where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
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?
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—if they couldn't fit the ultrasonic focus motor in it.
But Jonny, why would we want a 1.8? why not a 1.4 VR?
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?
I doubt a D version, especially if Nikon hasn't released a new D lens in who knows how long.
VR I doubt too, none of Nikon's latest primes have any VR at all.
Why couldn't you bump up ISO a bit to get a faster shutter speed?
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
how about adding "N" coating to 50mm?
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 :().
Hi all,
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).
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.
The 50mm is a terrific lens for the DX crowd (of which am I one).
That pesky tripod needs dusting.
My best to all,
Mike
NSXType-R said:
VR I doubt too, none of Nikon's latest primes have any VR at all.
That is incorrect.
85mm f/3.5 DX VR
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").
A correct statement would be "none of Nikon's sub f/2 glass has any VR at all."
Drab said:
That is incorrect.
85mm f/3.5 DX VR
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").A correct statement would be "none of Nikon's sub f/2 glass has any VR at all."
That'd be a more correct statement, that's true.
Abhinav said:
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
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.
Having said all that, OH MY GOSH, THESE LENSES ARE WAY TO EXPENSIVE!!
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.
You must log in to post.
