I thought of a lens that would be very useful. I want a DX 20-70/1.4-2.0, 77mm filters AFS-VRII. It would be the perfect reportage and portrait lens and more fun than a Noctilux. Why wish for high speed primes, when you can dream of high speed zooms? Made more possible by the smaller DX format.
New Dream Lens Idea
(11 posts) (7 voices)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
Are there any zooms that have a max aperture bigger than ƒ/2.8? But the 24-70mm ƒ/2.8's good enough for me, plus it works on FX :^)
Posted 3 years ago # -
That's fine, but since I have a smaller sensor, I can use a smaller lens which could be correspondingly faster. Low light capability and finder brightness are only two advantages of lenses this fast, the biggest advantage is shallow DOF - the ability to isolate a subject. The best journalist lenses were 35/1.4 or 2.0 and fast 50's. The best portrait lenses are 85/1.4 and 105/2. I'd just like to have them incorporated into one lens. I think it could be phenomenal to play with. I'm willing to accept large size and price.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I getcha :^)
Posted 3 years ago # -
Mr Ted.. I think the closest you are going to get is the 24-70 f2.8... at least for the next 5 years. If they do go below F2.8 .. its going to be is small steps .. What you are asking for is going to cost more than 200k and would be a one off.!! Maybe a dx f2 20-50 is possible now, there is a 14-35 f2 zuiko after all. personally I would be happy with a dx 28-75 F2.4
Posted 3 years ago # -
That Zuiko 14-35/2 (28-70 equivalent) is only 900g, 77mm filters and $1,900. I would expect the wide end was hardest to achieve. So, how about 24-70/2 DX, shouldn't cost as much as the Noctilux (full-frame, f0.95, Leica and $10,000). Do remember, this is my fantasy lens and I just want that shallow DOF.
Posted 3 years ago # -
ted2001 said:
That Zuiko 14-35/2 (28-70 equivalent) is only 900g, 77mm filters and $1,900. I would expect the wide end was hardest to achieve. So, how about 24-70/2 DX, shouldn't cost as much as the Noctilux (full-frame, f0.95, Leica and $10,000). Do remember, this is my fantasy lens and I just want that shallow DOF.You are looking for a shallow DOF, but a 24-70 F2 DX lens would also result in a shallow DOP(demand of product). I really don't think many would spend close to $2000 on a 42-105mm equivalent DX lens. Maybe a 16-50 F2 DX lens, but I would still go for the FX lens
Pete
Posted 3 years ago # -
Olympus has an f/2 zoom. A couple actually.
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1334
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1335
Posted 3 years ago # -
-
My dream lens? f/2.8 17-35 full frame, 77mm filter would be OK ...
Posted 3 years ago # -
I like the 77mm filter idea, as I already have two lenses that use that threading.
If something like that existed, I'm certain that it would be way out of my price range. I tend lean towards the wider angles, and was really hoping that the rumors from a while back of a 16-35 f4 VR would turn out to be true. I would like for Nikon to have a competitor to the Canon 17-40.Posted 3 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
