More Nikon rumors: new Nikkor PC-E 19mm tilt shift lens

Nikkor-lenses
As we get closer to Photokina, I start receiving more rumors about potential new products. A few days ago I got a hint about two new lenses: the 105mm f/1.4 I already reported today (announcement this week) and a new Nikkor PC-E 19mm tilt shift lens that will most likely be introduced around Photokina (September 2016).

New-Nikon-PC-E-19mm-f4D-lens-patent
Nikon has filed at least two patents for a Nikkor PC-E 19mm f/4 tilt-shift lens.

Nikon currently has three tilt shift lenses (24mm, 45mm and 85mm).

Here is the updated list of rumored/expected Nikon cameras and lenses:

Nikon DSLR cameras

Large sensor Nikon mirrorless camera

  • The rumors so far are suggesting that a new Nikon mirrorless camera with a "larger sensor" will be announced in the next few months.

Lenses

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • doge

    I think they filed that patent almost a year ago.

  • El Aura

    So the D820 (w/D5 AF) comes early next year?

    • Eric Calabros

      Yes, and its good news for upgraders. They have more time, and more rebates, to buy HDDs.

      • T.I.M

        did I miss something ?
        what is that D820 story about ?

        • TheInfinityPoint

          It’s the D30x30-80 camera … 😉

          • T.I.M

            nice one !
            :o)

  • John Mackay

    The lenses look exciting, but I am a little worried about the bodies. I really hope Nikon get Sony’s next high res sensor at the same time. and that they put IBISin their mirrorless camera with a near 0 lag evf or it will be tough to not look at other systems with adapters.

  • luca

    no new DX lens’ rumours yet!? did they file some wide DX primes a long ago?

  • Eric Calabros

    Good to hear its not 17mm for the sake of “me too”.

    • neonspark

      they have patented a 17mm too.

    • captaindash

      19mm is as wide as I go for my real estate shooting so it’s a perfect complement to the 24mm. 17mm is too wide to my tastes. I’d prefer a 20mm, but 1mm difference is an ultra 1st world problem.

      • Thom Hogan

        But here’s the thing: 17mm works for DX, 19mm doesn’t really work for DX ;~). So this is just another of Nikon’s ways of ignoring lenses that are functional for DX.

        • Tony Beach

          Not only that, but for me 19mm competes with rather than complements 24mm. My kit includes 55mm and 28mm PC options, and what I really want is a 14-16mm PC option — I’m not going to fill my bag up with prime lenses that only offer marginal differences from one another.

          • El Aura

            Putting DX aside for a moment, Canon’s 17 mm T/S lens already has a (diagonal) AOV based on the image circle of an 11 mm lens (or about 126º). There is a limit as to how flat a view onto a surface (already less than 30º with an AOV of 126º) can be realistically be presented as a straight-on view.

            • Tony Beach

              First, DX is an important consideration. If I had a 14-16mm PC option that worked on DX then I could see taking a D500 with me on vacation and not having to tote around two cameras. Unlike Thom, I do think 19mm is right at the margins of being useful on DX, it’s just that it can be a bit constraining and forces me to sometimes stitch (exactly the same as I do with my Schneider 28mm PC on my D800).

              Second, as a dual format user I’m looking for a seamless connection between the formats. 24mm on FX equals 16mm on DX, that’s seamless; 19mm on DX equals ~28mm on FX, Nikon doesn’t have a 28mm PC-E lens, and that forces me to change my approach based on which format I’m using.

              Also, I don’t consider realism at wider angles to be a high priority. For that matter, I don’t consider realism to be a high priority in photography at all, I just don’t like converging lines and find them distracting. Anyway, I would just take the 20mm option (assuming the optics are more or less equal to the 24mm PC-E), so as I said before, for me 19mm and 24mm compete with each other rather than complement each other.

              My final point is that 19mm just seems weak to me. Sure, it’s a good focal length to have, but if I’m looking at Canon or Nikon and 17mm T/S or 19mm T/S then I would choose Canon and the 17mm option — YMMV.

            • El Aura

              Using very wide FX lenses on DX (and in terms of AOV, a 19 mm shift lens might be as wide as a 12 mm non-shift lens) is always a bit of a waste of glass. The 14-24 mm might be absolutely marvellous on DX but it’s a lot of money and weight that goes unused.

              And if Canon had 15 mm and Nikon 17 mm, you would choose Canon. That game can be played almost ad nauseam. I don’t think anybody would have said that ’19 mm seems weak to me’ if Canon had released a 19 mm T/S instead of a 17 mm T/S lens.

            • Tony Beach

              I don’t buy the waste of glass argument when using FX glass on DX format. I don’t think Nikon buys it either considering that they featured the Nikkor 14-24/2.8 in some of their D500 marketing material. I actually used to use the Nikkor 14-24/2.8 on my D300 because at the time it was the best glass at those focal lengths for that camera. Besides that, as a dual format user I’m fine using the FX capabilities of a lens on FX format and also using the cropped part of the image circle on DX format when that’s the best available option — for me there’s no point in buying a DX specific lens, and when there is no DX specific lens then there’s every reason to use an FX lens on DX format.

              As to arguing reductio ad absurdum, both Nikon and Canon have 24mm T/S lenses, Canon goes almost 40% wider going to 17mm, but if this rumor turns out to be true then Nikon only goes 26% wider at 19mm, for me that makes Canon a better choice. Besides that, Canon doesn’t have a 15mm T/S lens, they have the 17mm T/S lens, that’s the target and not some hypothetical wider angle lens (again, setting aside the different crop factors of DX versus Canon’s APS-C), so why shouldn’t Nikon go a little wider instead of going noticeably less wide?

            • El Aura

              This 19 mm shift lens aside, many people including Thom Hogan have lamented the lack of DX lenses by Nikon. So, I’d say most DX users would prefer DX-native glass for the lower half of the focal length range. Most people also aren’t dual-system users. I’d say even most FX users aren’t dual-system users.

              “Canon has the 17 mm T/S lens, that’s the target”, here, you said it yourself: the main motivation for wanting a 17 mm shift lens is not that 17 mm is better than 15, 16, 18, or 19 mm but only that Canon has chosen 17 mm. It’s more about reaching parity with Canon in a pissing match than anything else.

            • Tony Beach

              Why shouldn’t Nikon try to be as compelling in this regard as Canon? It’s not about bragging rights, it’s about having a useful lens and a 19mm T/S lens is less useful than 16mm T/S lens, whether on FX or on DX, it’s as simple as that. If I were to buy the 19mm PC-E then I would forego buying the 24mm PC-E, whereas if it were 16mm then I could see having both.

            • El Aura

              “As compelling” implies that the wider, the more compelling. And on a technical level that is true. But besides that we are back to the position that since there will always be a situation where were any given lens is not wide enough, whoever offers the widest lens wins.

            • Tony Beach

              Your avoiding addressing my issue here by attempting to make a reductio ad absurdum argument against it. That issue is that a 19mm PC-E lens isn’t as compelling as a 16mm or 17mm PC-E lens.

            • Tony Beach

              Well, I would say 19mm is weak compared to a wider focal length regardless of whether it’s a Canon or a Nikon. There just isn’t enough that separates 19mm from 24mm to make having both of them in my bag sensible to me. To each their own.

        • El Aura

          There must have been a shift of expectations over the years. For a very long time, shift lenses (for 35 mm cameras) were available in 28 mm and 35 mm. Though one might argue that it is the AOV vs price/size/IQ curve that has flattened and the optimal intersection of demand and supply has moved to 24 mm. Or that the IQ improvements at the 24×36 mm size have allowed jobs that used to be done on larger formats to move down to FF (and thus created new demand). And your comment in itself might indicate that things are moving down further to DX.

          • Thom Hogan

            I think you’re misinterpreting history. The reason why original SLR shift lenses were 35mm had to do with optics knowledge, technology, and ability at the time, not photographer demand for 35mm tilt/shift lenses. We made do with what we were given, basically.

            The demand–particularly in indoor architectural photography–has always been there for wider angles than 35mm gives you.

            For those that want wider than 19mm, we’ve already got the Laowa 15mm (http://www.sansmirror.com/lenses/lens-database/other-lens-makers/laowa-lenses-venus-optics/laowa-15mm-f4-macro.html) though it doesn’t have a lot of shift to it.

            • El Aura

              That is what I meant with the “AOV vs price/size/IQ curve”. That technology wasn’t ready to produce wider shift lenses at a reasonable price, size, and IQ.

              But I don’t remember many people clamouring for a 17 mm shift lens when the first 24 mm shift lenses were released. The appetite comes with the eating. The real answer would be relative sales numbers if we had a fairly tightly spaced set of shift lenses (eg, 12, 14, 17, 20, & 24 mm).

        • harvey

          if I’m going to be dropping $2500 on lens, then I am going to be dropping $2500 on a body to take advantage of the full coverage of that lens.

        • Mikycoud

          Well, that 19mm would become almost a 28mm, which would still be useful. Why wouldn’t it work for you Thom?
          Also, hopefully they make the tilt and shift mechanism fully separated. Right now it’s a pain to (sometimes) have to think ahead and unscrew and modify the lens at home, depending on what tilt/shift combination one wants in the field.
          Also, they need to make the locking levers wayyyyyyy stronger! Both of them (tilt lock and shift lock) are really unreliable on all of them, the tiny shift locking lever on the 24mm being the most idiotic design I have ever seen! It feels like repairing the insides of a watch with gardening gloves every time one want to lock tight the shift movement. The 45mm and 85mm are not as frustrating, but they should definitely make them bigger/stiffer. Just my .02 cents. …

      • Glen

        Hopefully the slightly longer focal length is a compromise that allows the optics to be as distortion free as possible. I also hope they allow for the shift axis to be rotated 90 degrees manually by the user like every other T-S lens in existence. Even the Samyang does this. It would be nice to be able to change the shift from the factory setting to do horizontal stitched panoramas.

        • Mikycoud

          You can. Get a screwdriver and start unscrewing. Plenty of tutorials on the Web. It’s not as easy on one of them (the 85mm I believe) due to cable length being short, but it’s doable. I used to do it on the 24mm and 45mm.

          • Glen

            That might be worth it if I wanted to permanently alter it but most of my use is in the factory default setup so I am not going to void the warranty and go through the hassle of altering it every time I shoot. It is also not like I am asking for something that has never been done before. Every other T-S lens I am aware of on the market provides this capability.

            • Mikycoud

              Oh don’t get me wrong: I’m 300% with you! They couldn’t bother dealing with cable management in their design in a first place and shame on them for that. Hope they get it right this time, but I’m sure they’ve learnt their lesson! I was just pointing out to you that if you really really need to invert/align tilt and shift axis for a specific shot, you were not as “stuck” as it first appeared. It’s a hassle but it’s doable….

  • Bloomer

    Still nothing about a D600/610 replacement? :-s

    • No, only a D3300 replacement for now

    • Lloyd

      I’ve always considered the D750 as the 610 replacement, it just broke with the numbering in order to distance itself from the D600’s track record. Honestly the D750 should have been numbered either the D620 or D650

      • Bloomer

        I’m hoping for a reasonably priced, similar level but with snap bridge… no idea whether to try and get a D750 now or to hang on. Could be hanging on for a while…

      • captaindash

        The 750 was what the wish list was for the 610, but it came in at several hundred dollars more which I think disqualifies it for being a replacement (plus they make both at the same time). I think the D610 is the most underrated body ever made. The sensor is absolutely amazing, and absolutely professional quality. That’s not even up for debate. The body just doesn’t have the pro build, that’s all.

        • Bloomer

          Totally agree – great camera. Focus could be better but can live with it 🙂
          But I’m keen on an update with snap bridge…

  • T.I.M

    I have the 24mm f/2.8 PC-E (great lens), I was hopping for a 14mm PC-E
    :o(

  • T.I.M

    I have the 24mm f/2.8 PC-E (great lens), I was hopping for a 14mm or 15mm PC-E lens
    :o(

    • saywhatuwill

      I would be interested to see a side-by-side comparison between your image properly corrected by the lens and the one on the left corrected with the new version of Photoshop or Lightroom.

      • The problem with PS/LR correction is that it loses resolution (it has to stretch some areas and compress others), and for extreme cases, the artefacts are very obvious.

      • T.I.M

        I have Photoshop and perspective corrections look ugly.
        $2000 for the 24mm PC f/3.5 is not that bad…

      • Robert

        Here is the same scene shot with a D810 and 24-70{old version} with only LR CC perspective correction used to correct the distortion. Obviously not taken from the exact location but similar.

    • captaindash

      14mm?! You better be shooting buildings straight on like this shot or else the leading corner would look ridiculous. I think up close 24mm angled exteriors look goofy enough as it is.

  • The 19mm T/S lens is interesting (too bad I have too many lenses already).

    But after all this waiting, what I’m really waiting for and very curious about is the new mirrorless. Good thing I’m not a cat or I’d be dead already ☺

  • Bob Thane

    19mm’s pretty close to 24mm, but if it’s f2.8 they could have a real winner.

    • preston

      This is mostly aimed at architectural and landscape shooters, both of which primarily shoot at f/8-16 to get enough depth of field. So f/4 is actually preferred in most cases to keep the size and cost down. And 19mm is COMPLETELY different than 24mm in terms of field of view for architectural photography. A 19mm f/4 PC lens will already be over $2000. A f/2.8 version could very well be double that.

    • Spy Black

      19mm is a significant shift from 24. Compare the 20mm Nikkor to the 24 and see for yourself

    • aria

      19 is as close to 24 as 28 to 35.

    • captaindash

      19-24 is a monster shift. Go out with a normal zoom lens that covers that range and see, especially when doing real estate interiors. 24mm looks damn near ‘normal’ whereas 19mm is bordering on ultra wide angle.

      I think i’m the only person with a tilt shift who uses it at f3.5. The vast majority stop it way down, so I don’t think that becomes much of an issue.

      • 19 is ultra wide angle. Anything below 24mm is…

        • captaindash

          If you are getting pedantic, yes, 19mm is less than 24mm, but you can still make a room look quite normal at 19mm if you do it right. If you’re told someone took an UWA shot of a room, you’re probably going to think it’s a ridiculously distorted, funhouse looking shot. I couldn’t possibly care less about any specific photographic trivialities. Everybody who screams “crop sensor is NOT zoom” makes me want to slap them. Not saying that’s you, I’m just saying I’m not overly concerned with pedantics. I’m talking about general perception. My line in the sand is that I won’t shoot wider than 19 and I think the 17mm tilt shift stuff looks awful unless it’s shot straight on, so I’d welcome a 19mm.

    • jarmatic

      This isn’t a portrait lens or an astrophotography lens. It is a landscape/architecture lens. I see no need for going faster than f/4. I do own the 24 PC-E TS. I usually shoot at at least f/8. Usually 11 or 13.

  • preston

    I hope it’s as good as the Canon T/S lenses!!!

    • waterengineer

      It will be better because it has to be. It will be able to resolve for the high density sensors of the D810 and the soon to come D810.

  • saywhatuwill

    With all of Nikon’s know-how, why can’t they make an adapter that will plug lenses into a PB-6 (or earlier bellows) and allow G- or E-lenses to have aperture control? The way it is now I need to buy a D- lens because it has an aperture ring.

    • Bob Thane

      Not enough market for them, I’d guess.

    • EnPassant

      There are Nikon G to E-mount adapters. But I’m not sure if any E-mount to Nikon adapters excist? It is however possible to reverse mount the lens and use a G adapter for aperture control.

      Are there any solutions for Canon EF except the expensive Novoflex bellows? I’d guess I would just use older lenses.

      • saywhatuwill

        Unfortunately even with a G-adapter on the front of the bellows there’s no way for the lens adapter to communicate with the camera unless there was NFC or something similar.

        • EnPassant

          True. But in that respect AF D lenses are no different as the Nikon bellows are mechanical only. But if you want to use the lens wide open for focusing and automatic stop-down with a double cable release that is of course only possible with older lenses, and with the Novoflex bellows for Canon EF cameras: https://www.novoflex.com/en/products/macro-accessories/bellows-systems/automatic-bellows/

          • saywhatuwill

            I use the double cable release and it works great. I even got an adapter so that it works with my 10-pin on the D700 and D810. But I still need to use the AF-D lenses.

    • MyrddinWilt

      Or the same for the CX mount. You could then use any standard FX lens as tilt/shift.

  • waterengineer

    Awesome! Bout time! I nearly converted to Canon because of the 17mm
    T&S.

    • HKer

      I did

    • Spy Black

      No need to convert. Simply buy a Canon body and the 17. Have your cake and eat it too.

    • I did it last month. No regrets, this lens is amazing.

  • EnPassant

    “Only” 19mm? (The widest Canon TS is 17mm) Does that mean Nikon also plan an even wider PC-E lens, like 15mm or so?

    • Spy Black

      Move back about 6 inches. Now you have a 17…

      • Tony Beach

        When I’m shooting a sunset and want more of the sky, moving back six feet has near zero effect.

        • Spy Black

          Change the 300mm…

          • Tony Beach

            Not sure what you meant, but I have a D800 and a 14mm Samyang. What I’ve wanted now ever since I started using the 14mm lens on my D800 is an ultra-wide T/S lens –a 19mm PC-E doesn’t quite get there.

            • jarmatic

              That’s what the shift function is for. Then stitch in PS.

            • Tony Beach

              You can also do perspective correction in Photoshop, but at a cost. The cost of stitching is that there are many times where timing is critical and including a non-static element in the photo forces constraints on how you take the shot.

              Your argument suggests no need at all for a PC lens. Just take extra shots, stitch them together, than do perspective correction in Photoshop. That can definitely work, but there are valid reasons to choose a PC lens instead, and there are valid reasons to choose one focal length PC lens over another.

    • HKer

      I would say there wouldn’t be that demand. Unless you are dealing with super large venues. For landscape you would end up with a thin narrow strip of the area of interest, either too much unwanted foreground or too much sky in the shot. Imagine also the travel architect photographer lugging around 5 tilt shift lenses on a plane. In my opinion, one wide is enough.

  • Jeff Hunter

    Yes! I’ve been waiting for this one.

  • Glen

    I have been wanting something to compete with Canon’s 17mm tilt shift for ages. 19mm would be perfect if they can keep the linear distortions to a minimum. The 24mm is a nice lens but not wide enough for interiors and has a very bizarre field curvature which can even still be an issue at f/8.

  • HKer

    Even though I am mainly in the Nikon camp, for work, I bought a whole canon system, 4 tilt shifts, 11-24, 24-70. Only because of the 17mm tilt and 11-24 I purchased the canon system. These two lenses are amazing. The 17mm is used for very wide venues when the 24mm doesn’t cover. I am glad about the 19mm tilt shift, and may stop the rot of Nikon users moving to canon for those needing this lens. But not sure why Canon can achieve 17mm, while Nikon 19mm, 2mm is a big difference in field of view. And will make those needing TS to think twice, whether they purchase Nikon or canon TS.

    • captaindash

      What makes you think they “can’t” do 17mm? Maybe they’re catering to folks like me who think it’s a bit wide for their tastes.

      • HKer

        Actually you are right, they do have a patent for 17mm f4 TS. I agree everyone has their own needs. My opinion is I would rather have 17mm than 19mm and crop if necessary. At least then I have that option.

        • HKer

          I am just glad that Nikon are bring out something wider than 24mm, whether its 17 or 19mm. It would stop the rot of people moving to Canon. I can see this lens maybe coming out at the same time with a higher resolution D810 🙂 There’s a thought.

    • Spy Black

      The difference between the 17mm and 19mm FOV will probably require you to move your Nikon camera back about 6 inches…

      • HKer

        I shoot a lot of retail malls where I was pinned to the back wall or escalator to get everything in. But I recently photographed a High Court for the Government, where y I didn’t have those 6 inches and had to do a vertical stitch of the arch dome to the door to the main columns. You never know when that extra 2mm comes in handy. Everyone may encounter different shoot situations, it’s just that whilst using the 17mm I have been tight situations to get the shot.

        • You sumbatch, you changed your reply! I completely agree 100%, every person on assignment or doing special work will get that occasional request “hey could you shoot a team portrait of all 47 of us in this 4ft wide alleyway, you’re a pro, you’ve got a 0.005mm f1.2 lens, yeh? Of course you do, gents line up!”

          The whole “step 6 inches back” spyman is parroting doesn’t work very well out of an airplane camera port….or when you’re already up against the waters edge or when your tripod isn’t 7.5 feet tall and you can’t clear that bush fucking up your landscape……I could go on…

          • HF

            But by that argument, even 17mm is not enough in some situation.

            • HKer

              well theoretically yes 🙂 But there got to be a point where it is too wide for most uses, and the distortion gets too much or complicated. Something like a large church I think the 17mm would be very useful. Anything larger then yep back to the 14-24 or 11-24 and you end up too much floor whilst keep the walls vertical. There’s got to be a normal distribution curve 🙂 for focal lengths for architecture which I guess both Nikon and Canon have studied. But also considering physical size of the lens. At least the 17mm you can use 100×100 filters, while the 14-24 have limited numbers of filters and are damn large to travel with.

            • Thom Hogan

              True, but it’s almost easier to move forward than backward.

          • HKer

            I guess if Canon didn’t make the 17mm, everyone will just accept the 19mm because you have no other choice. But as the 17mm exist and is a great lens (particularly flare control), then it does make people start to query why hasn’t Nikon gone that wide? But who knows until we actually see the 19mm formally announced, it could be 17mm 🙂 Like maybe others, I have worked in places, where to get the shot, I had to tether so that I can see the camera screen as there was even not enough space for my head behind the camera. haha. My vote is still for 17mm and with higher resolution cameras coming out to crop if you need 19mm. There’s always some situations where you say, I wish I had a wider lens. The distortion on the 17mm canon can be easily corrected. Also with LR align function, makes it easier. I would still probably purchase the 19mm if it did come out, as I believe the dynamic range of D810 and any future high res Nikon would be better than the 5DSR.

            • El Aura

              Yep, it is the same as with megapixels. There are always situations where more megapixels could be useful. What photographers care most about is knowing that they couldn’t have done better. If Canon only had a 19 mm T/S lens, almost everybody would have been happy with a 19 mm shift lens from Nikon. But knowing that they are missing a few shots they could have captured with a Canon system, is what bugs photographers.

    • hje

      I’m curious how you all can “know” the field of view by just knowing the focal plane…

      • HKer

        hey hje, hope you are well and having as fun sifting through my words with due diligence. It’s great someone is reading everything very carefully. Yep its a careless mistake and fairly obvious to correct, but very much appreciate your time writing:) Sorry I just take photos, words aren’t my strength 🙂

        • hje

          seems like I inadvertently sounded harsh. So I’m sorry. I did like how you made your point very clear in all those posts here in this topic.

          • HKer

            I’m just glad they are bringing this lens out. It’s a surprise to me as I would have thought it wasn’t high on their priority list. It’s a happy occasion for Nikonian landscape / architecture / interior photographers. Maybe it’s their way of saying happy 99th birthday!

  • jarmatic

    Buying it. Absolutely.

  • MyrddinWilt

    Why make a tilt shift for the F-mount? It would be vastly easier and higher quality on a mirrorless. You could even have a chance of actually autofocussing.

    • Julian

      In my opinion autofocus on a TS is not very useful. If you have ever handled one, then you’d know its a very very manual process, and takes a lot of careful adjustment to get the shot you want. These lenses are strictly for tripod use with a lot of time on your hands for setting up and focussing to perfection.

    • TheInconvenientRuth

      AF becomes unreliable because of the extrme angles at which the light hits the af sensors when tilting/shifting. At least, that’s what I’ve heard. But it sounds very plausible. Plausible is good enough for the Mythbusters, so it’s good enough for me.

    • jarmatic

      An optical viewfinder is almost a necessity with these lenses.

  • HD10

    Good to see Nikon wake up from its slumber with the D5, D500, and now these new lenses. A Nikkor 19mm PC-E will be a welcome addition for those who have long been waiting for lens wider than the 24mm PC-E.

    What I will be watching out for is whether this rumored 19mm f/4 PC-E will accept a filter, and whether one can adjust the tilt and shift on the same axis. I theorize that the reason why Nikon chose 19mm instead of a wider focal length is to enable the lens to accept a filter.

    • HKer

      I think even with a screw on filter, others would still use something like a Lee/Cokin system, which gives you more flexibility in movement of the filter and with adapters can be used on other lenses, so maybe more cost effective. Personally I use the Lee 100×100 filters on the 17mm with adapter, and no issues as all.

      • HD10

        I understand. Still, I would like this lens to have a filter thread. Using the Lee/Cokin system is slow, cumbersome and fragile. One will not always have the luxury of such under some shooting conditions.

        • jarmatic

          The tilt shift lenses aren’t for machine gunning. My Lee system and my 24 PC-E are BFFs. These lenses take time and patience to set up correctly, especially since focus and T/S are manual. But in all honesty, I’ve thrown on the filter adapter, filter holder, and ND filter and the Polarizer on in less than a minute to catch a sunset or shifting clouds. I’m excited for the 19mm and will pick one up either way.

    • Thom Hogan

      Doubt it will have a filter thread. Still waiting to hear if it has full axis adjustability.

      • HD10

        The Nikkor 24mm f/3.5 PC-E and the Nikkor 20mm f/1.8G both have a 77mm filter thread. This new lens is expected to be an f/4.0 lens. And yet you doubt that this lens will have a filter thread. Why is that?

        • Thom Hogan

          Look at the patent. That front element is significantly curved. Now do the geometric progressions outward. To put a filter on that without restricting the view would require quite a wide filter ring. Greater than 82mm, I think.

  • FountainHead

    This thing is going to mostly be for landscapes and buildings.
    In some sense, f/4 is too fast.

    Why not make it f/5.6, knock $500-$1000 off the asking price, and sell 5x as many?

    • I’m sure that would be a great tradeoff if you shoot in bright light, but there is value in f/4 even if you never take a picture that wide. If you shoot under dark conditions (blue hour, etc), anything less than f/4 starts probably gets difficult to focus manually. Maybe that will be less of an issue as sensors continue to get more capable in low light, but I’m shooting with a D810 and find my f/3.5 tilt-shift is already noisier in live view focusing than my faster (f/1.4-f/2.8) primes. I just shot fireworks this week with my 24mm PCE, and took a photo of the focus setting on the focus marking on the barrel before sunset to make sure I could check that I was still setup for a sharp image at f/8 when it got dark.

  • bgbs

    wow, a tilt-shift finally. Let’s pray it will be $500

  • Alan

    Thank you Nikon – if this is done right, it’ll be an instant buy for me!

  • Dustin 4WD

    I’m looking forward to this

  • Back to top