< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Next Nikon announcement: new DX consumer lens

Pin It

The current Nikon DX lens lineup

The next Nikon announcement will be for a new consumer DX lens. The official release will probably take place in the second half of October. There is a low chance that other products will be announced at the same time. This will be another "silent announcement" - no press events, no big marketing campaigns, just a DX lens (similar to the 40mm f/2.8 lens announcement).

Needless to say there are no reliable updates on any full frame products.

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

    85 1.8G please :)

    • http://www.jpgmag.com/people/markwjr Mark

      He said CONSUMER DX lens. I can’t imagine a consumer-based DX 85mm/1.8. Any 85mms will be FX and out of the consumer market.

      • Iris Chrome

        Except for the 85mm macro ;)

        • http://www.jpgmag.com/people/markwjr Mark

          True. I was thinking about normal-use lenses. And you definitely won’t see them shell out an 85mm/1.8G MACRO lens. lol. That’d be a bit counterproductive, I’d say. (focus for normal shots would be slower because of the extra focusing distance, and you’d never use F/3.5 or whatever it degrades to at 1:1 for 1:1 shots. )

          • Give Up

            Give it up, Mark. You lost. 85/1.8 could be consumer-level, you don’t know. The 35/1.8 is consumer-level!

            (But I do agree with you Mark, just like the 50mm — its not likely at all. In fact, I think Nikon made a mistake making the 35/1.8 a DX lens — what an opportunity loss for FX purchases… Still just goes to show you that you never know what Nikon will do for its DXers).

    • anon

      An AF-S 85mm is required and I for one would like to see for but this would be for use on a DX camera. I think if Nikon were to do one it would most definitely be an FX lens.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dsloanphoto Daniel Sloan

    16mm f/1.8 prime?

    • MichavdB

      That would be perfect.

    • LGO

      16mm is good though I would a more people-friendly focal length of 18mm f/1.8. I am hoping that Nikon would also release a 23mm f/1.8 (realistically, it will likely be slower). It would be nice if both will be priced like the 35mm f/1.8G DX.

      And though this would be a “Pro” DX, I might as well add this: :-) 16-60mm f/2.8G VR N

      • Rahul

        16-60 f/2.8 DX would be very costly. 17-55 2.8 DX is selling at $1400 and that doesn’t even have VR :(
        A good quality 17-50 f/4 VR DX at about $600 would be great.

        • LGO

          Agree re the 16-60mm f/2.8G VR being costly but as an owner of a 17-5mm f/2.8G, I can say that this lens is worth it and I will get its replacement if it is wider and/or longer, has VR and nano.-coating.

          Re 17-50mm f/4 VR, the existing 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 is a good alternative. I have one and think very highly of it. It is an f/4 at 24mm, f/5 at 50mm, and f/5.6 at 70mm onwards. I use this as my walk-around lens when I do want to carry the heavier 17-50mm f/2.8G.

          • coco

            hope is something like the sigma 17-70 with fast auto focus

      • Alex

        Canon’s 17-55 have image stabilizer, Nikon’s don’t :(

    • R!

      +1 It’s going to be probably a wild angle prime lens because of the missing compare to other brands nikon stop at 35 f 1.8 till 10 f 2.8? 16 or 24 WILL BE WELCOME!!!!!!

    • http://www.veckansbild.nu Johan

      Yes let’s pray for a fast wide angle prime. This is a lens that is truly missing in the DX line up. It is just unbelievable that they have never released a wide DX prime in all those years. Why? They have even made one for the brand new CX-line.

      A DX version of the 24 f1.4 is what I would want. To be realistic I would settle for something like 16 mm f2. No lens can really be more needed for the DX line.

      My other wish for the DX line would be a 45-135 f2.8 VR or 50-150, i.e. a 70-200 at DX size. However since the new release will be a consumer lens this does not sound like an option this time.

      • Don

        I’m I missing something. If you want a really great lens in a 24, just buy the FX 24. It doesn’t get any better than that. Why do you guys think you can’t use the FX lenses on the DX. I do it all the time. What am I missing? The only reason I can see it is in the low ends of the zoom ranges where 18 is really 24 and also needing the 10mm zoom low end, but why a good DX 24, then you can use the FX 24?
        Ok, cheaper and lighter, I guess, but it will never be as good. Just blow the dust out of your wallets and lift some weights. Pa-leeeeze.

        • NanDub

          I use the 24 2.8D as a DX equiv of 35mm, but I still want a DX-specific 24 F/2 or something similar. After all the dof on 24 2.8D is quite limited on DX – it’s about equiv of 35mm f/4 on FF and that’s basically no dof at all…

      • Ke

        It is just unbelievable that they have never released a wide DX prime in all those years.

        Did you forget about the 10.5mm fisheye?

    • paf

      And if 16 is too much, I’d settle for a 13mm AF-S… :P

    • Acutia

      Bingo.

    • Narna

      Ooh yes please! Been looking at the 20mm and deciding its just not wide enough.

  • http://www.jpgmag.com/people/markwjr Mark

    Honestly, though, what makes us think this? It could be Nikon 1 lenses, flashes, accessories, etc.

    Mark

  • metalorange

    I hope it will be a wide prime. A 16mm/2,8 or 24mm/2,8 with good close focusing ability would be great.

    • Joseph

      There is already a 24mm f/2.8 with CRC…

      • Crocodilo

        And an AF 20mm f2.8D, also with CRC, mounted on my camera as I type this.

        But the sharpness results on digital fall short of modern lens performance, trust me, if using anything below ff8. Quite a pity, because I love this focal distance on DX…

        • Joseph

          Are you shooting DX or FX? The 24mm f/2.8 I had was okay on DX but excellent on FX. I still sold it in favor of a 17-35mm f/2.8 though!

      • Rikard

        Well, not an AF-S…

  • Narut

    probably a 16mm/2.8 or f/2
    f/1.8 would be too bright for a consumer wide-angle lens

    • iamlucky13

      I would tend to agree. The analogous 24mm F/1.4 lists for $2200.

      DX does have some advantage in overall size, but having the F-mount flange distance does not make it simple to make a wide aperture, wide angle lens in either format.

      But even a 16mm F/2.8 would be a very welcome addition to the DX lineup.

      At the other end of the spectrum, a modestly fast telephoto prime might be nice. Nikon has none, presumably because of the more elegant compatibility between DX and FX in the telephoto range, but something in the area of a DX 135mm 2.8 or 200mm 3.5 could have some appeal for beating the performance of the consumer zooms without the high cost of the current FX versions.

      I’d wager it won’t be the recently speculated/patented 18-300 design. I have absolutely no interest in that lens, but I suspect it’s one Nikon will want to promote.

  • http://brettmaxwellphoto.com brett maxwell

    a 24mm just like the 35/1.8 would be really awesome.

  • Foolishcfo

    Nikon continues to underwhelm. Knock our socks off, Nikon, and deliver a new DX lens attached to a D400!

    • Mark

      +1!

      Mark

      • LGO

        A kit camera body for a lens! :-)

      • LGO

        Seriously though, this could be one reason for the delay in the announcement of the replacements for the D3s, D700 and D300s:

        “Nikon will celebrate its 95th anniversary next year”

        Sorry folks … there won’t likely be any new full-frame or D300s-replacement this year.

        • http://sightbliss.com george

          Yep and this year were 94 years :) Sorry I really do not see your point. Anyway hope dies last :)

  • Crocodilo

    Please, please, please, a prime 16/18/20mm, f1.8/2/2.8, under $250!

    • 16mm f/2.8

      ++++1

  • http://www.jpgmag.com/people/markwjr Mark

    +1!

  • okay

    16mm please. 24mm is not all that wide on DX.

  • Vladi

    Replacing 18-105 VR perhaps?

    • Merv

      The 18-105 was only released in August 2008, and really, this lens does exactly what it is supposed to at its price point. There are many other Nikon lenses updates that I’m sure many would prefer to see.

    • http://www.TheJordanCollective.com CaryTheLabelGuy

      There is nothing wrong with the current 18-105mm DX lens. My copy is actually very sharp and has great contrast. I use it mostly for video work on one of our D7000s. It’s VR is good, too(why it’s mainly used as a video lens).

      I’m thinking the new lens will be a fast prime DX lens that fills the wide-angle gap in the DX lineup. Maybe a 16mm f/1.8 or 2.8.

  • The invisible man

    Sorry Peter but I don’t agree with you this time.
    I’m 99.47% positive that October will be THE MONTH.
    I already have the Champagne waiting in the cooler.
    :)

    • Banned

      Invisible, you’ll send me some of your $6 Champagne ok?

      • The invisible man

        @Banned
        Corbel brut $8.95 at Sam’s club
        Excellent (when cold).

      • paf

        the cheaper the better!

        I am afraid that next body announcement won’t leave enough in the bank to buy even the cheapest booze….

    • R!

      Wine get better when you wait you should know that !

      • paf

        lol…

        oh the “w(h)ining” here is definitely getting better with the wait!

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/sooperkuh/ außerirdischegesund

    24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24m24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm!
    m! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm! 24mm!

    f/2.0 would be cool, but f/2.3 to f/2.8 would be better than what we’ve got now.

  • Rahul

    I would be very disappointed if it is 18-300 VRII.
    Time for Nikon to give us a wide angle prime like 16mm f/2.8.
    I am not expecting, but will be very happy, if Nikon announces a 70mm 1.8 DX at around $300-$400.

  • AnoNemo

    NR Admin,
    Can you give us a summary of the “wild rumors” you heard about the FX so far? Of course it would have NR zero rating so everyone would know that those are just wild guesses and rumblings.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      I do this every once in a while, but then people quote me online for it without even reading the post. Then I am the one who spread absurd rumors. Not worth it.

      • JoFlo

        NR admin:

        This a rumor site, not a “Nikon Announcement Prediction Service”. You are way too cautious. Loosen up, please, share those rumors.

  • ahhhlawn

    Probably just gonna be a revised 18-55 kit lens with better VR. =(

    • Rahul

      A pink 18-55 maybe. Its girlfriend has already been announced by Nikon last month.

      • R!

        I would prefer a 17 55 F2.8 VRII IF asph ED N,If that’s not to much because of the Canon 17 55 IS that pisses me off!!!!!!

  • binary_eye

    These are the DX prime patents (reported on NR) which haven’t yet been announced:

    18/3.5
    24/2
    24/2.8

    An 18/3.5 would be extremely disappointing.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/sooperkuh/ außerirdischegesund

      Yes, a 18/3.5 would be completely disappointing. Also it would probably have
      to be a very compact pancake to make at least a bit sense.

      A 18/3.5 shift or tilt/shift (PC) DX lens would be kind of cool, though.

      • Soap

        I’d superglue a $100 used 18-55 VR locked to 18mm before I’d shell out more than $100 for an 18 f/3.5 DX prime.

        While in theory the prime could be smaller it wouldn’t be much.

        • Soap

          Though if they make me a liar and actually make a pancake I might just buy it AND a D3x00!

    • Worminator

      DX lens, no fanfare. So we have to think low key, <$400 product.

      85/1.8
      24/(2.0-2.4)
      18/(2.8-3.5)
      15/4

      Very hard to tempt the 18-55 DX set with better optics unless it is significantly brighter than the kit zoom. 18mm is a hard sell. 24mm would cost too much to make it bright enough to stand out from the kit zoom. 85mm makes some sense, except that there's no real advantage reason to make it DX lens. That leaves by elimination 15 mm. (unless it's an improved zoom, like a new 18-105

  • TheThing

    Those who need 85 can get 50fx. I need small 50 dx please (at least 1.8). I’m begging you Nikon!

    • Char

      Yeah, right. Thats like saying, those who need a new car can buy a mountainbike. And there is a 50/1.8, actually, there are two. And two f/1.4 versions.

      • TheThing

        Would they still be 50mm on D300?:)

        • B.O.

          a focal length is in fact a physical quantity and doesn’t change with whatever camera you happen to use.

        • D-RiSe

          And if you do want the 50mm equiv, buy the 35 f/1.8

          I’m hoping for a new 85 f/1.8, better bokeh and wide open sharpness than the af-d please!!!!!

    • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

      Why do you need 50 mm f/1.8 DX? FX version is very cheap.

    • Paul

      “Those who need 85 can get 50fx” Thats not the point. I want 85 for dx body (sth like 135 tele).

      • R!

        Nikon wont make a double number in DX and FX I think that’s smart!!!!

      • TheThing

        So which one do you need? 85mm or 135mm?

        • Paul

          I want 85mm lens to use on DX body. As far as I know, 85mm lens on dx body will give me equivalent of 127.5mm. Am I right or am I confusing something? I know that there is 85 1.8D nikkor af but i would love to have “G” version like the new 50mm 1.8G.

          Am i correct?

          • http://www.jpgmag.com/people/markwjr Mark

            Yes, you’re right. An 85mm DX lens will have a 135-like FOV. Yes. People on the net are just a little dense.

            Mark

            • Don

              Well, you are partially right. It will have a 127 FOV, but it’s DOF will still look like an 85. That’s the frustrating thing about DX to me.

          • TheThing

            Sorry for the confusion. It was my mistake:). I’ve never used DX lenses and I thought their numerals were equivalent to FX focal length on DX camera. I thought 50DX on DX camera was like 50FX on FX camera. So 35DX lens is equivalent to 50mm? It’s a stupid system but I’m much happier now:) My apologies and thanks for correcting me:)

      • Worminator

        “I want 85 for dx body (sth like 135 tele).”

        Then get the AF85/1.8D. Dirt cheap. Unless your camera doesn’t have the AF motor. :/

        It’s possible Nikon will not update this lens to “G” type, but develop a new DX lens instead, very small, something like the Pentax DA 70/2.4 limited. Either way most likely something fairly soon.

  • DBF

    I have though about “what are the slowest wideangle DX prime acceptable?” – a 16-24mm with 2.8/3.5/4 …slower? still in the 35mm 1.8, 40mm 2.8 pricerange?

    a 24 2.8 would be tempting ..but a 16mm 3.5?

    • Rahul

      Depends upon price and quality. If it is sharp, reasonably priced and small then even 16 f/3.5 would be very good.

      • Soap

        I would need to be quite small to convince me.

        The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 isn’t that large and while its $600 price is twice what a cheap nikon DX wide angle prime would be it should be though of as two primes.

        It isn’t that I don’t think there is room down there for some quality Nikon glass, but Tokina has a very high quality zoom sitting there. Nikon would need to make it a “prime’s prime” to make many enthusiasts buy, IMHO.

        That said, a quality 16mm is right at that hipster vogue 24mm (equivalent) focal length! ;)

        • Worminator

          It would be small, by definition of being a DX wide angle prime (see Pentax DA15 for reference). The tricky bit is making it both cheaper and better than the Tokina 12-24 or 11-16.

          The Tokina looks out of place on a D40. A small ultrawide prime has a place in Nikon’s lineup, for the size factor alone. (Since street photography is a big part of this FOV, its nice to have something compact.)

  • http://photoartbymark.zenfolio.com photoartbymark

    boring news like canon rumors nobody knows nothing neither do i

  • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

    Little off-topic here.

    I wonder why not to kill two rabbits when shooting at once? 35 f/1.8 DX is a good lens for crop users and it can serve being attached to FX camera as well at close and mid distances, but it still can’t be used at infinity. Nikon has to renew 35 mm f/2 to make FX user happy. Not every pro or hobbyist can afford f/1.4 version of 35 mm, so another lens in this focal length is a must have. Isn’t this confusing to have cheaper DX lens to be faster than more expensive FX version in the lineup? I have no idea about price of the hypothetic 35 mm f/2 G but it is clear that it would fall near to 50 mm f/1.4 G. I can’t understand why in the earth Nikon has to have two close versions of 35 mm and three versions overall. Judging from marketing point of view 35 DX is a winner, it it selling like a hot cakes, but from the logical point of view, this is strange. :)

    • B.O.

      we must remeber; nikon is a business, not a philosophy school.

      • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

        It’s a pity that it’s not. I’m not kidding. Nikon marketing team is a dumbest team ever. Mirrorless serie was born considered dead as APS-format film camera (Pronea, I guess?) was. Business is a thing that have to be based on some sort of philosophy. Zeiss, for example, has a line to keep it for: it is a non-profit company which invests money in R&D and this policy leads them to making best precision tools in the world. This is truly respectable. Some time ago image was important for companies but now it seems there is a tendency to lose the face because dumb marketing teams all over the world are missing the point of making special-purpose equipment. Do you know some marketing-involved people which are skilled photographers?

    • Soap

      I think they played it well.

      They needed the 35 1.8 DX. The DX system had to have a normal prime.

      FX buyers are mostly “big money” still. Getting all your “big money” lenses updated should be, and has been, a priority. As more an more “middle money” people transition to FX expect to see more “middle money” lenses.

      While I understand how having three 35mm lenses (for they will renew the f/2) may seem wasteful, I believe that’s only when you do not consider the timeline.

  • D800s_all_disppeared

    To be brutally honest, if there’s something in the FF space that Nikon users can switch to (like the rumored Canon 3D, or any 5D2 replacement with decent AF), a lot of D700 upgraders would happily move over. The only thing that bothers D700 users is probably the bad 5D2 AF.

  • D700guy

    Just when I thought they couldnt possibly produuce any more boring products, this happens

  • Sebastian

    Great! if there’s one thing Nikon’s good at it’s making primes, and short DXs are really being missed by a lot of folks, including me. 24 f/2, 18 f/2.8, 14 f/2.8 all seem doable at a reasonable price point. Then scale it up later as an FX version (like they did with the 35 1.8G).
    I’m just afraid it’ll be another boring mid-range zoom. 18-xx f/3.5-5.6 etc…

  • Daniel

    what about D400? would be a good timing…

    • Sebastian

      you mean a DX400???

      • Daniel

        i mean the replacement of the D300s – not a lens

    • The invisible man

      D400=D7000

      • Daniel

        i dont think so.. d300s is still better in some aspects. maybe they will call it d9000, but i still believe, that there will be a replacement. (and cant believe that they replaced the d300s after a year..)

      • R!

        D7000=D90. We will have a D400 24mpx!!!!!!

      • ISP

        No way !

  • George

    It looks like Nikon is going to do what it did in 2008: they’ll release the D4 right before the summer Olympics and the D800 a few months later. I really hope that I am completely wrong.

  • R!

    But we all want a D800 24 Mpx!!!! and we better get it quick !!!!

  • http://www.jpgmag.com/people/markwjr Mark

    Im REALLY hoping for a 18MP D400. That’s clearly not the case here. Maybe it’s the 18-300 in the previous rumor. But I doubt that’s it as well. It’s probably whatever kit lens will come with the D400. Hopefully a 17-50/2.8-3.5(or 4) ED VRII or something similar. But I highly doubt this as well. It’d be good to have a valuable upgrade to their kit lenses.

    Mark

    • http://500px.com/FriedToast Fried Toast

      You’re the first person to mention the 18-300. That’s what I figure it is. It just popped up in the patent section, so it makes sense for it to be coming out.

      • gt

        a lens like that makes me want to barf.

  • jerl

    I’m curious by what is meant by the word “consumer”: is it Nikon’s definition of the word (typically anything that is not pro level), or would it be more in line with the more common definition of the word (cheap, appeals to the mass market).

    I’m thinking that the latter would be more in line with Nikon’s trend this year following the release of the 50/1.8G, 40 macro and mirrorless system. Following Thom’s remarks about the recent lenses being useful both on DX and on CX, I suspect future lenses will be along this line. My guess would be a wide, but slow (2.8 or 3.5) prime (24, 18 or 16), that would be very small, fairly cheap, but quite sharp.

  • BBB

    Is the 80-400mm a DX lens? Maybe it will be the long awaited 80-400mm replacement??

    • http://www.TheJordanCollective.com CaryTheLabelGuy

      No, the 80-400 is a Full-Frame lens. Although, it performs badly in the corners on FX and is much better on DX.

    • Looony

      I hope so!!! Or better a 100-400 f4.5-5.6 DX.

    • Richard

      Have been waiting for the upgrade of the 80-400 for over 2 years. The current model is not AFS and is nearly 10 years old. I think there are more than enough DX lens combinations in the range below 100.

  • matt

    Come on guys your killing me… please release new bodies
    my stolen equipment isn’t going to replace itself..
    well it could (insurance) but i would like the new models..

    • Timo

      Wake up, man! Even if Nikon would announce a new pro body in late October, it would still take at least until December until it would be available. So, unless you don’t wanna shoot anything until the end of the year, just let your insurance replace your equipment. And what was wrong with your “old” body/bodies? Good photos do not come from always waiting for the latest equipment. They come from going out and actually shoot. And, if necessary, I could even do that with an old D40.

      • matt

        Yes that is true but the difference is the video functionally coming out in the newer bodies and the amount of work ive been shooting would then require me to purchase three times the equipment that i would require.
        already knowning the equipment that i had was great but the replacement hopefully will service my needs better, than the equipment that i have owned (Wanting higher video frames and lower rolling shutter.)
        the older gear is at its end of its production life span and would hate to waste good money on repurchasing and then loose more money replacing it in 3/4 months time while also having to purchase a higher end video camera to make up for the lower quality video. hope that kind of makes sense, P.S i do have other equipment to use but this would be my primary gear replacement.

        • stev

          Well you can get a D7000 for the moment and then sell it was soon as the new bodys come in… that wouldnt be bad, even though the video could be much better

    • The invisible man

      @matt
      I’ve seen a full equipment stolen (D700+lenses+flash) on Ebay few days ago, I reported it to Ebay who canceled the auction, I hope they also contacted the cops.

      • matt

        Yeah mine was a D3s and a stack of gear but im in different country (NZ)

        but good on you for reporting it, i hate thieves…

        • matt

          before any one flames on me yes i know ebay is International… criminals here most likely are to stupid to know how to sell it on ebay it easier to swap it for some drugs or something of lesser value….

  • David

    17-55 F/2.8 VR, it would be logical and that lens has been out for a while. The only other thing I can see is 16-85 update, I can’t think of any other DX lens needing an update

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

      16-55 f/4G VR, consumer grade would be nice. :)

      but impossible. :P

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

        However, I hope for 18-135VR.

  • MolokoDrencrom

    No D700 replacement! That is it! I am switching to Canon! I am going to sell all my Nikon bodies and glass at a 45% loss and buy a 3 year old 5D MKII. That will show Nikon. My photography is so bad that I am relying on an overpriced full frame to make it that much better. There is no way I could ever create a decent composition out of a DX. Everyone knows it is all the camera anyway. Insert your own whinny complaint here.

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

      You so funny, Nikon waiting for 5D Mk III and revenged will began. :)

    • Yagion

      HAHAHA… LMAO
      Relying on equipment to make your photography better?
      Based on what you said, my guess is you’re not a good photographer, and with that attitude… you’ll never be. Why not try to do more readings and get more practice to improve your photography? If you want full frame, Nikon has the BESTS as of now.

  • http://StandDevelopment.com Axel

    Gotta be another Frankenstein product. Probably a 73mm f/4.3 H or something. No aperture, and no focusing ring. What’s next? I’m seeing a convergence from professional, to G lenses with no aperture, to H lenses with no focusing ring, to point and shoot lenses where you can’t even remove them. Seems like we’re going backwards.

  • Muchachito Ehehe

    I hope it is the once rumored AF-S DX Nikkor 17-60mm f/2.8G VR.
    C’mon Nikon, don’t let us down this time.

  • Raydom

    I’d like something like 70-200 f/4 VR II. Usefull for DX and FF!!
    I can’t buy a 70-200 f/2.8 but i like this range. F/4 VR would be nice, cheaper and lighter

  • Gia Aqua

    … gOd… I loath DX lenses… [Eyes rolling, hands raised in the air] … Am I the only one?

  • Pat Mann

    There is no need for, and a very small market for, a wide DX prime that is f/2.8 or slower, unless it’s a PC lens, or has really exceptional resolution and low distortion. We already have consumer zooms that are close enough to f/2.8 at 16mm with very good performance.

    My first personal choice for a consumer DX prime would be 18mm f/2.0. 16mm would be OK.

    I think the most important for the general market, however, as part of a 2-lens prime kit, is a 24mm f/1.8 or f/2.0.

    Any of these would pair nicely with another important DX consumer lens a short-medium telephoto at 60mm – 70mm f/2.0 or f/1.8, or even an f/2.5, since the consumer zooms are pretty slow at this focal length. The classic 105, built for for DX. Yeah!

    I would love to see DX pro lenses at 50-135mm f/2.8, 24mm f.1.4, and a PC 16mm or 18mm f/3.5.

    I would expect the 24mm f/2 to come in about $250-300, the 18mm f/2 at $300-350, the 16mm f/2 a bit more, a harder sell.

    My little 60, 65 or 70mm f/2.5 should come in at about $300-350. A very neat little lens.

    Bring it on!

    • Soap

      I smell what you’re cooking.
      17.5 DX
      35 DX
      70 DX

      and if you want to go for the halfsies you can do

      17.5 DX
      24 FX
      35 DX
      50 FX
      70 DX

      for you’re not going to beat the current 50 f/1.8 FX price and I’ll bet a 24 f/2.8 AF-S $400 beauty is on the way for FX.

    • Sahaja

      Sounds like you need a Pentax K5….

      12-24 F4.0
      14mm F2.8
      15mm F4.0
      21mm F3.2 pancake
      31mm F1.8 (FX)
      35mm F2.8 macro
      40mm F2.8 pancake
      55mm F1.4 (for DX better than 50mm imho)
      70mm F2.4 pancake
      77mm F1.8 (FX)
      100mm F2.8 macro
      200mm F2.8
      16-50mm F2.8
      50-135mm F2.8
      (+lots of other zooms)

      no tilt shift lenses :-(

      Some of these are beautifully constructed

      Seriously, if you are committed to the DX format Pentax seem to be as well.

  • http://www.lhp-online.com Leroy

    Well, I guess its unofficially official. For 2011 the D7000 is the upgrade path for everything.

    :(

  • EvanK

    I’d love either a 16mm f/1.8 or a 25mm f/1.8, I’m really impressed that Nikon’s been introducing so many DX primes lately. How many APS-C primes does Canon make? None, that’s right, +1 for Nikon!

    Here’s my opinion on Nikon’s DX line:

    Wide Angle:

    Good lenses, but need some more primes. I’d also like to see an f/2.8 zoom like the Tokina 11-16.

    Standard Zoom:

    Nice range, good selection, but I’d love some constant f/4 zooms, and a replacement to the 17-55 f/2.8 with VR and a Nano coating.

    Standard Prime:

    The 35mm f/1.8 is an excellent, sharp, affordable lens. The build is quesionable, but still quite usable. I’d like to see this lineup grow, a 24 1.8 or wide or street shooting, a 55 or 60 1.8 for portraits, and maybe even a 35mm f/1.4, similar to the Sigma but with a better build and better IQ.

    Telephoto:

    This is where the DX lineup falls behind, the 55-200 and 55-300 lenses are VERY consumer oriented, Nikon needs some enthusiast type telephoto lenses, like a 50-150 f/2.8 similar to Sigma’s, or a fast telephoto prime.
    Regarding super telephotos, I don’t really want any, but there may be one or two wildlife or sports DX users who’d like one.

    Macro:

    Nikon’s done a good job here, but the f/3.5 aperture is slower than I’d like for their 85mm.

    • Soap

      How many APS-C primes does Canon make? None, that’s right, +1 for Nikon!

      Canon doesn’t need to make APS-C primes.

      Where is Nikon’s 28 f/1.8? Canon has one FOR UNDER $500!
      Where is Nikon’s sub $400 85 1.8?

      Canon has the primes from 24-135 covered better, with “AF-S” and at lower cost, than Nikon’s offerings, DX or FX. If Nikon wants to stand out in that manner they need to go LOW. 16/18/20mm fast DX prime!

  • Roddy

    16mm already here. Tokina 11-16mm f2.8. Better than my sigma prime and rivals my pro nikon lenses.

  • Don

    Some of you guys kill me. You say you want a XXmm DX lens, you want it to be fast and you want it to be very sharp, oh yeah, and cheap. Well, guess what. If it fast and sharp it’s probably not going to be cheap, so why pay 3/4 of the price of an FX lens for a really good DX lens. That’s why I never bought the 17-55. Too much to spend on a DX. I would rather use the 14-24 like a 21-36 and have one of the best lenses ever made and it’s FX too. Once you move out of the budget lenses, I just don’t get DX.

    • Soap

      Because Tokina’s 11-16 is wider than your 14-24, lighter, smaller, cheaper, just as sharp, and holds its resale value just as well.

      Oh, and it takes filters!

      THAT’S why DX people are willing to buy DX glass.

    • Ke

      Well, guess what. If it fast and sharp it’s probably not going to be cheap

      The 40mm macro, & the 35mm are both sharp, cheap, & fast.

  • NikonMick

    Anyone here used the 12-24/f4 DX? I got one secondhand two years ago and it’s been marvellous.

    Sure it’s a bit slower than one might like, but hey, it’a super-wide zoom with terrific performance.

    Mick

  • Thom Rockjorn

    that’s great.. who needs new FX lenses anyways. DX is the future and soon FX will be phased out.

  • bobos

    There is a empty gap between 18-105 and 18-200. I hope they fill it by reviving the 18-135 adding VR and improving the IQ (or making 28-135 like Canon). Although 28-300 is FX, I expect that the smaller 28-200 to be released just like the DX 55-200 and 55-300.
    On the wide side, Sigma has 8-16 while Nikon’s widest is 10, I hope for a 8-18

    • http://www.jpgmag.com/people/markwjr Mark

      I can’t see any reason, at all, to have an 18-135. If you want 135 at F/5.6 (it would likely end there, even though there’s no real reason why it couldn’t end at F/4.0-4.5), just the 18-200, 18-300, 55-200 (either of the TWO versions), 55-300, or the upcoming (eventually) 18-300. There’s no real need for a DX zoom to end at 135. It would give you a 200mm effective FOV, and is obviously covered many times over with their current lens lineup. 135mm, mind you, is probably the sweet spot for most of these lenses as well, but I can’t attest to that.

      DX needs better wide primes, fast zooms (why not use the regular zooms, you ask? The DX would make for a smaller, lighter zoom lens. Very well taken.). I really think one of the major issues with DX is that there isn’t a real DX “line”. It’s kind of like “oh, they offer this DX lens.” “Well, I want it to cover ___” “Oh, well we also offer this FX model that will be equivalent to that.” …and everyone’s happy. There really isnt a need for revolutionary DX lenses, because there’s not really that much of a problem with just using one of the lenses in Nikon’s already extensive FX lens lineup. Nikon really needs to come up with something to draw in the DX crowd…to DX lenses. I own the Tokina 11-16/2.8, Sigma 17-50/2.8OS, and Nikon 35/1.8GDX lenses. And I’m really thinking about switching my 35/1.8 to the Sigma 50/1.4. There’s just not really a NEED to have DX lenses with DX cameras, especially with the lack of wide primes.

      Sorry for what seems like a rant, but this whole conversation seems a little redundant and almost unneeded. Unless the release is something that changes ALOT about the line, like:
      – A new kit lens that comes with all the new cameras (D5000 and below) that everyone will forget in the next week, but will be ever-present in the market from now on
      – Wide, FAST primes that most will love to drool over, but will never want to shell the money out for
      – Something that has never been achieved before, but is very welcomed such as the 18-300. Tamron has the 18-270, and 18-270PZD. Those work well for what they are, but they’re not Nikon lenses, for sure. Something like a 18-300/4 VRII N would be better suited for a revolution, but that’s clearly not going to happen. The price would be too high, the build would have to be too solid, and it would be too heavy for most people’s liking. So, that would ultimately lead to more whining about prices and compromises.
      – Long telephoto zooms (200-400/4 VRII that would be smaller than the current model because of the smaller sensor that it needs to fill). But that would lead to complaining as well.
      – Medium-long telephoto zooms (120 (or 100, or even 80) -300/2.8 VRII DX) for the same reason as above. Again, the ever-present whining will be seen.

      You WILL NOT get a fantastic product with
      – Great build quality
      – Fantastic durability
      – 100% Weather Sealing
      – Nano Coating
      – 4-stop VR
      – No CA
      – No Ghosting
      – No Distortion
      – No flare
      – Lightweight
      – Small in size

      …for a wonderful price. Not from Nikon. Maybe from Sigma or Tokina. MAYBE. But not from Nikon. Nikon’s products are worth what they cost (costing less wouldn’t hurt, though).

      There’s no reason in whining about the compromises you make for everything. You HAVE to make compromises or you will never get anything released, ever. Sigma’s 200-500/2.8 is the epitome of this. It’s a fantastic lens. It’s $25,000. Sure, you can get the 150-500/4-6.3, which is a great lens for under $1500, but is ho-hum at 500, and is slow throughout the range.

      Sit back and listen. The answers will come.

      Just a thought.
      Mark

  • Frank

    50-150 2.8 please

  • Phill

    Give me please an 17 or 18mm compact light prime (25.5- 27.5mm equivelant) with minimum distortion and i dont care about low “f ” number, as long its a more than good glass and very sharp of course. That way i will not have to turn in m43rds option for a street shooting camera. There many people who like street photography, that just want to walk around light with just a small wide angle prime. Until today there are only FF choises that cant quite get the result in dx.

  • Liquide

    I am surprised that so many want something wide.

    IMO if there is something the DX lineup is missing is some quality tele lenses.
    As a DX user the only choise you have is going for heavy, big FX lenses.
    Sure there are 70-300, 55-200 and so on but pretty much every one is crap on the
    far end.

    Would love to see a fast 300/400/500mm prime for DX

  • D-RiSe

    hey admin, how about a vote.

    What would be the most underwelming anouncement and what would be the least underwhelming.

    16mm dx f/1.4 – 2.0
    16mm dx f/2,8 – 4.0
    18-300 dx
    18-135 dx
    70-200 fx f/4
    50-135 dx f/4
    50-135 dx f.2.8
    85mm fx f/1.8

    etc etc

  • http://www.spark-creative.co.uk/photography.html Mark Astle

    18-70 could do with an update.

    • Soap

      It’s been updated four times.
      18-55
      18-55 vr
      18-135
      18-105

      • D-RiSe

        those are different lenses, the 18-70 had a faster tele aperture of 4.5 , a metal mount and weather sealing. Plus it very very sharp on my d300, i only sold it because i upgraded to a d700, the 24-85 afs i bought to replace the 18-70 was not as convincing.

        • Soap

          Those are different lenses, but like it or not they are what replaced the 18-70.

          The 18-70 is a man without a country.

          You can get a cheaper build or a nicer build (16-85), less zoom range or more zoom range, but you can not get your Goldilocks lens anymore and I’ll bet you $1000 you never will again. That portion of the market is saturated by Nikon, and despite a shot not landing exactly where you like don’t expect another.

  • Back to top