Next Nikon announcement: new DX consumer lens

The current Nikon DX lens lineup

The next Nikon announcement will be for a new consumer DX lens. The official release will probably take place in the second half of October. There is a low chance that other products will be announced at the same time. This will be another "silent announcement" - no press events, no big marketing campaigns, just a DX lens (similar to the 40mm f/2.8 lens announcement).

Needless to say there are no reliable updates on any full frame products.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • M

    16-85 /f4… i’d buy it. I could care less about VR, nevertheless it will have one.

    the current 16-85 didn’t turn out how it was supposed to. as a successor to the 18-70, it’s much worse @ 18 and 70mm, even worse at 16 and 85.

    also, i find a 16-85/f4 very realistic since it’s the equivalent to the 24-120/f4 which isn’t that old.

  • Antonio

    AF-S DX 16mm f/1.8G ED
    AF-S DX 24mm f/1.8G ED
    AF-S DX 17-60mm 2.8G N ED VRII

    16 and 24 to compleate focal length compared to the FX: 24mm 1.4G – 35mm 1.4G
    so: 16 dx – 24 dx – 35 dx – 50 fx – and of course we all wait for AF-S 85mm f/1.8G
    there never will be a ~60mm DX f/1.8G because you can use 50mm 1.8G FX on DX

    17-60 2.8 VR is a must now, at same price
    because canon has IS version and because the future is:

    D400 with 17-60mm f/2.8G N VR

    • Trevor

      This pretty much sums it up. Personally I’m hoping for the 24mm, but I imagine it will be f/2 or f/2.8 like the recent patents. That’s just fine.

      Replacing the aging 17-55 makes sense, especially if the D400 is around the corner. But, admin does say “consumer” DX lens, which is not what I would classify the 17-55 as.

      Either way, new DX makes me a happy guy.

      • Mark

        I still don’t understand why the Admin thinks it will be consumer-grade, or even DX at all. I mean, it’s for him to know, not us, but I’d still like to know.

        • Based on information from several different places. As always, it’s just a rumor for now.

          • sloma_p

            Any chance you know if it will more likely be another 18-xxx crap, or do they consider e.g. 24/2 “consumer DX” as well ? That “consumer DX” bothers me – another 40/2.8 here we go…hope not…

            • Ke

              That “consumer DX” bothers me – another 40/2.8 here we go…hope not…

              What’s wrong with the 40mm 2.8? An affordable macro lens was a really good idea, it looks to be a really good lens too.

      • Antonio

        17-55 is a strange lens because is DX but used by pro (example all wedding photographer), also consumer lens because is for D200-D300 which are pro-sumer (that is no prof) but expensive enough


        people need 17-60 VR + canon has 17-55 IS => nikon will do 17-60 VR
        people need 24 1.8 & 16 1.8 => nikon will do

        also you can se:
        35D 2.0 – 50D 1.8 – 50D 1.4 – 85D 1.8 – 85D 1.4
        now we have
        24G 1.4 – 35G 1.4 – 50G 1.8 – 50G 1.4 – 85G 1-4

        and we miss 24G 1.8 – 35G 1.8 – 85G 1.8
        why? because they are cheaper and we want them => nikon will do

        I hope nikon think that is good and cheaper enough (and so can sell enough) the DX 24 1.8

        • ausserirdischegesund

          I think a 24/1.8 is too expensive. 24/2 would be almost too much, 2.3 or 2.5 is more realistic. Retrofocus construction due to the mirror clearance really makes a difference.

          Have you seen the Sigma 24mm/1.8? It is a huge beast of a lens, and a DX version of this will not be much lighter.

        • Tim

          I agree.

          I own the 24mm 1.4 lens, this is for a full frame, and I use it for all of my weddings and it is the biggest lens I own and the most expensive lens I own, about $1,700 used, $2,200 new.

    • Where’s my….

      No no no no, 16mm DX should/could be something from f3.5 to f4.5 MF AIS pancake. And cheap. Then everybody will buy it without having to think about anything. Much like Voigtländer 20mm f3.5 but DX so smaller =) Or maybe it should be Voigtländer/Samyang/Polar/Vivitar as long as it looks retro and small and remains DX only for shrunk dimensions.

  • Does the 80-400 qualify as “consumer” lens?

    • Soap

      Doesn’t qualify as a “DX” lens.

  • marco

    why Nikon did not think of a 70/200 mm f4 VR on FX?! …
    cheaper than “70/200 mm f2,8”, but equally good?
    I’d love to!
    what do you think?

    • Raydom

      I wrote about it before!
      I´d like it for my Dx right now, but also with future Fx possibilities.

      And as someone said in other post, canon has it and we want it… Will Nikon do it?

  • probably 17-70/4 or 18-105 a little bit faster

  • I Think it would show Nikon exec’s have a great sense of humor if they did a soft release of the D4 and like no one noticed for weeks.

  • getanalogue

    2 DX lenses are missing: 17-55 / f:2.8 replacement = 16-60 / f:2.8 and 12 or 14 f:4

  • Ashok Kandimalla

    I hope there will be a 100-400 AFS VR soon. This is a major gap in Nikkor line up as there is not light fast focusing 400mm that is essential for bird photography.

  • choudoufu

    I’d vote for 85mm f/1.8G or even f/2G
    should performs alot better than the old 1.8d version with an affordable price.

  • Henrik Jansberg

    I see a couple of lenses missing:

    Compact 50-135 (150) 2.8 DX zoom
    Compact 16-35mm 2.8 DX zoom
    Compact 24mm f2 (f1.8 too big?) DX prime

  • BBhaswaran

    In all probability, Nikon is going to replace the 18-200 VR with something like 18-250 VR or 18-300 VR, with improved image quality issues. They must do this to tick of the Tamron 18-270 and Sigma 18-250

    Any improved 16-85 f2.8 is welcome

    • Henrik Jansberg

      18-xxx are boring lenses – lets have a compact and bright zoom or a couple of primes with at least f2

  • Back to top