Nikon 24mm f/1.8 lens on the horizon

DutchmanDutchman Posts: 2Member
edited June 2015 in Nikon Lenses
http://nikonrumors.com/2014/11/18/new-nikon-24mm-f1-8-lens-on-the-horizon.aspx/

Any news on that? A small cheap dx equivalent to a 35mm prime lens would be very nice...

Comments

  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    Yes, Its called the Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art :-(
    It's probably stuck in the same shipping container as the D400

  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    It's unlikely that Nikon will announce any new products before late July or early August, so we'll likely have to wait till mid-July to get any idea of what is coming down the pipeline.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • DutchmanDutchman Posts: 2Member
    So, waiting for August then...
    That Sigma lens surely is pretty good, but not that much cheap and small :(
    A 24mm lens in the shape of that Nikon 35mm dx lens in combination with a d3xxx or d5xxx would be great for henri cartier-bresson wannabe photograpy.
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    edited June 2015
    It's unlikely that the 24 1.8 would be a DX lens, so it won't be nearly as dainty as the 35 DX, it will however be smaller than either the siggy or Nikkor 24 1.4, and hopefully cheaper than the Nikkor, but I bet it will be more than the siggy. I'm starting to save my shekels.
    Post edited by Ironheart on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    I don't think the a 24mm F1.8G would cost over $850 (price of the Sigma 24mm F1.4 Art). Nikon would have a hard time selling the lens at that price point, considering how strong the competition is.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,491Moderator
    Surely $650?
    Always learning.
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    35mm f/1.8 (FX) = $600
    28mm f/1.8 = $700
    20mm f/1.8 = $800

    I'll revise my guess to $750, right between the 20 and 28, which makes it $100 less than the Sigma.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    edited June 2015

    28mm f/1.8 = $700
    20mm f/1.8 = $800

    I'll revise my guess to $750, right between the 20 and 28, which makes it $100 less than the Sigma.
    That does sound likely, since the 24mm F2.8D was somewhere in the middle between the 20mm F2.8D and 28mm F2.8D in terms of price.

    Still a tough sell, IMO. I think many people, who aren't afraid to buy third party gear, would easily drop an extra $100 for the faster aperture. Then again if the Nikkor is significantly lighter weight, that would be a big selling point.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    And the winner is.. $746.95. I was off by $3.05 :-)
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    edited September 2015
    $879.99 North of the 49th. ;) So I was close for a non-US price. I think I'll hang onto my 24mm F2.8D, much smaller and lighter. Yeah and lighter on the bank book at $200 USD used. ;)
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    I'm probably going to end up grabbing it. I have a couple of slots missing in my 1.8G collection >:)
  • kenadamskenadams Posts: 222Member
    Any decent tests on the Nikon 24 yet? (other than the one on the blog, which I don't count)

    For a difference of a 100 bucks between the Sigma and the Nikon, I'd get the Sigma I guess. 1.4 aperture and certainly sharper, is the feeling I get.
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
  • kenadamskenadams Posts: 222Member
    Hmm, thanks, Golf, but although I really like the "Fro", his "wind tunnel" testing procedure is IMO not standardized enough to yield reliable results... :-D
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,491Moderator
    What do you mainly want it for Ken?
    Always learning.
  • kenadamskenadams Posts: 222Member
    S'n'p, mainly for landscape, although I have to add that I'm not yet there buying super specialty lenses with only one personal field of application. Not to bore anyone senseless here, but as I've stated on one or two of the other WA/UWA related threads, I'm looking to replace a 17-35 2.8 that seems to show its age to me. Plus, it's huge, and I've really come to appreciate primes for *excuseme* artistic vision on top of size and weight. Before going to Mexico on extended travel, I grabbed an inexpensive 2nd hand AIs 24mm 2.8 Tokina for close quarters pics I knew I'd do b/c it was sooo much smaller and lighter. Turned out I really liked the look and angle of view. So there :-D

    So yes, mostly landscape, and I'd also like to venture into astrophotography for a wee bit (I'm on sort of a deserted island right now for extended stay; awesome night skies!). I have gotten a feeling for your take on that field and the lenses involved (I'm closely eyeing the other thread here), so I value your input in that area!

    That's why I'm hanging out on the 20/1.8, 24/1.4 & 1.8 and similar threads like I got nothing better to do :-D Probably stupid to look for a do-it-all solution. If asked, landscape and people are my priority.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,491Moderator
    OK, thanks for that Ken.

    If you find you like nightscapes (as I do), you will have to get a dedicated lens for it - unless you never intend going bigger than 10x8 that is. Assuming that to be the case then, in a nutshell:

    I am really unimpressed with any of the lenses one would normally buy and which would excel in other genres of photography. If you intend to go with the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower manual focus 24mm f1.4, you will need to get it from somewhere with a good returns policy as if your luck is like mine, you may not get a good one first time. The 24mm f1.4 has the best compromise of clear aperture/speed and focal length. The 14mm f2.8 is rated for it too, but I have found the aberrations to be too high on that one.

    All of the above assumes you want to do absolute best quality prints up to circa 36"x24" after learning the dark secrets of post processing night sky shots.

    If you aren't that 'into' nightscapes, the Nikon 20/1.8 was great for landscapes and the Siggy 35/1.4 beautifully sharp with good contrast and colour but poor focussing in low light.

    Hope that helps.
    Always learning.
  • I am new to this forum and registered specifically to speak about this lens. I don't often emphasize lens comparisons but I have been shopping for an optimum lens choice in the 24mm FL (including zooms) for several years as virtually all choices had distinct limitations (including the Sigma 24mm f1.4 which I will address here). As much as I am usually not an early adapter, the purchase of this lens several weeks ago was based upon my having purchased and sold the Nikkor 24mm F1.4 last year because of issued discussed on this and other forums, some experiments with the Sigma 24mm option) and the marketing material and sample images on this new 24 f 1.8 by Nikon. I bought into the propaganda having evaluated the 58mm (rental) and found Nikon's image bank and statements about the product to be accurate.

    I was indeed disappointed with the Nikon 1.4's extreme CA wide open, the well known AF inconsistencies (and viritually impossible focusing in low light) and a not so well described variability of accurate exposures. Though the lens otherwise was brilliant, particularly wide open, I sold the lens and continued looking. Not being a huge fan of spending time to have to correct CA and distortion in post, the initial reviews of the Sigma 24mm seemed a great choice. After several hours with this lens as a rental, however, I found the level of flare, the color characteristics and contrast, the inconsistent AF not appealing. The lack of CA and wide 1.4 aperture were great, but this lens did not have the Nikon 1.4 look. I am going to offer a comment confirmed by several well respected pros, that the Nikon 1.4 comes as close as any Nikkor as having that "Leica look", particularly in color contrast, flare control, and reduced highlight blowouts. My subjective appraisal of the Sigma is that it doesn't hit a homerun for me.

    Enter the Nikon 24mm f1.8. This lens comes as close to the Nikkor 24mm 1.4 without the overwhelming CA issues, while exhibiting extreme sharpness right out to f16, high color contrast (even wide open), and excellent control of highlights and flare on my D800s. There is some curvature of field, softness in the corners, and vignetting wide open to say 2.8, but frankly this lens is as fine an instrument for the money as I could expect.

    I own the Nikon 28m F1.8g and the 50 f1.8g and though pleased with both, particularly with color output, the new Nikon 24mm eclipses them by a considerable degree in many respects, but primarily in contrast levels and resolution.

    AF is fully reliable even at night and distortion is at very acceptable levels.

    For many the Sigma may be a better choice particularly if you need 1.4, but this and the new Nikkor 20mm suggest to me that Nikon is making great strides in being competitive, offering very fine (but not perfect) optics which are easily compatible with most applications.

    My 10 cents.

    PDM

  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,491Moderator
    @flip: Have you any first hand experience of the sagital and tangential astigmatism and coma performance of the 24/1.8? It shows in night sky photography which is one of my interests. The 20 didn't beat the 24/1.4 Samyang in that regard, so I am interested in the 24/1.8.
    Always learning.
  • Spraynpray: I have not tested for other optical abberations as I have been comsumed with producing abstracts, night street work, and fall daytime landscape imagery since acquiring the lens. I will leave testing to Diglloyd, Ken Rockwell, and others who have a need to unpeel the onion of each lens. I have one night image taken at f1.8 which shows no coma that I can detect (I will try to post in the next several days if I can find time), while astigmatism is not apparent. The overall appeal to me is the really excellent contrast (almost Leica like), virtually no CA wide open, fewer blowouts (like many Leicas) and superb color contrast. If all of my Nikon lenses had these characteristics I would spend no time doing anything else in my life but image making. So abberations have a life style benefit - they keep you from ruining your life with your lens addiction. I will stop short of saying it is exceptional as it is in eye of the beholder. Really great lens though, very comparable and better than the Nikkor 24 f1.4 IMHO and a welcome relief from the years of waiting for better choices.

    PDM
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,491Moderator
    Great, if you could post it on flickr at full res so we can examine it in detail, that would be very excellent. Try 8 seconds at f1.8 and ISO around 1600 depending on moon cycle and light pollution. :-)
    Always learning.
  • FYI I will not be able to post anytime soon as I just purchased a new place and will be spending the next couple of months getting settled, I do not have a flickr account, and from what I gather one can only post images via link here. Sorry about that. There are a few tests of this lens on the web and in the current issue of Pop Photo next to the Milvus 50mm f1.4. It obviously does not quite compare with the latter (few Nikkors would); but there was a comment that larger prints were sharper with this lens then the Nikkor 1.4 24mm.

    Good luck
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    @flip, you can post pics from any file share site, including Dropbox and Google. Also Flickr is free. Good luck with your move.
  • Interesting that DXO today described the lens as superb, the exact adjective I used in my Nikon review many weeks ago. It really is excellent and in some ways unique in its rendering among my lenses. It is exceptional between f4 and f16.It controls strong light much better than most, again very much like the 24mm 1.4 AFS but without the CA issues. I won't be posting any time soon however, until I can snatch some time away from my work, move etc.

    Good shooting and don't hesitate to try it.

    flip
Sign In or Register to comment.