< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4G lens also to be announced tonight

Nikon 58mm F1.4 lens patent

One of the Nikkor 58mm f/1.4 lens patent drawings

Update: here is the first picture of the lens.

In addition to the D5300 (see updated specs), Nikon will also announce the AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G lens I mentioned yesterday. The new lens will have nano coating and excellent sharpness and micro contrast even wide open.

Via Digicame-info

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

    Oh man I really hope you’re wrong on that price point.

  • EAJ

    Clearly the 58mm 1.4 is intended to be offered as a D5300 kit lens.

    At that price the lens had better render stars as points wide open.

    • El aura

      Isn’t it rather the other way around and this lens is offered as a kit to come with the D5300?

  • neversink

    This is one lens I am going to want to test and compare with the 50 1.4 G and my old 58 1.2 nocturnal (in beat up condition, but perfect glass)

  • mist3rf0ur

    Nikon, I’d rather have a new rangefinder body with an FF sensor that accepts F-mount.

    • Eric Calabros

      with in sensor PDAF from V2

    • rearranged

      And how should that work regarding flange distance??? If nikon makes a ff rangefinder than it will have a new mount with new lenses

      • J. Dennis Thomas

        People want what they want. They often give no regards to the impossibility of their desires.

        • http://Flickr.com/inthemist InTheMist

          Just because the flange distance allows a mirror doesn’t mean you have to have one.

      • pyrua

        simple, nikon will have to introduce an adapter as sony did.

        • groucher

          Why? All that is needed is for the body to have the correct flange distance. The rangefinder lens system would have to be coupled but that’s not an insurmountable problem.

          If they produced such a camera and ensured that it was bloat-free (no scene selections, rear display etc etc etc) I would be first in line.

    • neversink

      That’s nice…. However, what you would like to have is not what this subject is about. It’s about a 58 f/1.4 lens that Mr. Admin says is going to be announced tonight. It’s not about what you or I would like. So tired of off-topic posts.

      • stoooopid

        Hey! This post is not about whether or not YOU like other peoples posts. It is about a lens release – stay on topic or go away. d.a.

        • John Foote

          Your post complaining about off-topic posts is, by its nature, off-topic unless this were a forum on off topic posts and in that case it would be on topic.

          • stoooopid

            ironic much? Anyway all this topic nazi stuff is boring.
            This looks like a nice lens. Way too expensive for most, but I am sure it will find a nice home in a few very special peoples bags.

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

        Yes, like I said already D5300 and 58mm f/1.2G lens tonight.

    • neversink

      That’s nice…. However, what you would like to have is not what this subject is about. It’s about a 58 f/1.4 lens that Mr. Admin says is going to be announced tonight. It’s not about what you or I would like. So tired of off-topic posts.

  • Can’t Believe It

    Does anyone know if this is a replacement for the Noct? In other words, does it have the optical corrections for sagittal coma flare on bright points of light when shot wide open? Or don’t we know yet?

    • jk

      it will replace that one , and it will be expensive , costing as much as 1.8 k or more.
      but I think it will be amazing , I did not see many samples but saw a few ,unfortunately Nikon deleted it , though.

    • MyrddinWilt

      The 85 f/1.4 is better on sagittal coma flare than the Noct. So yes.

  • ShaoLynx

    Will it be as good as the legendary Noctnikkor?

    • Sean Molin

      Probably.

    • MyrddinWilt

      Almost certainly better.

      The 85 f/1.4 is better so expect the new lens to be better as well.

  • Up $#!t’s Creek!

    any idea if even though a FX lens is targeted as a 85mm equiv on DX for a high end dx camera? (have to keep the d400 alive in spirit…)

    • jk

      no D400 for sure , but this lens will be an amazing sharp lens.
      all those who have tried it already told us talking about it now online.
      and unfortunately, there is no more room for D400 or 7D or A77 kinda cameras.
      the Alpha 7 costs only about 1450USD, now who pay more than this for a tiny sensor DX or MFT?
      like or not , you have to accept it , there will be no more serious DX from Nikon or Canon, and I think Sony will go all FF very soon.

      • Up $#!t’s Creek!

        sony’s latest offerings seem to be pretty impressive at face value. Too bad nikon couldnt commit to something this bold with the Nikon 1′s

        • neversink

          Then buy the Sony…

        • El Aura

          If the Nikon 1 would be full frame (which seems is what you mean with bold) it wouldn’t be the Nikon 1 as the term is now defined. It’s like saying Toyota should have been bold with its Yaris and made it a large pick-up truck with it. It’s a rather non-sensesical statement. Unless you mean Toyota should have put a V8 and three rows of seats into the Yaris chassis.

      • Pat Mann

        There’s a hole a mile wide between the D4 and the top of the current 7xxx group that’s just perfect for a D400.

  • http://Flickr.com/inthemist InTheMist

    I’m gonna wait and see what Sigma has coming up in their “Art” series. Their new 35/1.4 impresses the hell out of me.

    • RMFearless

      +1

    • phosgene

      yes, and yes. I simply can’t believe how awesome the Sigma 35mm 1.4 is.

      That said, I’m not terribly happy with the ghosting. The nano crystal coat has spoiled me a bit…

    • neversink

      -1

  • Terry Clark

    So close… yet so far. Another 1.4 lens instead of the 1.2 many were holding their breath for Nikon to introduce. And at a price point to compete with Zeiss and Leica to boot. Wow, or should I say, yawn.

    • Mike M

      That many will be holding their breath, well, forever. The rear element size of a f1.2 or faster lens doesn’t leave room for the electronics in any of the popular focal lengths. Nikon’s mount just isn’t wide enough to make it happen. A few people have modified existing NOCTs for chips and they had to cut the glass itself to make enough room for it.

      • neonspark

        The same wad said about the 800. Nikon has plenty of patents and the design figured out. They can make a 58 1.2 in CAD and the only reason they went for the 1.4 patent version was price. Enough with the old wives tales

        • El Aura

          What was said about the 800 (the 800 mm f/5.6)?

          Well, if designing for the smaller mount diameter makes a f/1.2 lens noticeably more expensive than designing a f/1.2 lens for the Canon EF mount, with the same level of IQ, would you prefer the current lens, 58 mm f/1.4 for, eg, $2000 or a f/1.2 lens for $3000?

          I think it is very safe to assume that larger mount diameter makes things easier (and vice versa, with a smaller mount making things more difficult). The question is just how much more difficult. And unless we are optical designers (or have access to one), neither of us can claim to know how much more difficult it actually would be.

          The only thing we can go by is circumstantial evidence: (1) the existing Nikon f/1.2 lenses have larger rear glas elements than any other lens in the Nikon mount, (2) using the existing design you’d need to cut off the top part of the last lens element to get space for the electronic contacts, and (3) neither Nikon nor a third-party have released full-frame f/1.2 f-mount lenses with electronic contacts electronic so far.

          What you call old wifes tales is the story that somebody with more optical knowledge than us came to the conclusion that it would be very difficult and require unreasonable measures or compromises to design a f/1.2 lens with electronic contacts for the f-mount.

          Whereas your conclusion appears to be that, of course, designing such a lens is possible, it would just make it a bit more expensive. But implying that these pieces of circumstantial evidence have no value at all as you do (“Enough with those old wives tales”) is based equally on the circumstantial evidence of saying that the approach of: “If there is a will, a technical solution can be found”, has been confirmed in the past in similar situations.

          • MyrddinWilt

            It may be safe to assume but it would be wrong.

            The only advantage to the larger mount is being able to mount Nikon lenses on Canon bodies while the reverse is not possible.

            There are plenty of Nikon lenses with an aperture much larger than the camera mount. The 300 f/2.8 for example.

            • El Aura

              The size of the aperture alone has pretty much nothing to do with the size of the glass element that sits at the plane of the lens mount as you have illustrated with the example of the 300 mm f/2.8. The size of the aperture roughly sets the size of the first element behind the aperture. But the size of this lens element has no direct influence on the size of the glass element at the mount plane. So, you have based your certainty on an irrelevant parameter (size of the aperture).

              The exact size of the element at the mount plane can by definition not be defined based on absolute rules because there is no absolute rule on the distance of the lens mount to the image plane. There are no optical rules on the maximum size of the mirror box and thus the distance of the lens mount to the image plane. Sure, in reality it roughly is a function of the sensor size, as the sensor size informs the minimum size of the mirror box and thus the minimum distance, so there probably is a rough rule but with non-obvious parameters.

              There might also might be a correlation between the relative sizes of that lens element at the mount plane (which is also always the last element but the reverse is not true, ie, the last element is not always situated at the mount plane) and the f-stop for a given flange distance, ie, all f/1.4 lenses are larger by the same amount than the corresponding f/1.8 lenses at equal focal lengths, ie, that ratio stays the same for different focal lengths.

            • Meinrad

              Actually the minimum size of the rear element can be calculated as an angle which is formed by the light cone between the last element and the sensor. This angle is called “marginal ray angle” . This angle (from center line) is: arcsin (1/(2xf-stop)). For an f1.2, this angle is 25 degrees. For the Nikon F-mount, the last element has to be 39mm in front of the sensor (otherwise the mirror would scrape the lens). A little math will show that the element needs to have 36mm diameter for the ray that creates the center of the sensor, plus additional size for oblique angles (or else, horrible vignetting will occur). The outer limit of the F-mount with all the electronics pins (not required for the manual f1.2s) is about f1.25. Under those circumstances, some vignetting will occur, but that is probably acceptable for such a lens.

            • ben

              hey! may i know if that sensor-mirror distance of 39mm is accurate? i do lens conversions from other mounts to nikon F and this number is important to tell me if the lens would clear the mirror. i’ve never been able to find it though. if true, you’d have just saved me a fair bit of trail and error =)

            • Meinrad

              I made a mistake from memory. The nominal distance is actually 38mm. The required tolerance is 0.05mm, so that the fully toleranced backfocus clearance comes to 38.05mm. Here is a link for your verification: http://www.pierretoscani.com/echo_shortpres.html#shortpres04

            • Meinrad

              Hello Ben:As you may or may not have seen in my answer on the NR board, I made a mistake (from memory). The actual (hard) number is 38mm. For stacked tolerance reasons, the clearance should actually measure 38.05mm. The appendix publications on Pierre Toscani’s website have detailed drawings. Most of it is in english, some more of it is in French. I had no problem finding what I needed. His drawings and animations are second-to-none. He also does answer questions. Here is a link: http://www.pierretoscani.com/echo_shortpres.html#shortpres04 I hope this helps! Sorry for the delay – it slipped through the cracks. Meinrad MachlerOakville, Canada
              Subject: Re: New comment posted on Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4G lens also to be announced tonight

      • Pixyst

        I remember when people said Nikon would never make a full frame digital SLR because the F-mount couldn’t support it, forgetting that 35mm film is “full” frame.

      • Mr. Mamiya

        How could Nikon ever make that 58mm f/1.0 CRT Nikkor? If it takes to produce some square glass, Nikon can surely do it, if those Noct-Geeks can do it.

  • Joseph Li

    Always wanted a kickass normal prime from Nikon…but $2400 is really hard to bite. Same price as a 70-200mm VR II? more expensive than a 24mm f/1.4? Way more pricey than a 85mm and 35mm 1.4?…and for a 50ish mm lens. Damn

    • Rami

      The price in US Dollars will not be the same as the price in Euros, I expect this will be priced at just over 2,000 USD, placing it in the same range as the other 1.4 lenses…

    • rob

      With the recent lens release, Nikon (and Canon) seems to be charging £££ premium on their pro lens. Perhaps hedging their product against inflation (as the JPY price is fixed for lifetime of product it seems) for the next 10 years?

      Whatever the reason, I don’t have faith the premium pays for better quality control. In my experience with their pro line of telephoto lens (70-200mm 2.8 in praticular), the alignment or calibration can be horrendously bad and Nikon UK won’t correct it as it’s too much effort (I seen the repair manual). If only I had time to bring trading standards against them.

    • Dpablo unfiltered

      I am thinking that this will be a great lens and wouldn’t be surprised if it and the Zeiss both beat the last 58 aperture for aperture. None of the current lenses are leaving production so what the problem is?

  • stoooopid

    Looks pretty nice, but how about some dx love? Moisture and dust resistant constant aperture dx zoom? wide dx prime? Or they could leave all dx lens development to third parties.

    • neversink

      This post is not about dX. Go away, or talk about this lens. Stop whining…

      • stoooopid

        Wow. Miss you meds today?

        Oh, and neversink – this post is about a new lens release. And last time I checked Nikon makes lenses for both fx and dx. So if I want to point out that I would like some dx lens releases as well then suck it.
        Hope you and your therapist can work through your issues.

      • Pat Mann

        Actually it IS about DX. Any FX lens is also a DX lens. It would be nice to have some more DX lenses, but I’m saying “Thanks” for this one that should be fantastic as a DX portrait lens.

    • Pat Mann

      This is a great lens for DX – we now have a hole at the ideal portrait length in DX – this should fill that nicely.

  • Ian Dangerzone

    Well as someone who has been keening for a modernised NOCT, I’m pretty happy about this lens.

  • Ian Dangerzone

    Well as someone who has been keening for a modernised NOCT, I’m pretty happy about this lens.

  • Kiefferma

    I was thinking since it was 58mm that it would be f/1.2. The bokeh better be a lot better than the 50mm for me to consider it. I would rather be adding a 40mm 1.4G to my bag. F/1.4 better be contrasty and sharp… and phenomenal at 2.8, because a 1.2 would (should) have been. I am pretty tired of this company making market share their focus. Make a camera case for phones with wifi and nfc already. Then get back to focusing on ground-breaking image making tools.

    • neversink

      Well, if this lens will be similar to the nocturnal, it should hold gorgeous contrast throughout its aperture range. I am hoping so…

    • Neopulse

      It should be sharp as hell in my opinion at it’s maximum aperture like other lens brands that have sharp results wide open (eg: Leica). It was kind of annoying having to stop down to f/2.0 on my Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 to get good results. The predetermined f/1.2 I was hoping they would have made it. Hope it follows similar characteristics like the 85mm f/1.4G.

  • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors
  • Back to top