< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon 135mm f/1.8 lens patent

Nikon filed a patent (201048125) in Japan for a 135mm f/1.8 lens:

  • Patent release date: March 8, 2012
  • Patent filing date: August 30, 2012
  • Focal length: 132.9mm
  • Aperture: 1.8
  • Angle of view: 18.3°
  • Lens design: 15 elements in 9 group, 2 ED elements
  • Internal focusing (IF)
  • Vibration reduction (VR)
Update: here is the US patent 20120050872 application for the same lens.

Nikon currently has the AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2D lens ($1,329.00) in their catalog (lens design: 7 elements in 6 groups).

It seems that Nikon is persistently releasing a whole line of full frame f/1.8 lenses - last year there was the Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.8G lens, this year the Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G and will probably see also a new Nikkor AF-S 28mm f/1.8G by the end of 2012.

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

    Ugh, I can’t wait for them to actually release updates for the 135mm focal length. A new 135 ƒ/1.4 or 1.8 would be sweet.

    • http://www.daviddrufke.com David, Sports

      I would love to see this lens too, as long as is has a fast AF-S system (like 70-200), and not the slow AF-S system (like 50mm or consumer zooms.)

      • MJr

        Well the AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2D is not a budget lens either, so do the math.

        • Aldo

          The AF DC one is actually superb, I have the 105mm one and I don’t see how they would be improving an already fantastic lens…

          • FM2Fan

            Well the 135 DC is great optics but slow AF … that is for some situations “unpleasant”

          • Banksie

            I have the 135mm DC and I agree, the lens is amazingly sharp and utterly bokehlicious. And it’s built really well. It’s made of metal (with a great metal sliding hood) and not plastic. A fantastic lens that has that 3-D kind of look to the images. One of Nikon’s very best efforts at lens making.

            But yeah, it’s not a ‘fast’ lens in respect to its AF. It’s an older style AF. But then again, it’s meant to be more of a studio lens and a portrait lens. It’s a lens to work with in a much more contemplating and calculated way. I hope they keep producing it and build a different fast AF-S G 135mm for the sports and action togs.

      • Astrophotographer

        The 50mm G is a Gaussian design meaning the whole lens moves on focusing. The fast autofocus are usually internal focus (IF). From the spec this is an IF lens so should be fast.

    • Epic

      A 135 f/1.4 would be incredible, and it would be very big both physically and in terms of its price tag. The front glass would be about 4 inches in diameter, for a start. I suspect Nikon would never make such a lens nowadays. There was a day when Nikon made things just because they could, and there the 300mm f/2 springs to mind, but I suspect a 135mm f/1.4 would retail at about $3000-3500 and there wouldn’t be much market for it if an f/2 version is available. But I may be wrong, and I hope I am wrong, because such a lens would suit me perfectly and I’d be right at the front of the queue waiting for one.

      • LeGO

        I reckon a 135mm f/1.4 will not be too far from a 200mm f/2.0. in size and price. If given the same lightning speed and rendering as the 200mm f/2.0, this would be as great a lens but will not likely sell as many units. A fast-focusing 135mm f/1.8G AF-S VR would be a good middle-ground and would likely sell more. Given my experience with the 200mm f/2.0, I likely will set the VR on OFF most of the time for best bokeh.

        Really looking forward to this lens to add to the 85mm g/1.4G.

    • matgay

      no way nikon can make a 135 lens better than the sony zeiss 135mm f1.8!!

      but nikon does have the best 200mm f2 though

    • Joseph

      I personally don’t see a point to this lens. The 135 DC is already beyond perfect, it is sharper @f/4 than my 55mm Micro and has beautiful rendering and bokeh. If you need faster focusing for sports or something, why not use the 70-200mm f/2.8? 1 and a 3rd stops in optical speed hardly matters in a world with clean 12800 ISO, and the zoom range is more useful for sports than a prime anyway.

      Possibly the only improvement possible to the DC lens would be VR, but then it is already fast enough to not likely need it.

      Well on the plus side at least I don’t really have any reason to salivate over this lens…unlike the new 28/1.8 patent! Just got my hands on a 28/2 AIS and it is a fabulous lens…but wouldn’t mind AF!

      • http://www.sofuscomer.com Sofus Comer

        I know its all a matter of taste. But 135mm 1.8G wow!!! Just what I have been wanting for a long time. It has to have ultra fast autofocus, otherwise not interested. Just sold the 200 f2.0 (regret it some times… actually alot, it was awesome) but it was to heavy. So if they make this perform just as sharp on wide open, I am going for it.

      • jodjac

        Can someone explain what the DC stands for in the 135mm DC lens?
        Also,
        I have a Contax Yashica 135 MM mount. It’s really sharp and great to work with. I’ve recently learned that there are kits you can buy that will convert the mount to a Nikon F mount, but you have to fiddle with the lens and a screwdriver, something I’m a little nervous to do. Does anyone have any experience or knowledge of these MM to F conversion kits (Leitax)? I’m OK with manual focus!

        Here’s the link:
        http://www.leitax.com/Zeiss-Contax-lens-for-Nikon-cameras.html

        • Aahkam

          Defocus Control/Calibrate. It is how you want the amount of out of focus in your photo composure.

          This lense ha an additional ring for DC and you can choose how your bokeh looks like. A very special lens where no one else made except Nikon.

      • jablko

        You must be shooting with a D3s. For the rest of us, fast primes are still the best way to get low-noise shots during indoor sports.

        • Joseph

          Actually I am shooting a D700 (and soon a D800).

    • vince

      does anyone know if there will be an update to the 24-70 2.8 ?
      now that canon will release a new version of that…

      • Nick

        The Canon lens is 10 years old – Nikon’s lens came out 23-08-2007 so four and bit years old. I would expect not for awhile. Besides it already outperformed the Canon lens by a bit. I would expect the new Canon lens to be better by a small margin. Nikon’s 24-70 lens however is already fantastic – apart from distortion at 24mm There would be little else to improve.

    • FM2Fan

      a 135 1.4 is probably a bit “bulky” – just think of the 200 2.0 it is BIG

  • http://mos-photography.de marosi

    Nice… one point less to argue about with nikon as a canonist….

  • DMM79

    This look very interesting. This would go great with my 35 and 85. The price point might be a little high for me, but I would get 70-200 F4 if it came out under $1000.

  • http://StevenGeorges.com Steven Georges

    If it’s AF-S, that would be one hell of popular a lens.

    • http://www.seanmolin.com Sean Molin

      Are you concerned it *wouldn’t* be AF-S?

      • http://StevenGeorges.com Steven Georges

        No, it just doesn’t say it in B&W. . . yet.

  • Visualiza

    If this lens comes out, Nikon will have updated every fast prime I could possibly want. The only other lens that would be nice is a compact FULL FRAME 16/2.8 or so. F/2 IF it was possible without a bulbous front element. This way, FX could have a stellar ultrawide and DX could finally have a fast 24mm equivalent.

    • David G.

      I’d love to see a DX 24mm f/1.8 too.

      • DX man

        And a DX 16mm f1.8 or f2. It would be silly of nikon to expect DX users to buy and carry massive superwide FX lenses in order to get below 35mm in a prime lens.

        135mm f 1.8 would be superb on DX. No need for a 70-200 anymore.

        • Visualiza

          Indeed, but that’s why I suggested a compact 2.8 as an alternative as well. Whatever the case, you can be certain that a 16 1.8 dx would be as big if not bigger than a 2.8 FX equivalent. Fact of the matter is that with the state of the market today, it probably makes more sense to go mirrorless if size is a major concern. I’m looking at the Fuji X-1 for this exact reason myself. That 18/2 is extremely tempting.

        • MJr

          Would be silly ? It is silly, because that is how it is now. Micro Four Thirds has more than a few fast wide-angle primes, why doesn’t Canikon aps-c ? I hate it. I hate it !

          • WoutK89

            Even the Nikon 1 has a 27mm equivalent prime lens ;)

    • http://haroldellis4444@gmail.com Harold Ellis

      105mmm was in old times favorite portrait lens, for me and sure many others, and nikon now have only old DC (which is awesome, but…) and rather yawn micro nikkor.

      • http://www.onsitemn.com Onsite Minnesota

        Have you tried the VR 105 micro? It’s the sharpest lens they make.

        • PC

          He said portrait lens. Ultra Sharpness and portraiture are not typically complimentary.

    • FM2Fan

      yep a 16mm or 18mm would be nice …

  • logandiana

    Anywhere under $1000 and I am all over it.

    • Visualiza

      This will be closer to, if not more than, $2000 in todays market. Considering the upgrades over the AFD/DC version: newer, faster, nano-coating, AFS, more elements/groups, ED elements, AND VR.

      Come to think of it, it will be a miracle if this lens releases under 2k with these specs.

      • http://www.seanmolin.com Sean Molin

        I’m betting $1899.

        • Visualiza

          I hope you’re right, otherwise I fear that Nikon would be alienating many potential customers if it comes in above 2k.

          • inginerul

            Well, canon just posted a 3500$ price for the new 5D and 2300$ for the 24-70, and canonistas are still all over these products. The japanese owe as no favors.

    • goldaccess

      Double that and you come closer to the real price.

  • kyoshinikon

    I still want that 10mm f/4 aspherical and an update to the ai 8mm f/2.8

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

    Happy times! Expect to pay no less than $1750.

    OTOH, there’s AMAZING Zeiss Sonnar 135/1.8 ZA. If Zeiss’d be so kind to release manual ZE/ZF.2 version of it, Nikon is in trouble. C’mon, Zeiss, bring it as soon as possible! :p

    • BornOptimist

      Nikon in trouble because of ONE MANUAL focus lens???
      Yeahh right – in trouble….

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

        Have you seen ever portraits taken with that lens? I guess no.

        • JED

          It could be the greatest lens ever made but why would that mean Nikon is in trouble????

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

            135/1.8 is expensive formula. Add the cost of VR to it and the price will easily rise to figures between $1750-2000. Autofocus Sonnar for Alpha system costs $1600, according to B&H. Manual lens will cost less and will have better build quality than Nikkor (face it, even expensive OEM lenses have plastic parts in the construction).

            The second point is pretty subjective. I don’t care if fanboys will fire me for that opinion — I don’t care. Professional lenses made by Nikon are great, surely. Optics are technically refined, but that’s all. They are clinical, they’re not exciting enough. I wonder why cheapo 35 mm DX is much funnier than professional 35 mm f/1.4 G which is epitome of boring and why in all senses amazing 85 mm f/1.4 G has so ugly ‘porridge-like’ bokeh (sorry for that idiotic metaphora). Almost all Nikkors blur the background in similiar way (excluding cheap offerings).

            • MLN

              My 135 DC is Bokeh Heaven, it took my a little while to get it right tho.

            • clicker

              >> Manual lens will cost less

              I wouldn’t bet on that — Zeiss glass is expensive, and itemized book-keeping often does not apply.

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

              MLN, G-type lenses were meant. My 105 VR had great sharpness, very fast AF but in the field I disliked it drawing style and nasty yellow cast. By the way, VR affects image quality. I was relying on stabilizer until realized that sharpness could be better if you’ll switch it off.

              clicker, maybe you’re right.

            • preston

              Slow Gin, a fast 135mm lacking autofocus would only be desired by a small fraction of potential buyers of this focal length. I would use this more for sports than portraits, so the manual focus would be a killer. Even for portraits I’d much rather nail focus on 9 out of 10 shots rather than half that (at best) with manual focus.

        • BornOptimist

          It doesn’t matter if this is a good lens or not. Nikon is never ever gona be in trouble because of ONE MANUAL focus lens.
          That’s NEVER GONA HAPPEN!!!!!

        • W.

          For those dreaming about the existing 135mm f/2 AF DC and what new version would be like with an even faster aperture, I can assure you that the existing 135 is overrated. Just part of Internet culture and what we can expect when information is distributed, errors amplified, etc.

          I have had the 135mm f/2 DC for several years and it certainly does have a place in a lens inventory. However, if compared directly to the earlier, manual focus AIS version it is not really all that much better. The effect of the defocus control is very, very subtle and I often leave mine in the neutral position. The lens fills a needed focal length but citing its ‘bokeh’ as something unique suggests limited experience with other, longer focal lengths. Under some conditions, for example, I reach for the 300mm f/2.8 or the 400mm f/2.8.

          • Travis

            Sure exotic telephotos are great but how many can afford them? And what other Nikon under 2000$ lens have a similar bokeh?

    • King of Swaziland

      Zeiss does not release the lens designs they have for Sony mount for other mounts. Even the 85 f/1.4 ZA is a different optical design from the ones they sell in other mounts. Zeiss only does the optical design and glass manufacture for the ZA lenses, Sony does the electronic and mechanical design and assembles (or has assembled) the lens itself.

  • http://www.vivesa.pl Fotograf Kielce

    At last!! And there is VR. Great! Waiting for announcement.

  • D3s Owner

    I own the 135mm DC F2…it was great back in its time but its about DAMN TIME Nikon decided to refresh this great lens. Hopefully the bokeh wide open wont be crappy like every other 1.8G out there…I have all the current 1.4’s so trust me, the bokeh of the 1.8s is NOT smooth wide open. Hopefully this 135mm 1.8G will have better bokeh.

  • tsy

    135 f/1.8??? sign me up!!!

    Though I don’t think this really falls in the same category as the other 1.8 primes… I mean dont get me wrong, ive heard great things about the 35, 50, and 85 1.8 primes but a 135 f1.8 lens is definitely something top of the line and not a budget lens.

    I loved the 135L when I shot canon… hopefully this lens is at least just as good, if not better!!

    • NoFunBen

      I would love this lens!
      should be great for portraits, and it would be a fun one to play with. it will not be cheep i am sure. I hope the cost does not go up too much from the current model.

  • わからな

    Very interesting. I take it though that, assuming Nikon even follows through with this (my impression is that many patents never turn into actual lenses), that it won’t be available in 2012?

    • GrumpyDiver

      I hope they keep the DC. That is one reason I bought the 105, and frankly the only complaints I have about that lnes (shared with the 135) is the somewhat awkward ergonomics of switching from autofocus to manual focus.

      The current lens is f/2, so bumping it up to an f/1.8 isn’t something that would wow me. VS would of course be nice, but I would be a bit concerned on the price. The current lens is listing at a tad over $1300 with 6 groups and 7 elements. The new lens is 9 groups / 13 elements. Ouch!

  • JIMMYJIMMY

    Hmm…
    135/1.8 =75mm
    I am guessing the front element (filter size) would have to be at least 77mm if not bigger! Perhaps 82mm?
    That’s a lot of glass. I bet it will be heavy!

    • David

      Look at the Sony 135/1.8. It’s the best 135mm on the market right now
      http://www.photozone.de/sonyalphaff/500-zeiss_135_18ff

      77mm filter thread. Weighs 1050g

      No VR though – don’t need it, because all lenses are stabilised by the body with Sony cameras

    • danpe

      77 mm is a good thing, same as 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 24/1.4, 85/1.4 and so on. At least for my I’d rather not mess around with step rings or different filters.

  • Nobody Special

    That would be a fine piece of glass – it’ll be heavy, but that’s okay.

  • markogts

    Looking at the last string of patents, seems like the crowd waiting for the 300 f/4 and 80-400 update has to abandon any hope.

  • Will

    I wish they made a macro 135mm, with an aperture of 2.8 and maybe make a 180mm macro (like the one sigma announced a month or two ago) and make a new 200mm macro lens with same aperture, but they would be expensive :(

  • Justin

    This lens would make an excellent portrait lens on a full-frame and a super fast telephoto on a crop. Super excited!

  • broxibear

    Talking of patents, anyone know what this Nikon accessory mount patent is about ?
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20120057860.pdf

    • Ooops

      Hi Broxibear, Nikon 1 mount perhaps?

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

      hard to tell

      • Ooops

        in any event from an initial view it does seem like a lens mount

    • nikonandye

      This is the most important patent in the Nikon System 1.

      It protects Nikons intellectual property (and the business model) around the camera-lens mount, as it is the base of the System 1 “platform business” for the next decades.

      Andy

    • Astrophotographer

      broxibear, I agree with nikonandye. My reading is it’s a mechanism to prevent jamming a bayonet mount.

      • Dr SCSI

        Agree, it is describing a three tabed mount with various length tabs to permit the mounting only in a certain phase with respect to the mount. It was first filed in Japan’s patent office in 2010. If I were to guess, I would think this is the Nikon 1 mount being described and Nikon is only now catching up on filing this particular patent in the USA.

  • Opinion…

    Why would anyone need 135mm?:) There’s 85mm and the next useful focal length is 200mm:)

    • clicker

      >> There’s 85mm and the next useful focal length is 200mm

      … for you.

    • http://www.seanmolin.com Sean Molin

      You’re joking, right?

    • Gavlister

      That’s like saying there is no need for a 50mm as the difference between 35 and 85 is all you need.

      For a start it is 1.8 and will have VR. The 70-200 VRii with it’s focus breathing at close range is not much different from a 135 so you will get this with 1.8 aperture and can get closer to your subject as well. Also if it follows suit with the 135DC it should have comparable or better bokeh than the 85 1.4.

  • Paul

    Is this still going to be a DC lens?
    I’m all for the new f/1.8 primes.

  • http://niphotoinc.com Richard

    Knowing Nikon, this lens will not be ready for 3 years

  • Landscape Photo

    I’d like to see a new 135mm f/4, since the 135mm f/3.5 Al-s is fantastic.

  • John

    Good for my photography, bad for my wallet.

    I found the current 135/2 DC to be not quite as good as my 135/2 AIS at f/2, so I’m looking forward to an updated fast 135mm with AFS and VR. Not sure what this will do to the price of my 135/2 AIS though . . .

  • Gavlister

    Does anyone have a rough idea of how long it takes between issuing the patent and actually producing a product?

    I have the 135DC and really love the results from this lens but find it difficult to get consistent results. I have calibrated it but it goes beyond the +20 micro adjustment on both my camera bodies. Even taking this into account autofocus is still often hit and miss. Also my version isn’t great below F4 and really only produces outstanding results in contrasty lighting conditions. As for the DC, I never really use it.

    Rambling aside this is the lens I have been waiting for. I really hope that this will be produced soon and that it will be made as a high quality ‘pro’ type lens rather than a cheaper consumer lens. Not expecting it to be cheap though :-)

    • http://www.artandlife.com Sole Prop

      That was my thought: how long typically between filing the patent and releasing the lens? I’ve had good luck with the 135 f 2 over the years, although I don’t use it as much as I once did in the days of film. Strictly a function of what kind of photography you’re into, of course, but I wouldn’t mind seeing a nice, fast focusing, VR enabled 135 come down the pike in the near future.

  • jorg

    awesome!
    i love this nikon spring of 2012!!!
    2 grand cameras, now cool glass, yay

  • Shawnino

    I love the DC aspect of the 135 f/2. I don’t need a 1.8, but if it fills a niche, that’s great.

  • Switcher

    Stoked to see this come to fruition. As a recent convert to Nikon I have been let down by my 135 f/2 DC compared to my Canon 135L. Hit and miss AF precision, slower to focus, and not as sharp or contrasty.

    • Ooops

      It may be worth taking a slight step back if one anticipates this has now come to fruition.

      when looking around there are more than one or two patents filed to which the products are not on the horizon just yet

    • Matt

      +1

      I sold my 135 DC for the 85 1.4G and haven’t regretted it at all.

    • Banksie

      fwiw, I did have to go through three samples of the 135 DC before I settled on the sample I now own. Others have had the same issue, so it appears there is a big sample variation.

      But if you get a good sample, the lens is utterly fantastic. It’s one of the best lenses I own, and I also have the Zeiss Makro-Planar 100mm ZF.2 and the Nikkor AF-S 85mm 1.4 G as a comparison.

      • SNRatio

        That is consistent with Nikon’s published MTF curves and test data. Those complaining about sharpness have probably got a bad copy. AND.. it may well be some of the complainers actually report on the same copy – those with good copies tend not to sell it.. ;-)

  • http://ronscubadiver.wordpress.com Ron Scubadiver

    Just remember patent applications cover an invention and not a specific product. The invention covered by the patent might show up in a 135 f/1.8 or it might be in a different lens. That said, studio photographers would love this. It is also sort of a DX equivalent of the 200 f/2.

    • http://www.laurentiuilie.ro Laurentiu Ilie

      135 f/1.8 will be great for DX and also for FX.

  • http://www.BogdanSandulescu.Ro fotograf nunta Iasi

    135 f/1.8 and VR?! Hm, it will be great.

    • http://mirceaciuca.wordpress.com poze nunta

      Come on ppl, what will be great?! In your dreams maybe! VR on a fixed-short lens?! 135 with f/1.8 and with AF-S after 17 years?! No way…

  • MB

    This will be amazing 3000$ lens … if and when released …

  • Ralph

    Argggg another obese nikkor. It’s about time they release some quality f4 lenses. Give is a 35-105f4 and a 100-300f4. That would be a lovely line up after the 16-35f4. I’m too old and unfit to keep carrying all this f2.8 rubbish and fast primes. I thought with the D800 Nikon had realized ha people shoot things other than dark churches, football games and vain people.

    Those who hike with camera beg for IQ alongside healthy backs. PLEASE!!!

    Just for interest sake I weighed my Pelican case with only my lenses in it and it comes in at 26.5KG, that doesn’t include my 500f4.

    • SNRatio

      After the 16-35 f4 and 24-120 f4, I don’t think it is likely with more f4 releases in the short end of that range. There will almost surely be a 70-200 f4, and, personally, I share your hope for a 100-300 f4 – but that one is NOT going to be cheap. 50-150 f4? Might be handy, but I’d rather take a f2.8 for that range. The old 50-135 f3.5 isn’t big and clumsy at all.

  • Twaddler Belafonte

    Please be stabilized!

    • Twaddler Belafonte

      Oh, I see the VR now. Sweet!

  • http://www.thirdelementstudios.com/ Forrest Cavale

    Finally!

    Cant wait, my kit is missing that focal length, saving up now.

  • http://www.1984studios.com Mat

    Now we are talking….

  • David

    Fwiw, the best 135mm around at the moment is the Sony Zeiss 135/1.8 Sonnar for Sony alpha cameras.

    It’s autofocus, and the image quality is absolutely ridiculous. Bokeh is amazing, and the subject has a real 3D feeling to it. I’m switching from Sony to Nikon and it’s the thing I’ll miss the most.

    It’s big, heavy and expensive though. 1050g and £1400 in the UK.

    Photozone review here – check out the MTF graphs!
    http://www.photozone.de/sonyalphaff/500-zeiss_135_18ff

    • Mikycoud

      Well, zeiss is good indeed, but can be horrible in some situations: try shooting a model in a contrasty environment… The 135 zeiss is terrible in this particular scenario and produces so much purple fringing that I find the results unacceptable.
      Nikon’s 200 f2 is much much better in that regard, thanx to its Super Ed glass element. So let’s hope this 135 1.8 will be based around one of those elements too for a true apochromatic lens.
      Btw, does anyone know of any other Super Ed based lens? It seems that Nikon only used this amazing technology in their 200 f2, as far as I can tell. I wonder why?

  • simpleguy

    thats interesting if it can improve the already amazing 135mm f2 DC , that would be something :)

  • Astrophotographer

    There is a US Patent application for those that’d like to read it:

    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20120050872.pdf

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

      thanks, I will update the link

  • http://mirceaciuca.wordpress.com poze nunta

    Even will be this lens on the market, the price will be huge, like Nikon used to do. This lens will be 1600$ or with VR close to 2000$. Or maybe more.
    Keep on dreaming!

    Ca si fotograf de nunta, nu cred ca ajuta cu ceva sa cheltuiesti 2000E ca sa faci cateva poze de nunta! E prea scump!

  • D800_finally_here

    AF-S 135mm f/1.8G ED Nano VRII. How sweat the product name is…. with the Gold Ring, nano-coat, and VR… it would not be any cheaper than either the 24/1.4G or 85/1.4G I reckon.

    • jodjac

      @ D800Finally Here (and others): I read this as another fine consumer prime in the f1.8 line, not likely to have VR and probably reasonably priced, like the fifty f1.8, 85 f1.8 and the like. I don’t see this as a Pro lens with the Gold Ring, VR and Nano coatings. Just my take.
      I’ve never used a VR lens, is it really that good that you need it on every lens? Even if it degrades image quality a bit? I’ve read that VR degrades IQ, is this true and how does it present itself? It must be very, very minor or it wouldn’t be on Pro lenses.

      • jodjac

        @jodjac @D800FinallyHere: Oops, it’s bullets points VR right in the post. I thought I read the post well. It just goes to show you how addicted I am to NR that I have to read it first thing in the AM, before I’ve even had a cup of joe.

        • silmasan

          besides, how come the supposedly “another fine consumer prime in the f1.8 line” be faster/wider than the previous pro lens of the same focal length (135/2)? It’s not analogous to the f/1.8 vs f/1.4 in the 50 and 85 cases.

  • Iglass

    Great. Wonderful. Nikon is just spitting out primes left and right these days, it seems.

    In the meantime, if they could come out with a home brand equivalent of Sigma’s 50-150/2.8 or even a 50-135/2.8 with the Nikon coatings, image quality, and build construction – and do it for anything less than $1500 – they would sell a truckload of them. JMHO. C’mon, Nikon – give us something we can really use.

    • SNRatio

      The Sigma 50-150/2.8 and the corresponding Tokina are for crop format only. Cannot be used on FX, way too smal image circle. So, a 50-150/2.8 would probably be a bit bigger – more expensive and less handy.

      • Jon

        SNRatio,
        I think Iglass was implying that Nikon’s 50-135/2.8 should also be a crop format. This would be the DX equivalent of the full format 70-200, and I think it would be very popular. All else being equal (features, optical & build quality, etc) a 50-135/2.8 DX should be smaller, lighter and less expensive than the 70-200.
        There is currently nothing available for crop users in this range. 70-200 is too big and heavy for DX, and is missing 50-70mm, which is really needed on such a lens. A portrait zoom doesn’t need to go to 200 (or even 150) on DX, but it DOES need to include 50-70. Nikon seems to think that DX users only want 3.5-5.6 plastic lenses, which is soooo not true.

  • JC

    I hear that David really likes his 135mm f/1.8 from Sony…

    • David

      Yes, yes I do.

      I’m switching Sony to Nikon and just surprised that Nikon has no competition for it.

      Another funny one is that Sony has a great pro-quality 70-400, and Nikon users are all crazy about not having a new 80-400.

      Funny how the grass is always greener!

  • Valadice

    Yay, finally some news on a lens that I really really really want.

    BTW, filing date is August 2012….. Nikon can time travel :D

    • EnPassant

      The month before Photokina… Maybe that’s the time it will be presented!

  • http://www.andygural.com Andy

    That would make a nice concert lens.

    The current 135 F2DC dates back to 1990, though the electronics were refreshed in ’95. I’d imagine that the new full-frame bodies will help push an update to the 135,

    • SNRatio

      Yes, it will be interesting to see how the current 135/2 DC fares on the D800. I suspect that the weaknesses of this lens may be exposed @36MP.

  • Mock Kenwell

    Yeah baby!

  • Natan Lorenzi

    This lens will be “N”.

  • jg

    I have always thought that the 135/2 was always an embarrassment for nikon and is need of redesign. Sure the photozone review looks good but I have seen this as an aberration – other reviews are close to what i see but not this lens. I have 2 samples which I got during the film days…and have spoken to others owners about the lens…it was never a hit … it is only a manual lens really .. the 180 2.8 was way more popular – it was way sharper wide open…

    IMHO

    It is not useable except for a tight portrait at f2 and at 2.8 it is only moderately sharp by modern standards.
    Needs 20+ points of focus tune and changes with using the DC.
    Focus plane is not flat.
    Focus speed is poor.
    Bokeh can be poor for point sources when the DC function is used.
    DC function is next to useless in the digital age.
    Big and heavy compared to canon version

    The good points are that it funds focus in poor light well and it is super sharp at f8 – f11

    Only 32939 Af version were produced/sold according over 16 years – 300,000 85 1.8 or about a million pro long zooms sold in about the same time

    http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#135

    • deadsync

      I don’t know why would anyone get bad results with 135mm DC lens – I find it sharp as a razor wide open and the bokeh is fantastic. I have owned one for a few years and I use it almost exclusively at the widest aperture setting – it is the sweetest portrait lens anyone can want. The Defocus Control is out of this world, albeit rather subtle. With my D700 I never really need to override the AF, which indeed is not super fast, but the set up nails the focus perfectly each and every time.

      Just my experience as an amateur weekend warrior.

      Maciek

    • magisterludi

      100% Agreement with my own experience of fifteen years with this lens. I cannot quite get it focus-tuned even with +20 points, CA wide open renders it nearly useless, and doesn’t begin to get really sharp until at least f/4.0.

  • DFive

    WHEN CAN I ORDER THIS BABY !!!

  • makoto

    I just don’t get it, why people complain a LOT about 135 DC, I have that lens on D7000 and yes, on DX CA is exaggerated! but my copy sharp straight from f/2 to f/16, and th fine tune! (maybe I got a good copy of D7000 as I also don’t need any adjustment with Tokina 11-16 as Internet people do)

    The only problem with 135 DC is there are no single ED elements! add one or two, the lens PERFECT!

    Slow AF? what the hell? you wont shoot sports with this lens!? This is PORTRAIT lens people??? lens this long and fast, I always use the lens in MF, I have perfect eyes and fast hands, and a LOT MF practicing.

    As for 135DC wide open the DOF is sooooo thin I’ll blur the nose when focused at the eye. Why even bother with 1.8? astrophotography?

  • Back to top