This is the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4G lens

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f:1.4G lens
This is the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4G lens. The official announcement will be in few hours together with the D5300. Stay tuned for detailed coverage.

Update: the US price of the lens will be $1,699.95.

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

    Will it fit on a Sony α7R?…

    • BlueBomberTurbo

      With an adapter, sure!

      • Spy Black

        I’m not sure there is such a thing.

        • Hejhejhej

          There is one.

    • koenshaku

      I was more interested in the A7 the R while higher resolution I like the more round about hybrid focusing system. At least on paper anyway, I will really have my eyes peeled on that one because I will be upgrading right around that time. Mirrorless has always looked a little weird though so I will keep my fingers crossed.

  • SoftOnDemand

    So this is the Noct’s grandson? I was really hoping for 1.2

    • Daniel

      I doubt they can do that with autofocus mechanism. If you look at the mount of the 1.2, the glass is almost touching the aperture handle. They probably don’t have room to fit the new autofocus electronic contacts.

      • koenshaku

        That is a good point, I don’t think Nikon has anything F1.2 on their AF-S G lenses.


    That’s 2 Grand? Come on…Nikon!

    • The first 50mm (that I recall) to have Nano crystal coating!

      • IAmTheOneYouDefyToSee

        *First 58mm to have NCC

    • This lens should have a very good performance.


        let’s hope it is around 500 or less..or am I dreaming..because it is 1.4?

        • No, my guess the price will be between $1000 and $2000 for the US.

          • Stefan Georgiev

            Mansurov shows MSRP Price: $1,699.95


    …and Ken Flopwell has not reviewed this new lens..Flopwell is slipping in his old age! lol

  • Paul

    This can’t possibly be $2k, right? Right?

    • No, the lens will be cheaper in the US.

      • Stefan Georgiev
        • KnightPhoto

          2 Aspherical Elements

          72mm Filter Size (I guess use a step-up ring…)

          The 385g weight is surprisingly low

          Looks interesting!

      • Neopulse

        YEah, I mean the 50 1.2 of Canon is around that price range so this will compete and beat it by far.

  • iamlucky13

    I presume this will be a Noct lens – optimized for best sharpness wide open and minimal coma and chromatic aberration?

    • I believe so.

    • Mike

      Except that the entire point of the Noct is what it does in the dark, not anything else it might have done better back then. The newest 50mm 1.8G from Nikon deals with coma and CA better than the Noct, so presuming that its going to be a Noct based on that set of criteria is a mistake.

    • DafOwen

      Seen others mention it – what is “Noct” ?

      • iamlucky13

        “Noct-Nikkor” is a series name for lenses optimized for shooting wide open (as you would generally in low light…think “nocturnal”).

        The less expensive 50mm F/1.4 is ok wide open, but it’s at its best around F/8, and has issues with coma and vignetting wide open. The Noct Nikkors are corrected against coma, and this latest one supposedly avoids significant vignetting in part due to the larger front element.

        My experience is with the older AF-D lens though. I think the 50 F/1.4G is also corrected against coma, but I’d expect the 58mm F/1.4G to do an even better job.

  • I have been wanting a companion to my 24/85/200 prime setup. This will fit in perfectly!

  • Daniel

    I AM NIKON 😉

  • Brent

    This just seems like such an odd focal length. who is it targeted for?

    • Mike

      Then it’s not for you. Which is fine. It’s not for everyone. Those that do know will get it. 50 1.4g is not good until 2.2. So what’s the point? The 60 macro, which is a sleeper of an insanely sharp lens, is macro and max f/2.8. The 50 1.8G is sharp but only slightly above average. It’s not in the same league as the 24G or 85 1.4G. This new 58 will have a slightly shallower DOF than a 50 1.2 and likely sharp as hell at 1.4 and agile to resolve 36 mp. So that’s it’s target audience.

      • Scott M.

        I think you nailed it, except it is also a perfect size for DX portraiture. I have 60G and this will be that one on steriods, except for macro.

        • jr456

          A bit rich for me but yeah, I have the 60mm AF-D and I LOVE that lens on my D90 for portraiture as well as on my D700 as long as I’m shooting head and shoulders because up close you can get a little distortion.

      • Pete

        Thanks, but I’ll wait for the 53mm f/1.2…

        • Ryan

          You can wait all you want.. I’m getting the 61mm f/.098

      • Matt_XVI

        He’s talking about the odd focal length. Every reason you gave above addressed the quality of the other 50mm’s (and aperture of the 60mm), except for the one point of the very slight added depth of field that 58mm would offer. I would personally rather a sharp-at-wide-open 50mm f/1.2, as I also find 58mm an odd length. Not quite a wide enough for lifestyle/event/street photography, but not quite long enough for portrait either. What would be the target audience? I feel Brent had a good question.

        For the record:

        “Then it’s not for you. Which is fine. It’s not for everyone. Those that do know will get it.”

        Sounds quite arrogant and pompous – especially considering your arguments were mostly irrelevant to the focal length that he had been questioning in the first place.

        • Zograf

          It is not an odd focal length – it is the minimal focal lens not needing a retrofocus design, i.e. more freedom to optimize the optical quality. The first ever lens for a SLR was the famous Biotar 58/2, classic in all aspects. For quite a bit period of time the standard “normal” focal length for SLR cameras was 55-58 mm. As somebody mentioned above it perfectly fits between 35 and 85 focal lengths.

          • Matt_XVI

            Thanks for the information Zograf.

    • yfc

      Targeted for APS-C shooters to have a FOV almost like a full-frame 85mm on a full-frame Nikon camera…amongst its use.

  • Steven Mackie

    Is this REALLY what Nikon users need? These guys are losing the freaking plot. I’m just waiting for Justin Beiber to be their new point-man.

    • Noor

      Yes, this is *exactly* what Nikon users needed. Desperately. Not having a pro lens between the 35 and 85 primes was painful. At 58mm, it sits almost exactly between those two focal ranges. It will have a bit more compression than the 35 and be an optimal working distance for working with many subjects, especially babies and children. And the fact that it is a AF-S mid-length prime with N glass is a dream. Sure, maybe a 1.2 could have happened, and maybe it will (my 50/1.2 AI-s fits the bill just fine), but the noct-like nature of this has addressed a huge whole in the lens lineup.

      • Ryan

        No. That’s what a 50mm is for. And all Nikon’s 50mm’s are terrible.

      • Steven Mackie

        Noor, I’m sure that there are a number of users who this will surely appeal to. I’m just surprised that Nikon’s business model includes this at this price point at this moment in time.
        I find my Sigma 50 1.4 does the job for me, sans 8mm, at $400, so I’ll gladly pocket the extra $1200 and wait for Sigma’s next Art lens.

    • koenshaku

      I know what you mean lol they file a patent for 58mm F1.2 then we get this…

    • Shakira

      extra 8mm on the 50 to fit Beiber hair-style in a frame

  • Mike

    My precious!

  • IAmTheOneYouDefyToSee

    Waiting to see the actual price….

  • Evilsivan

    I don’t understand, what is the purpose of this lens? Why not use the 50mm f1.4? Is nano coating different than ED? Somebody clue me in, I feel clueless!

  • jefferylewis

    nifty fifty-eight. it doesn’t rhyme.


      nifty fifty-eight aint so great!

    • Rameses the 2nd

      This is a hefty-fifty. It is so bloated in price that it added additional 8mm to the focal length.

      • jefferylewis

        It should be a 200mm as it’s 4x the price of the 50mm 1.4! Can’t wait to see how it compares to the $4,000 Ziess.

  • Juan Lopez

    The big answer: WHY???

    • Fred

      That’s actually a question.

  • Alex

    After having collected the 24, 35, 85, is this another one to waste my money? Sigh.

  • BenHDisqus

    I want to see this thing compared to the Zeiss 55mm.

    • I will do that. Stay tuned.

    • Zograf

      $4000 vs. $1700
      If you want much cheaper (and probably better image quality from f/4) by Nikkor 55/2.8 AF second hand on eBay

  • blp

    same old ugly design… come on Nikon, you can do better than this !

    • Zograf

      Nothing to worry, quality will be high, it will be made in China

  • Mike

    Who will pay $1700 for a 58mm. lens. The pricing is so wrong! 🙁


      IT seems ways off. I don’t get it..Nikon you and I are not on the same page. I will wait for the 58 1.8 G at $500.

      • J. Dennis Thomas

        You’ll be waiting forever. There will never be a 58 f/1.8G.

      • derek

        I will just settle with the 50 1.4. Chances are it wont test much better than that lens anyway. $1700, what a joke!

    • Zograf

      It is wrong but it is the trend.

    • RMFearless

      Not me

  • Jason

    what is the advantage of this lens over the 50mm F1.4G?

    • J. Dennis Thomas

      Build quality and image quality.

    • better low-light performance

    • Michele Perillo

      Possibly a faster AF?

  • Ryan McBride

    I hope they come out with a fixed 189mm F/3.2

    • scottmcc

      no, they’re going to make it f3.14. nothing else could possibly make sense.

  • scottmcc

    a number of people have complained about the quality of the 50 f1.4g. I use it regularly, and it’s my favorite lens for most general purpose photography. to say that it is “no good” is a vast overstatement of its limitations. it’s really a great lens, especially for the price, and while it supposedly lacks critical sharpness, I haven’t had that problem. maybe I’m not demanding enough, or maybe it’s just not as big a deal as the internet would make it seem. as for me, I see very little reason to even contemplate this new lens, especially for the price. and I think nikon would find far more “need” for products like an updated 300 f4, any pancake lens, just about any reasonable dx prime, or some “affordable” super telephoto lenses (eg 400 f5.6). any of those would be much higher on my personal list, at least.

    • J. Dennis Thomas

      That’s the great thing about having options. Now Nikon users have an option of a mediocre, good, or stellar fast normal prime. If you’re happy with the 50mm f/1.4G that’s cool. Some folks have the extra cash lying around and may want something better in which case they can buy the much more expensive 58mm f/1.4G.

    • DafOwen

      Well put. Plus the economics of it are significant enought so that they can’t be ignored.

  • Matt_XVI

    For what it’s worth… If I could ask for my ideal lens it would be a 42mm f/1.4 that is tack sharp wide open. I personally feel that this would fit the way I see the world perfectly. 35mm always seems a bit too wide and 50mm a bit to narrow. I love both focal lengths but something in between would be my dream lens!

    • J. Dennis Thomas

      Have you checked out the Voigtländer 40mm Ultron f/2 for Nikon?

      • Matt_XVI

        Not yet but thanks for the recommendation! I tend to like to keep my “ecosystems” with the same brand, but this might be worth check out. My thanks!

        • J. Dennis Thomas

          It’s a little known lens, but it’s very sharp and relatively inexpensive.

          I use a Voigtländer 35mm f/1.4 on my Leica and so far I haven’t been tempted to buy the Summilux.

      • preston

        According to that lens is only sharp in the center and not on the edges (same problem as nikon 50mm range). Check it out here –

        • J. Dennis Thomas

          Never hear of, but I have used the lens myself and I found it plenty sharp. I don’t put much stock into websites. Heck. Ken Rockwell even said it was sharp and he HATES Voigtländer lenses.

  • WHY?

    WHY 58mm? To rhyme with D5300?

    • Zograf

      I would guess because, 55-58 mm is the focal length threshold above which there is no need for retrofocus design given SLR’s camera registration, ultimately more freedom to optimize the optical design. Historically the first standard lens for SLR was the famous 58/2 Biotar for the Contax-S system.

  • Scott M.

    $1700! It must be made for D800 resolution. Gold ring too.

    • KnightPhoto

      No. The Nikon 58mm and Zeiss 55mm are made for the D4X 😉

  • Hmm, it’s not weather sealed..Bummer.

    • Keith Homan

      I find that very strange as well.

      • KnightPhoto

        Ditto. How bout the 24, 35, and 85mm f/1.4’s, are they weather sealed?

        • Keith Homan

          Yes they are.

    • J. Dennis Thomas

      Not sure how you can tell from this image. It seems to have a gasket near the mount.

  • Scott M.

    Ahhh. Nano coating and integrated super spectra coating. Sounds like a new thing.

  • Funduro

    I will rush out and buy this lens !

    I was told by a Nikon sales rep that Zombies will not eat you if you have a D4 and the new 58mm f/1.4 hanging from your neck.

  • Global

    I cant wait for Sigma to come out with an ART lens that is $800 and sharper than this lens. Nikon should have delivered a 1.2 NOCT lens instead.

    • Keith Homan

      Have no idea how sharp this one will be yet. You can keep your Sigma’s though.

    • Global

      If this lens is sharper and has less distortion than the 85/1.4, it could effectively be an 87/1.4 on DX……..which could be quite nice portrait lens for Pro DX users……. the only problem being that Nikon has failed to come out with a D400!!

  • Rameses the 2nd

    Nikon quality at Leica prices.

  • Stéphane Pierrejeu

    Yet another fifty-ish wide lens in the Nikon range, it’s only the fifth…

  • Bebo

    WT F*ck. C’mon Nikon. Get your sh*t together. There’s are so many holes you in your lineup that need fixing and you come out of left field with something that nobody is asking for. It would have been interesting if this as f/2. But and f/1.4 standard lens for close to $2K when your 50mm 1.4 is $500. How about updating your crusty 24-70 2.8 first ?

  • Bebo

    Errata: That’s f/1.2 not f/2

  • Chris Rogers

    a 58 ? whuuuuuuuuut? that is such a weird focal length to me. just take a couple extra steps :/

  • George Christofi

    Come on Nikon .I am with Nikon 20 years ,There is Fuji on the other side you know that?

  • Ordnassela

    Pathetic price.

  • Back to top