I just wanna say that Nikon is just best option in Camera. I have Nikon S3000 cool pix. Its just fantastic camera with 4x zoom quality and great clarity lens.

http://monk.otavo.tv/ , http://frasier.otavo.tv/

The patented Nikkor 10mm f/4 fx aspherical is at the top of my whishlist as is an old 6mm f/2.8

I use my Sigma 10-20mm at 10mm so much of the time, I'd love to see a 10 or 12mm DX prime. By going prime, I'd anticipate the weight, possibly size and price would come down, which would be nice, particularly as that is a great landscape lens, so can get carted distances for landscape shoots.

Thom Hogan has had 'an ultra-wide DX prime' on his wishlist like forever, and that is based upon his broad experience.

The OP is still on one post so I doubt he'll see this Gabbb. Try 'PM'ing him.

I'm using a Samyang 14mm AE 2.8 on Nikon DX. It's a tack sharp and costs like 500$...

LMAO... I guarantee he doesn't even know what shutter speed is :P

As to the topic a 15mm f4 prime seems kinda useless on Dx as other options have been mentioned above. The impractical part I feel would be that fact that super wide lenses demand a sizable bulbous front element to be a true aspherical lens negating the compactness of dx. However pentax managed to eschew the idea and has a pretty good compact 15mm f4. Still I find the Canon/Pentax has so why cant we game pretty silly as if you were to cut all of the duplicate focal lengths down on every system (f-stop not counted) Nikon wins in the variety category by a decent margin.

A good 10-24mm constant f4 (or 2.8 for that matter) would be a dream lens however or an aspherical 10.5mm (9?) f2.8

That's hilarious, TTJ and Mike.

TaoTeJared said:
Saw a review on Amazon for the 85mm 1.4G where the author said something to the effect, "Auto focus was no faster than my 18-55m at the beach. I thought this was suppose to be Fast glass."

Why is it those people have the money and I don't.

Doesn't it make you want to shake you head?

Say, 'Just pitiful.'

Walk home and put a hamburger on the grill and pop a top.

Sit in sun and think, it's shame when cousins marry.

My best,

Mike

Mike Gunter said:
It doesn't have anything to do with 'sharpness'. That's something else entirely, although sometimes it seems that 'fast' and 'sharp' get mixed up in the same language.

Saw a review on Amazon for the 85mm 1.4G where the author said something to the effect, "Auto focus was no faster than my 18-55m at the beach. I thought this was suppose to be Fast glass."

Why is it those people have the money and I don't.

Hi,

The 10-24MM zoom which isn't close to 1.8, is still a good lens, and do a lot with software correction - something I'm not above doing.

I used to have the 18mm Nikkor for my film cameras and it was terrific, but had a lot of distortion.

I guess the short of it is that in the 'wide' arena I can live with longer exposure time, thus larger larger f stops. It doesn't have anything to do with 'sharpness'. That's something else entirely, although sometimes it seems that 'fast' and 'sharp' get mixed up in the same language.

My best,

Mike

TaoTeJared said:
T

I would like to see some good F1.8 - f2.0s in the $300-500 range. A 400mm or 500mm 5.6 would be great. Even a 400mm F4 would be wonderful.

now you're talking, but we would probally be dreaming to get it at that price.

but we can dream

The idea that the smaller aperture of F4 will somehow make a prime cost really cheap is a pipe dream. Even a non-distortion lens like that would be huge and easily cost $1,000+.

I would like to see some good F1.8 - f2.0s in the $300-500 range. A 400mm or 500mm 5.6 would be great. Even a 400mm F4 would be wonderful.

Well I'm sure it'd be nice for Nikon to have a low-cost, compact, slow prime in every focal length class the reality is they have limited R&D and manufacturing resourced. Nikon right now seems to operate under the assumption that normal and wide lenses on DX are for "consumers" only (hence all the slow plastic zooms). Even on their pro side, compactness is not on their wish list- see the 16-35/4 or the 24/1.4 for instance.

The good news is that different companies focus their resources differently, so you end up with different kinds of lenses in other systems. Hence, if you like the Pentax 15/4 so much, I'd suggest getting a Pentax body and the 15/4 lens, or even switching systems if that makes more sense to you.

As far as what I'd like Nikon to do, I'd also like to see a widish dx prime, somewhere in the 10-16 range, but faster than 2.8. I doubt this is really practical, but anything else wouldn't be all that useful to me.

TaoTeJared said:
We need to let this feed die ;) F4 prime? So one would have to stop it down to F11 to make is sharp? :)

Some lenses are already sharp at max. aperture, but you already know that.

We seriously need more decent quality primes. After the 15/4, a 400mm/5.6 would be nice as well.

We need to let this feed die ;) F4 prime? So one would have to stop it down to F11 to make is sharp? :)

Look to Sigma and Tokina. They have some lenses out there that are close. I have a Tokina 17mm F/3.5 ATX and I love it. 26mm on DX and it will work on FX as well.

true.. I guess that's an exception because it's a macro lens.. it gives you something zoom doesn't.

jbl said:
I understand that you need something as light as possible and I think that's probably the only reason to want a 15mm f/4 lens because there are already many ways to get 15mm f/4 on DX.

But yeah, that's what everyone said already.

I'm 100% certain that it won't happen for the same reasons that were stated earlier... and to me, there's no point in having a prime if its aperture is f/4.

I think what would be best for you is a four third with a 10mm prime.. unfortunately this doesn't exist :(

Funny you should say that, with the 85mm 3.5 DX macro.

I understand that you need something as light as possible and I think that's probably the only reason to want a 15mm f/4 lens because there are already many ways to get 15mm f/4 on DX.

But yeah, that's what everyone said already.

I'm 100% certain that it won't happen for the same reasons that were stated earlier... and to me, there's no point in having a prime if its aperture is f/4.

I think what would be best for you is a four third with a 10mm prime.. unfortunately this doesn't exist :(

Nikon should definitely make some more cheap (at least sub $400) AF-S primes with nano-coating.

For me f/4 or even f/5.6 will be enough with the d7000, so the price could be kept quite low as well if the max. aperture would be something in that range.

A 15mm or rather a 16mm prime with minimal distortion would be very nice indeed.
(Why 16mm? Because I love the 24mm on FX and that is the widest I usually need)

Being a DX user I would have loved such lens from Nikon :)

stanlm said:
As just a casual shooter, this sounds like a good idea to me. I have room in my bag for a little wider dx prime than the 35mm f1.8 (which I really like). There is something fun about using a fixed lens.

I agree, interior shots with the 35mm can be tight. I like that lens too, I just wished Nikon made something wider. Preferably a F/2 maybe.

As just a casual shooter, this sounds like a good idea to me. I have room in my bag for a little wider dx prime than the 35mm f1.8 (which I really like). There is something fun about using a fixed lens.

Hi, Nikon4ever—maybe ;-)—and welcome to the forum. There's no shame in switching to pentax if they've got -the- lens you need. LemonToast and TTJ have broken down the options well, and I'm another owner of the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8. It's probably not as light as you'd like, but the performance is excellent. Good luck!

Hi there and welcome. I am a nikon fan but I am also a guy who will choose to get gear that fits what I want to shoot. Had a look at that pentax prime. I can see why you like it. I think it is very unlikely that Nikon will create one similar to it. as mentioned Nikon has several zooms that cover that focal length and the IQ form those are some of the best in the industry comparable to or better than that pentax prime probably. Ther aare also many 3rd party zooms that cover that focal lenght.

If that lens is what I need for my shooting requirements I would get a pentax.

Why you are set on "15mm" and F-4? I'm guessing like many of us, there is a desire for a cheaper lenses - like $400 and below? Probably will not happen from Nikon but from 3rd party manufactures you may be in "almost luck land."

The closest you can find is a Tokina 17mm f3.5 which at the moment, lives on my camera. AND it is full frame! I picked it up used on e-bay for about $300 used and it is almost flawless. Almost no distortion, takes 77mm filters, small, built like a tank and is tack sharp. It took me a while to find it, but it was well worth the wait.

The other options are like the one's above. I have a Tokina 12-24mm f/4 that is just about perfect at 15mm wide open. I picked it up on e-bay for around $400 and it is built like a tank and uses 77mm filters which is great. The newer version "II" can be used on AFS only cameras. (Below D90) I have used Nikon's as well and it is just as good if not better, but in my opinion, not as well built which is more important to me. You also have available the one's mentioned above as well as a few from Tamron and Sigma.

As sharp as Nikon and Tokina's Zooms are having a fixed focal length (other than size) is rather null and void. The 18mm 2.8 is a very good lens as well as the 20mm. Sigma has a 14mm 2.8 "DX" Lens and Tamron has an older 14mm 2.8 "FX" lens that are out there as well, but I have not used either of them. Nikon has rarely made F4-s and I do not expect Nikon to start pumping out any F4 primes anytime soon as lens design takes years to start from scratch.

If you are looking for deals, e-bay is just about your only hope. KEH photo is a good source for used equipment as well and you can find all of the lenses above there.