . .

  • HA

    nikons 14-70 and 24-70 really put to shame the 70-200. It NEEDS an update!

    I’d love an updated 80-400 but that’s looking hard to get. Prime updates are important but the current old ones still do somewhat ok. The sloowwwwwwww 80-400 and FX trash soft 70-200 are just shameful at this point.

    • Shooter

      Have you actually shot with the 70-200?

      • ha

        not only did I shoot with it, I lost a bit of money selling it a few weeks later. On an FX body, that lens isn’t worth what nikon charges for it.

        • http://www.xanga.com/cameratalk Camera Talk Blog

          Um, it’s called rent before you buy?

          :-P :-(

          =Matt=

  • Guy

    An affordable 28mm 1.4 FX would be nice. >$5k (on ebay) seems a bit silly. Nikon could make a fortune remaking that lens…

    • http://www.xanga.com/cameratalk Camera Talk Blog

      A.M.E.N.

      !!!!!!!!!

  • anonymous

    i for one, take photography as an hobby and would never consider moving to FX with the prices being like it is today, and i don’t believe it will change any time soon, so DX it is for me.

    i’m very happy that nikon’s releasing the 35mm f1.8 affordable DX lens, and look forward to more affordable DX lenses. the AFS 85mm f1.8 or AFS 50mm f1.8 update should be the next logical step for nikon as canon has them with USM already, and their amateurs(like me) can enjoy fast USM/AFS lenses(f1.8s) without a huge financial penalty. us nikon amateurs want that too!

    i also think that nikon’s current offering for pro lenses is as good as it is already, their 14-24 and 24-70 is the best, and then there’s 85 PC lens, all released within the couple years back or so, and that’s still not enough for you pro people who keeps complaining not enough FX lenses? wow, you guys are really rich!! lolz.

    for me, it’s good to know nikon pay attention to lens quality when they build them, they don’t just build it just to make money, i believe they keep their reputation up there when it comes to lenses, i believe that’s why nikon never rush out a lens into the market. of course, some little percentage of nikkors arent as good such as the 24-120(but even this one who nikon users complain about outperforms 28-135 from canon in every aspect). my point being, in general, it’s been known that nikkor lenses performs well! even the older AFD lenses are THAT good until today(ie: 85 f1.8D. from 1994?)

    one of the reason why ppl buy nikon is for their legendary lenses quality. not quantity. u want quantity over quality? or if you think you can take better pics with more quantity of lens choices? then you’re using the wrong brand.

  • Mesli

    Unfortunately,
    Most of people do not see the economical aspects of selling DX Lenses.
    As said before, the APS-C’s marketshare is about 80%. (I’ve heard that in Japan, FX sells are even lower than 5% of their whole selling).

    If selling this new lens to 5% of DX DSLR owners, would make this lens profitable so we can expect Nikon would put a part of the margin in the research as for DX lenses as for FX lenses.

    Selling DX lenses allow Nikon to develop new FX (and DX) lenses, so it is not an aberration.

    I still shoot with a D200 (although, i’m thinking about an upgrade) and i would stay in DX (D400?) in I can get the FX Image quality in a cheaper body and cheaper lens.
    More expensive is not always the obvious choice….

    • http://jmcs.deviantart.com Joe S

      Try telling that to the guy who said that DX is worthless. I personally like my DX lenses. They are reasonable, and small, so I don’t have to lug around a gigantic lens whenever I shoot.

      • http://www.xanga.com/cameratalk Camera Talk Blog

        Seriously. DX is so flippin’ awesome. Just take the 12-24 DX, and the Sigma 50-150 2.8 DC, for example. They are TINY, yet rugged and durable, deliver amazing image quality, and are quite affordable.

        Because of these two lenses alone, I am constrained out of principle to stick with DX for the time being, especially for outdoor, go-light photography. Nikon will have to come out with a 24 MP D700X, a 17-40 f/4, and a 70-200 f/4 before I switch to FX for oudoor photography. And that right there is probably a 4-6 thousand dollar investment. Consider that I’d only get $2000 for all my DX gear, that equals no dice unless I magically do $4000 worth of extra business this year… And right now I’ll just be happy if I don’t do more than $4000 LESS business this year!

        =Matt=

  • Dave

    We need a 24-105mm f/4 and 70-200mm f/4. The fact that these are not even offered has me thinking of switching.

    • peter

      they wont be coming in the next couple of years, so switch.

  • http://jmcs.deviantart.com Joe S

    24-120 VR that isn’t of Opteka /Vivitar quality? Maybe an AF-S Fisheye?

    I’d hope for a 85mm Micro, and a wide angle zoom that is comparable in price to Tonika’s 12-24, but that is probably asking for too much.

  • Peter

    I work at a camerastore in Holland and we get Nikon trainings monthly and our host confirmed there is a 80-400 AF-S comming. Also the SB-600 flash wil be replaced. And the 400D wil not be anounced at the PMA. Maybe later this year.

    Nikon wil also get a new body this year. It wil be placed in the segment between D60 and D90. Wich can compete with canon 450D

  • Back to top