<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="bbPress/1.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Nikon Rumors Forum &#187; Topic: 50mm f/1.8G VR</title>
		<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493</link>
		<description>where there’s smoke there’s forum fire</description>
		<language>en-US</language>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 00:49:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>http://bbpress.org/?v=1.1</generator>
		<textInput>
			<title><![CDATA[Search]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[Search all topics from these forums.]]></description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/search.php</link>
		</textInput>
		<atom:link href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/rss.php?topic=2493" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

		<item>
			<title>msmoto on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-79971</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 07:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>msmoto</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">79971@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><blockquote><p><cite>Abhinav <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42710">said</a>:</cite><br />
yep 50mm 1.4 doesn't have nano ,but once nikon coats nano layer over one of its lens elements, I bet it will be priced for $1500 above hehe
</p></blockquote>
<p>Had to comment on the "price" of glass.   In the 1960's I had two "F" bodies, and when I did the calculations, I paid about $2900 each for these in today's dollars.  And the Gossen Luna Pro light meter... about $1500 in today's dollars.  In other words, I worked about two and a half weeks to buy an "F" body, a week and a half for the meter.  Anyone can do the math and see that the "bang for the buck" in today's equipment is pretty good.</p>
<p>Having said all that, OH MY GOSH, THESE LENSES ARE WAY TO EXPENSIVE!!  </p>
<p>On to the subject.... mote the f/stop of some of the highest quality glass around.....  the Leitz stuff...   Summarit-S 70mm f/2.5 ASPH CS Lens for $6,000.00.  And NOT VR.  Admittedly, it has a shutter, but the Nikkor glass is not really out of line if one does this as a pro and hopefully gets something in return.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Abhinav on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42710</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 2010 21:47:54 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Abhinav</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42710@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><blockquote><p><cite>NSXType-R <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42403">said</a>:</cite><br />
Wait, the 50mm 1.4 doesn't have nano?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>yep 50mm 1.4 doesn't have nano ,but once nikon coats nano layer over one of its lens elements, I bet it will be priced for $1500 above hehe
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Drab on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42535</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 Sep 2010 21:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Drab</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42535@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><blockquote><p><cite>NSXType-R <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42527">said</a>:</cite><br />
That'd be a more correct statement, that's true.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Not more.  Correct period.  "Correct" is like pregnant.  The prior statement was <strong>wrong</strong> not "less correct".
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>NSXType-R on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42527</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 Sep 2010 18:01:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>NSXType-R</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42527@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><blockquote><p><cite>Drab <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42510">said</a>:</cite><br />
That is incorrect.<br />
85mm f/3.5 DX VR<br />
And the 200 f/2, 300 and 400 f/2.8s, and the 500 and 600 f/4s as well (depending on your definition of "latest").</p>
<p>A correct statement would be "none of Nikon's sub f/2 glass has any VR at all."
</p></blockquote>
<p>That'd be a more correct statement, that's true.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Drab on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42510</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 Sep 2010 10:45:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Drab</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42510@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><blockquote><p><cite>NSXType-R <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42354">said</a>:</cite><br />
VR I doubt too, none of Nikon's latest primes have any VR at all.
</p></blockquote>
<p>That is incorrect.<br />
85mm f/3.5 DX VR<br />
And the 200 f/2, 300 and 400 f/2.8s, and the 500 and 600 f/4s as well (depending on your definition of "latest").</p>
<p>A correct statement would be "none of Nikon's sub f/2 glass has any VR at all."
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mike Gunter on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42405</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 11:59:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Mike Gunter</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42405@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Hi all,</p>
<p>How timely. I was shooting yesterday p.m. and evening with the f1.8 50mm, portraits, and frankly, at my age my hands are a bit shaky. A few of my exposures show it (I ramped up the shutter to avoid it for the shoot).</p>
<p>VR would obviously help, but like jonnyapple, I'm chea..., conservative, at least in my purchases. If VR was added it would likely be added to a NOCT or at least a f1.4.</p>
<p>The 50mm is a terrific lens for the DX crowd (of which am I one).</p>
<p>That pesky tripod needs dusting.</p>
<p>My best to all,</p>
<p>Mike
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>NSXType-R on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42403</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 11:25:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>NSXType-R</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42403@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><blockquote><p><cite>Abhinav <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42387">said</a>:</cite><br />
how about adding "N" coating to 50mm?</p>
<p>I'm thinking of getting 50mm 1.4 AF-s before games start here  (I have used 50mm 1.8 ,but construction seems so bad that I returned it :().
</p></blockquote>
<p>Wait, the 50mm 1.4 doesn't have nano?
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Abhinav on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42387</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 00:48:27 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Abhinav</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42387@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>how about adding "N" coating to 50mm?</p>
<p>I'm thinking of getting 50mm 1.4 AF-s before games start here  (I have used 50mm 1.8 ,but construction seems so bad that I returned it :().
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>jonnyapple on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42381</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 22:48:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>jonnyapple</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42381@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><blockquote><p><cite>shivaswrath <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42348">said</a>:</cite><br />
But Jonny, why would we want a 1.8? why not a 1.4 VR?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>That was me mostly being cheap and not smart, Shivas—I guess I just couldn't afford a 1.4 VR. I don't know whether any of my suggestions would be possible.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sangster_Photography on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42370</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 20:35:08 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Sangster_Photography</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42370@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>I would love to see someone make 50mm f1.0 NOCT  Nikon made a 50mm f1.1 for Nikon SP around 1960 and a 58mm f1.2 NOCT, with Leica producing the only 50mm f1.0.... would love to shoot an f1.0 NOCT on my D3s
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>NSXType-R on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42354</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 11:10:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>NSXType-R</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42354@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>I doubt a D version, especially if Nikon hasn't released a new D lens in who knows how long. </p>
<p>VR I doubt too, none of Nikon's latest primes have any VR at all.  </p>
<p>Why couldn't you bump up ISO a bit to get a faster shutter speed?
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>shivaswrath on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42348</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 10:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>shivaswrath</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42348@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>But Jonny, why would we want a 1.8? why not a 1.4 VR?</p>
<p>I think it comes down to the optics, but I'm not a physicist like you. . .seems like adding VR to super large aperture lenses will somehow risk a degree of softness they aren't willing to take?
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>jonnyapple on "50mm f/1.8G VR"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2493#post-42346</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 10:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>jonnyapple</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">42346@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>I don't even know if this is possible from an engineering point of view, but a 50mm f/1.8G VR lens is a dream of mine. Do you think there's any chance Nikon would ever release it? </p>
<p>I think with the 50 1.4 it would harder (impossible?) to fit the extra VR electronics. I would even take a non-AF-S version—a 50 1.8D VR&#8212;if they couldn't fit the ultrasonic focus motor in it.
</p></description>
		</item>

	</channel>
</rss>
