< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Weekly Nikon news flash #204

Pin It

Nikon Noct-Nikkor 58mm f1.2 Ai-S Manual Focus Lens

Thanko-Lens-Mount-Adapter-for-Nikon-1-Series

  • New: Thanko adapters for Nikon 1 allows you to attach any lens made by other manufacturers.

Pocket-Wizard-Plus-X-transceiver

New-Nikon-lens-rebates

nikon-1-J3-S1-mirrorless-cameras

Sigma-lens-rebates

Nikon-School-logo

Aptina-sensor-logo

sony-logo

Nikon  Coolpix S4400 camera

Nikon-ACULON-T01-Binoculars

Zeiss-135mm-f2-Apo-Sonnar-T-ZF.2-lens-review

Nikon-at-Focus-on-Imaging-show-seminars

Screen Shot 2013-02-27 at 7.14.39 PM

  • Very detailed video tutorial on AF tuning:

This entry was posted in Weekly Nikon News Flash and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • swartzfeger

    I wonder if the D800/D600 rebate will be extended to March 30 as well.

    • Jer

      +1

    • Jer

      +1

    • lorenzo

      Yes, it has been extended to 03/30

  • Spy Black

    Considering the Nikon 1 cameras don’t have a manual mode, putting an electronically unconnected optic on the camera should be interesting. And how do you adjust the F-Stop on a G lens?

    • NoFunBen

      The V1 does have manual mode for setting the aperture and shutter speed. so it could work. there are other adapters for g lenses that let you adjust the lens aperture i dont know how well they work but it could be done, i dont know if this adapter does all of that, but it could.

      • gsum

        The Nikon F adapter is only about 14GBP so will almost certainly have no electrical connections.

        Attaching Nikon’s 300mm f4 to the V1 using the Nikon’s own fully featured adapter gives a truly spectacular setup – about 800mm f4 and 60 frames per sec. Absolutely ideal for sports and action.

        • anonymous

          Actually the multiplier affects the effective F-stop as well (depth of field). So you’d have the equivalent of a 800mm F/10.8 when you attach a 300mm F/4. If sports photographers didn’t mind such a large DOF, they’d just use teleconverters on their DSLRs.

          • preston

            With the N1 you just lose DOF, not light. With teleconverters you lose both.

            • Gleb

              I believe that with either of these you loose only light. DOF is a property of a lens. You take the actual focal length, aperture and the distance from the object and calculate the DOF.

              If you use a crop sensor, you are using only the central portion of the image circle (you always do that, but with crop sensor it is smaller). That means that you loose light (that light that doesn’t hit the smaller sensor). DOF stays the same because you didn’t change any physical properties of the lens and the distance to the object (IMPORTANT! Usually you do change it because the angle of view changes!)

              If you use a teleconverter, it takes the central area of the image circle and EXPANDS it to cover the sensor. Here you loose light that didn’t pass through the converter. The DOF stays the same again, assuming you didn’t change the distance to the object.

              The confusion arises because the angle of view changes (so called effective focal length). And when people say that on a Nikon 1 300 f/4 is “800mm F/10.8 ” (actually f/10.8 or F10.8), what they mean is that 300 f/4 mounted on a Nikon 1 will give you that angle of view of a 800mm lens mounted on a full frame camera with the depth of field that 800mm lens gives at f/10.8

            • gsum

              f-number is defined as the focal length of the lens divided by the diameter of the selected aperture; it is not related to the size of the sensor. My 300mm lens behaves in exactly the same way, regarding exposure, with the half frame D2X as with my FF D800 – it remains an f4 lens. The same applies to the V1.
              It is a bit confusing but the key is to consider the definition of the term f-number and remember that the focal length of the lens (as opposed to its equivalent focal length) is constant (i.e. not dependent on sensor size).

            • Anonymous

              Yes, it remains an f/4 lens, but it also remains a 300mm lens. You originally claimed it changed to an 800mm f/4 on a V1 (and you would claim 450mm f/4 on a D2X by that logic). But if you multiply the focal length to find the “equivalent,” you also have to multiply the F number. The aperture is 75mm, so 800/75 = 10.7. You should have said either “about 800mm f/10.7 and 60 frames per sec” or “about 300mm f/4 and 60 frames per sec.” Both of these would have been correct. One is just the absolute values and the other is the full frame equivalent. What you wrote was incorrect.

            • jerre

              That is correct. However, just to clarify the word “equivalent” I believe should apply ONLY to either the angle of view or the DOF…

              i.e, “The 300mm f/4 Lens on an FX format camera body is the equivalent of angle of view of 800mm lens with a DOF equivalent to a lens with a f/10.7 aperture on a Nikon 1 series camera body”.

            • gsum

              I’m repeating myself a bit here but if I put the 300mm lens on the V1, the camera behaves as if the maximum aperture of the lens is f4, not f10.7. The camera reports f4, selects its parameters according to f4 and images are correctly exposed.

              Looking at this slightly differently, the f-number together with the size of image circle (both constant for a prime lens) determine the intensity of light that reaches the sensor. Cropping the sensor has no effect on light intensity. If the 300mm f4 was attached to a medium format body, the lens would have an equivalent focal length of about 200mm at f4 (not f2.8) but would vignette due to the size of the image circle.

              Focal length, image circle size and f-number are features of the lens, not the sensor.

            • Anonymous

              This post (Gleb’s) is pretty much correct. The only thing incorrect is somewhat semantic with the multiple ways of interpreting DOF. I was talking about the perceived depth of field (what is visually perceived to be in focus/out of focus). This DOES change when you put on a TC, when you put a lens on a crop sensor, and even when you crop an image in post. All three of these actions do the same thing in a different way: they take the central part of the full image the lens captures and expand it to make a new image. Thinking about doing it in post is easiest for me to visualize. Things that were just barely what you would call “in focus” in the original image are now larger, since you expanded a smaller area to fill the screen/print. You can visually perceive smaller flaws more easily, so you no longer consider those areas acceptably in focus.

              There’s a pretty good sample image here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/39921607 Look at how many inches of carpet appear in focus in the 6x compared to the original. The perceived depth of field changed by cropping the image and resizing it to fill the same area on screen. So DOF does change in that regard when using a TC, using a crop sensor, or cropping in post.

          • gsum

            Not true, the lens aperture is retained. All you’re doing is using the lens with a cropped sensor. Stick the 300mm f4 on a dx camera and it becomes 450mm equiv. f4.

            But the great advantage of using the V1 over a DSLR is its 60 fps – the D800 only manages 4 fps and is great for landscapes but really struggles with action.

  • Spy Black

    Considering the Nikon 1 cameras don’t have a manual mode, putting an electronically unconnected optic on the camera should be interesting. And how do you adjust the F-Stop on a G lens?

  • Lajaca

    Lens rebate extension?? Say it isn’t so. Nikon is hurting. And the (anticipated) downturn in the American economy can’t be good news, either. C’mon, Nikon, start selling stuff WE want.

    • Global

      Or MAYBE the Dollar is appreciating against the Yen and there is no need to keep prices as high as previously…….. Which actually is the case, by the way. In fact, in Feb., 2012, it was $1 U.S. Dollar = 75$Yen. But now, 1 year later, $1 dollar is worth 95$Yen (approx.).

      That’s about 20% increase in value of the Dollar.

      So what does that mean? Nikon COULD give a 20% discount and earn the same amount of money as a year ago. By making it temporary. Meanwhile, they’ve raised the prices of most lenses over the past 4 years, when the reverse trend was happening.

      This as more of market correction than a true discount.

      Nikon lenses, on average, are much more expensive (on the whole) than 4 years ago. So a temporary discount means almost nothing. Keep in mind that 5 years ago, the U.S. dollar was worth 110$Yen. So even though Nikon can afford a temporary discount, and has raised prices, it will still need to keep prices a bit high compared to 5 years ago, even if it can lower them compared to the last couple years. Therefore…. take these discounts while you can. It might be a few years until prices normalize to their 2008 levels (if they ever do at all).

    • zoetmb

      Say it isn’t so? Why? Do you prefer it when prices are high? This is nothing new…rebates used to get extended all the time. When a marketer tries a rebate or sale, they evaluate the performance. If it works, they keep it going, they don’t get rid of it. As ‘Global’ pointed out below, Nikon can well afford this since the USD has been increasing radically against the Yen, although there’s no signs of it reaching its 2007 value of 120 Yen to the USD. It’s at 93.59 Yen to the dollar today, but it was only 79 from 12/2011 to 3/2012, so that’s an 18.5% increase since then. Nikon’s rebates are generally a lot smaller than 18.5%.

      On the 24-70mm, for example, with an “ESP” of $1890, they could really offer a rebate of $350, instead of the $200 that they’re offering and make the same money they made in early 2012.

      The original ESP on the D800 was $3000. If they lower that by 18.5%, that would bring it down to $2445. At $2445, I think they would sell like hotcakes. Same with a D600 at $1709. Nikon could do it and if they did, I think they would own the market again like they did back in the days when they released the D70. (If they owned up to the problems and provided great customer service, I think they would once again become an incredible company.)

      Furthermore, regardless of what you think are the merits or not of Nikon and Canon glass, Canon glass tends to be a lot less expensive than Nikon and even if a consumer never actually buys any extra glass, that perception stops a lot of people from buying Nikon. IMO, if Nikon could lower their prices on glass, they would sell far more bodies, not just more glass. When it comes down to it, only the old AF line still has some reasonably priced lenses.

      • Groosome

        Did they own the market at the time of the D70? All the Nikon sensors at the time were CCD pretty much and Canon CMOS. I went with the 350d due to CMOS and 8mp. Needless to say I’m now on a Nikon partly due to them producing full frame bodies with built in flash and the new Canon 24-70 being so expensive and still without IS/VR.

  • Lajaca

    Lens rebate extension?? Say it isn’t so. Nikon is hurting. And the (anticipated) downturn in the American economy can’t be good news, either. C’mon, Nikon, start selling stuff WE want.

  • xxx

    hope aptina will move with foveon

    • Global

      By the way, does this Technology Sharing mean that Nikon will have access to Sony technology in future Aptina sensors — essentially a way for Sony to share/license its technology to one of its biggest buyers(Nikon)……?

      Or is this a hostile move by Sony trying to TAKE the technology that Nikon is using so that Sony can maintain one or two steps ahead of Nikon to ensure that Nikon doesn’t learn something that Sony doesn’t know(thereby keeping Nikon dependent or behind)…..?

  • MJr

    That Noct is quite expensive, considering they could probably make an AF-S version today for < $3000,- A little less than Zeiss did with the Distagon 55/1.4, and now Sony has the Zeiss Planar 50/1.4, but Nikon still lacks behind !

    • MyrddinWilt

      Try $1600

      The 85 f/1.4 AFS actually has better sagittal coma flare performance than the Noct and a larger aperture (60mm rather than 48). So the Noct should not cost any more than the 85.

      I think a replacement Noct is pretty likely just because it is such an iconic part of Nikon history. But in the case of the Noct the most likely time to see an appearance would be when Nikon completes the AFS upgrades on the rest of the range. So a new 80-400 and possibly updates to the DC primes.

      • Johnny Dough

        Yeah and don’t forget the D400 ;-)

    • ola

      Doubt they could fit the data pins on an F1.2 lens…. thus, no AF(S).

  • http://www.amateurnikon.com/ Digital Philosopher

    The Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 Ai-S is the lens I have absolutely no use for but I would still like to own :D

    • Fred Flintstone

      It’s become a collector’s item pretty much, I wonder how many are out there but not being used? Sad really, though my photos would still be pretty average even with this lens :0)

  • MJr

    That Noct is quite expensive, considering they could probably make an AF-S version today for < $3000,- A little less than Zeiss did with the Distagon 55/1.4, and now Sony has the Zeiss Planar 50/1.4, but Nikon still lacks behind !

  • http://www.amateurnikon.com/ Digital Philosopher

    The Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 Ai-S is the lens I have absolutely no use for but I would still like to own :D

  • MyrddinWilt

    The adapter I want is one that allows you to put an F-mount lens on a Nikon 1 camera and do tilt/shift.

    Think about it, the F-mount lenses have plenty of coverage to do tilt and shift. Whatever flaws people might imagine in the N1 cameras they still outperform any 35 film ever made by quite a margin.

  • zoetmb

    Looks to me like that Coolpix S4400 is only a European model, along with the S2750, S2700, AW110s and L27. Not that it matters: even though Nikon sold 14.45 million Coolpix camera in the first 9 months of this fiscal, they’re still all pretty much boring and indistinguishable from themselves and the cruddier models of the competition. Personally, I think they’d be better off if they had only five clearly distinguishable models. And the “Performance”, “Lifestyle” and “Style” designations are ridiculous – it means nothing and I see that on the U.S. site, they don’t even break them down by those designations anymore.

  • Back to top