Next Nikon announcement: 1 Nikkor 32mm f/1.2 lens


Nikon announced a record number of new products in the first quarter of 2013 and I have already mentioned that the next few months will be slow in terms of new product introductions. Expect the next wave of major announcements to come later this year (after August).

Now back to the next announcement: next month, probably around May 15th, Nikon will officially release their 1 Nikkor 32mm f/1.2 mirrorless lens (equivalent to 86.4mm in 35mm format, Nano Crystal coating, see patent). The press photos of the new lens are already listed on Nikon USA website.

This entry was posted in Nikon 1 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • fjfjjj

    3 different typefaces, separated by 2 different lengths of spacing. I nominate this lens barrel for a design award!

    • dan

      Actually 4 different typefaces.

    • Fry

      and this is important because .. ?

      • Can’t Believe It

        What you surround yourself with, you become.

        • Fry

          I see, so you become…. a lens…

    • Snarfy

      Hey look, another graphic designer!

  • GlobalGuy

    What is f/1.2 in FX equivalency again? (f/2.8?)

    • Neil

      f1.2 is still f1.2 unless you’re changing the framing/distance.

      • AM

        I believe they are talking about the DOF equivalence. The 1 Nikon 32mm f/1.2 will produce an image with an equivalent DOF of a FF at 86.4mm f/3.2, if both are framed the same and shot at the same distance.

        • Neil

          That’s basically what I was saying. It’s 1.2 with 1.2 DOF until you change your framing. But you don’t *have* to change your framing.

    • Simba

      Nikon 1 camera has 2.7 crop factor, so f/1.2 is only f/3.2 for a full frame camera.

    • doppler_fto

      The 1 series has a 2.7x crop factor. So if you’re talking about total amount of light hitting the sensor, all else equal, it’d be like an f/3.24 lens on an FX sensor running at identical (electrical) sensitivity.

    • keepitsimple

      This question comes up a lot. Answer is it depends on what you want to be “equivalent”. If your talking light/exposure, there is no difference. If your talking DOF, then you need to apply the crop factor. So exposure wise you will get f/1.2 speed. DOF will be similar to f/3.2 on FF.

      • El Aura

        Exposure will be the same, but what matters for the image is the amount of light, not the exposure. A 12 MP cellphone camera with a f/2.8 lens at ISO 100 will have the same exposure as a 12 MP FX camera, f/2.8 lens and ISO 100, but the resulting image will be vastly different (and not just in terms of DOF).

    • Eric Duminil

      32mm f/1.2 on CX at ISO 200 is like 86mm f/3.3 on FX at ISO 1600
      Same field of view, same depth of field, same exposure and same noise

      • AM

        Noise levels and ISO equivalence between different sensor sizes is not that simple. There are other factors such as pixel density, sensor technology, etc, that have much more to do with noise.

        • FTH

          exactly. People come up and build up myths by stating that FX owns DX in terms of light sensitivity, this is a false theory – sensor tech is prone to evolution and are not even related to a specific format or brand. Stating that CX ISO 200 is like ISO 800 in DX or ISO 1600 in FX is thus completely irrevelant. Try to compare an older FX camera with newer DX cameras and things are reversed.

          • No longer Pablo Ricasso

            It’s the first time I saw someone discussing the noise, but I think it holds true within any equal generation of sensors. Of course newer sensors are better than old sensors but also bigger sensors are better than small. They aren’t going to make technology to put on the rink dink camera and then purposely keep it from the executive limo. (And vice versa as long as we’re not talking about Canon.)

          • El Aura

            How difficult is it to multiply QE with sensor size? Or just compare SNR measured for different sensor sizes? An FX sensor is 8x the size of a CX size, but the QE difference between all cameras released in the last two years is probably less than 30%. So, which is the primary driver: sensor size varying by a factor of 8x or QE which varies by a factor of 1.3x?
            I don’t know where this denial is coming from. Fear of numbers? No knowing what something as simple as standard deviation is? Not being able to tell whether a mathematical statement makes sense or is completely made up? People identifying themselves so much with a choice that they become irrational about it? People assuming that if they don’t understand something, nobody else could claim to understand it?

            • Can’t Believe It

              For those of us who maybe have forgotten their physics, what is QE? And why would you multiply that times the sensor size? What does the product tell you about the quality of the resulting photographs.

  • Neil

    Now we’re talking! I’ve got a V1 and the kit lenses. Been hesitant to add more lenses to it so far. As they add more useful non superzoom lenses I may finally have me a lighter, useful, travel kit than my D800.

  • val1s

    any price expectations? $599?

  • Nikon sure makes a nice looking lens.

  • Lame…where’s the 1.2 love for FX? Fuji just announced their 56mm 1.2 and Nikon follows up with a 1.2 for their dinky V1 lineup?

    • rensuchan

      Being in a global recession, I doubt the market is going to want to spend 1.2 on FX money right now. That’s likely the reason for the lack of love.

  • Andy

    Okay, now we need this in an F mount.

    • fjfjjj

      Planning on shooting 8mm film?

      • Shkacas

        LOL! Made my day! 🙂

  • niXerKG

    I am surprise Nikon doesn’t provide a reverse adapter to allow Nikon 1 lenses on their DSLRs that can do the 2.7 crop (D4, D800, D600??) mode for crazy light, video lenses.

    • Neil

      I may be wrong but I bet the CX mount to sensor distance is way too short to accommodate an adapter for an F mount.

    • Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

      Buy a 50/1.2 AIS then.
      Crop modes increase noise levels, so you are better of with a 85/1.8 compared to this 32/1.2 in 2.7 crop.

      • No longer Pablo Ricasso

        You’re always better shooting whatever f value you have to on a larger sensor, but this will be good for people who want a little bokeh on a little camera. That looks like it will weigh all of four ounces.

  • PhotoAl

    I’m looking forward to this lens but I’m really curious about the price.

  • RondoX

    I was REALLY excited until I realized it was a Nikkor 1. Nikon does have a patent for an FX 35mm 2.8 VR. Hope we will see something soon… Nikon TRULY needs something between the $200 35mm 1.8 and the $1600 35mm 1.4. That new Sigma is looking awful tempting right about now…

    • Mike

      I gave in to temptation. It’s a phenomenal lens.

      • RondoX

        Yeah, that’s what the consensus is. Everyone I know is raving about it. For now I’m using the Nikon 35mm 1.8 on my D800 in 1.2x FX crop mode. Its closer to 40mm, but it gets the job done.

        • Micah Goldstein

          Try the 35/2. It’s pretty darned nice and it’s about the same price used as a new 35/1.8. Check my blog for a full res D700 shot wide open. It gets better stopped down–enough to give a D800 moire. And it’s the smallest AF lens you can get for the mount!

    • Jason

      Nikon has a new f/1.8 lens for all of it’s f/1.4 focal lengths except 35mm. I’d love to see a 35mm f/2 with VR. I like shooting in dark restaurants and while the 35mm focal length on FX is just right, I’d value VR over the f/1.4 aperture for food. I thought about that Sigma lens, but I’m holding out to see if Nikon comes up with something in the f/1.8-2.8 aperture size with VR.

  • Greger Pung

    I’m thinking about getting this for my D700. Would vignetting be a problem?

    • Marco

      Nope, go for it.

  • FTH

    1.2 sounds sweer for CX but the design is pretty aweful.

    • iamlucky13

      The 1 series tends to follow the minimalist, boring design. Besides, there’s not much to dress it up with from a functional standpoint – no aperture ring, no A/M switch, no DOF scale, etc. Honestly though, it wouldn’t kill Nikon to at least provide a focus distance scale.

      Good addition to the CX lineup for those who have it. I wonder if Nikon is actually giving the focus ring a useful amount of throw, or if it’s just there to make people feel like they’re doing something other than pointing and clicking.

      • PhotoAl

        That’s no focus ring, it’s just a textured portion to help when twisting the lens on and off. Very similar to the other primes on the 1 system. There is MF but not via lens, which is another reason why they don’t have any scale on the lens.

        • iamlucky13

          Ouch. I’m speechless.

  • Aristide

    This is wonderful news. At last!

  • Where’s the damn off-camera flash capability for the Nikon 1. A miserable PC-Sync adapter would do!

  • AlphaTed

    Can I use this on my future D400 ?

  • rajahx

    Ha ha … too little too late. Sold my V1. Moved on already.

  • fred

    “Expect the next wave of major announcements to come later this year (after August).”

    I expect the D400 announcement then – if there is going to be one.

    My D300 is getting long in the tooth.

    • Nope

      Don’t care.

    • pwmorg

      my D200 is long in the tooth so it looks like Nikon wont sell me a new camera this year!

  • lorenzo

    Those Nikkor 1 lenses look very pretty; are they plastic or metal?

    • keepitsimple

      Depends. The kit lenses and the 18.5 are plastic. Not sure about the 10mm, looks like metal. I have the new 10-100 and the outer barrel is metal (inner barrel is plastic). I believe the new wide angle is also metal. I believe this f/1.2 will be plastic like the 18.5, but there are no zoom rings or anything so the weight savings makes sense for the primes.

      • PhotoAl

        The 18.5mm seems metal to me. It gets cold while the plastic parts don’t. And yes the 6.7-13mm is definitely metal (it has the same knurling as the new 10-100mm).

  • Shawn Reynolds

    Bottom line: a good FoV, and DoF for portraits. Should produce some really nice results.

  • Rhonbo

    I think its great that the 1 system gets a nice portrait lens. Now where are the DX lenses that we have been waiting for all these years. Surely there is a lot more profit in DX than the 1 system.

    • Rob

      Nice portrait lens? My concern is it is a 32mm and even at f1.2, I am not convinced users will be able to obtain a shallow depth of field.

      I would love Nikon to post some samples.

      • Studor

        32mm and f1.2 on CX is about 85mm and f3.2 on FX. The dof is shallow enough. I rarely shoot faster than f2.8 on my D800 or even on my D300 for any focal lengths longer than 85mm.

        But as you say, we need some samples.

        • Rob

          Thanks Studor, that is comforting to know!

  • V1

    Many people are excite without ever used it.
    Looking good on photo doesn’t mean anything.
    It there anyone taking photos in here?

    • PhotoAl

      Isn’t that what this site is for? A rumors website is like the opposite of a website full of testing. Anyway, I’m excited for the concept of the lens but of course we need to wait and see it’s performance. If it’s anything like the latest 3 lenses released though, I’d say this we have nothing to worry about.

  • Neopulse

    When is the V3 gonna come out heh!

    • Fry

      right after S2 and J4

      • Neopulse

        Yeah no doubt. Hope the FT-1 gets an update though.

  • Nikon

    Oh yeah, great lens
    I knew it without even ever use it


    Making comments

  • Back to top