NIKON...MIRROR LESS NOW WITH FIRMWARE UPDATE

donaldejose

tc88: I am not being sarcastic. I was the one who brought up the quote from the main blog yesterday. Here it is: "Rumor: "the new range of lenses will have fresnel elements to give an ‘effective’ larger aperture (so I was told a 1.8 will be marketed as 1.8 but behaves like a 1.4, and be tiny) much like their new 300mm that shrunk." Interesting, especially if the new f1.8 lenses are budget priced alternatives in their focal length like the old f1.8 lenses were. How about an 85mm f1.8 that behaves like an 85mm f1.4 without the additional cost and an 85mm f1.4 that behaves like an 85mm f1.2? Such new lenses may be as revolutionary as a mirrorless body and give Nikon a real market advantage." That rumor of new lenses which behave better than their f-stop is what I refer to as "It was an eye-opening comment, wasn't it?"

tc88

@Andrewz, I understand exactly what I'm talking about. But instead of keeping on repeating myself, here is a straightforward question for you.

Is it possible to have a lens whose T-stop value is better than its F-stop value? (a) Yes. (b) No. (c) don't know.

Your simple answer to that simple question should tell us immediately how much you know the subject.

tc88

@donaldejose, if that's the rumor you are referring to, you can chalk it up as fake. Aperture and F-stop are physical quantities that can not be faked. That is, it's not possible for a f/1.8 lens to behave like a f/1.4 lens transmission wise.

Another way to tell it's fake. Fresnel elements are used in long tele lens. For wide or normal lens, have you ever seen a patent using it? It's not used because it does not really offer size benefit at wide and normal, but carries with it issues such as flare which is more likely to be problematic at wide to normal. But f/1.8 indicates a wide to normal lens. Is there ever canon or nikon f/1.8 long tele lens? Maybe at some observatory on a different mount.

spraynpray

@tc88: Looks to me that you are getting a little more excited than is reasonable. Let's play nice.

When I see DxO tests saying an f2 lens has a transmission of 2.2 stops, I read that as saying it loses (absorbs/Reflects) 2.2 stops of light making it worse than a theoretically perfect f4. 2.2 stops sucks and like I said before, it may be a trade-off between low T-stops and low aberrations. I don't know, does anybody here?

snakebunk

@spraynpray: A lens with T2.2 lets in as much light as an F2.2 lens with perfect optics (i.e. theoretical optics that lets all light through). You don't add the T to the F, rather T is an adjusted F-number. More info here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number#T-stop

snakebunk

@spraynpray: In your example, the F2 lens with T2.2 absorbes light equal to the difference between a perfect F2 and F2.2 lens.

HankB

tc88 said:

@Andrewz, I understand exactly what I'm talking about. But instead 0f keeping on repeating myself, here is a straightforward question for you.

Is it possible to have a lens whose T-stop value is better than its F-stop value? (a) Yes. (b) No. (c) don't know.

Your simple answer to that simple question should tell us immediately how much you know the subject.

I think not....BUT in the mendacious world of marketing, they will find a way.
Much like they have spun the switch from fluorescent backlights to LED backlights for LCD TVs and monitors into them actually being "LED TVs" etc. (And the advent of OLED, true LEDs, now just adds to the confusion of the general public).

Car models that used to incorporate their engine displacements in their numerical naming schemes are now bastardized with inflated numbers to recognize turbocharging.

donaldejose

tc88: " if that's the rumor you are referring to, you can chalk it up as fake." Claiming a f1.8 lens performs like a f1.4 lens surely seems illogical and false which is why it is an eye opening statement and if true in some way (such as not meaning more light transmitted through the lens but meaning f1.4 like better bokeh out of a f1.8 lens) could be a significant market advantage for Nikon to advertise. Once the new camera and lenses are released by Nikon we will see if this claim ever surfaces again.

spraynpray

@snakebunk: Ah, I didn't realise that! So my f2 Siggy with 2.2T stops is pretty good. Cool, thanks.

Vipmediastar_JZ

Symphotic said:

Well, here is the question that is burning in my mind: When can we get a RRS L-Bracket? It might be nice if the bodies for the Z-6 and Z-7 could use the same L-Bracket.

In the meantime you can get a universal L bracket from Promedia Gear. I been using it on my DSLR's

Vipmediastar_JZ

mhedges said:

How do preorders usually go for this kind of thing? Is it one of those deals where they go up at a known time, and you have to keep hitting F5 and get your order in quick to get one? And do you have to put down a deposit?

Usually pre-orders will be available online. Or call up your local camera store. I have already reserved mine few weeks ago. I got my d850 with them and referred many people to them for their d850. So im #1 on the list.

Who knows how many will be available or if they will be back ordered like the d850 but I would suggest to support local vendors if you need one asap. My only concern was having to get new glass (fuji/sony) or having an adapter but if the rumors are true and the adapter is included then it makes it a good deal for me. using non-ai-s with the df will be my option if the adapter doesn't support them.

rmp

Does "light amplification" work in night-vision goggles? Why not in camera lenses?

WestEndFoto

They may be saying that the T-stop of the 1.8 is similar to the T-stop of a typical 1.4 when they say it acts like a 1.4. That sounds reasonable and is important as it will lower the required ISO required to achieve the desired exposure in a low light situation.

This is an example of one of those little design choices that Nikon will make and why Nikon lenses are better than one would think from comparing the more common specs, such as sharpness.

donaldejose

Good point WEF. It will be interesting to see if this claim resurfaces anywhere after the lenses are released and tested. Perhaps it is just an error or false claim.

tc88

@donaldejose, agree.

@WestEndFoto, let's not further justify such fake rumors. Typical lens are marketed by F-stop which is already an exaggeration regarding its light transmission. Now marketing it by a fake F-stop number? Anyway, as I mentioned earlier, using Fresnel on a wide to normal lens have a lot of drawbacks such as flare that it's highly unlikely and won't suddenly happen without prior research and patents.

@rmp, night vision devices are optoelectronic devices. Notice the electronic part. They don't receive more photons, they just convert the photons to images better, enhance the contrast, etc. They may also see in a spectrum that human eyes don't see, but the light is there, such as infrared. Sometimes (though mostly in old tech), they may even illuminate the field in infrared, like shining with a search light that you can't see.

@spraynpray, well Andrewz and I were going in circles, and I can't find ways to make my position clearer. I initially even thought he understood the subject. I did re-read his posts again, and if I'm not mistaken, I think he said T-stop and F-stop are unrelated, but I believe most people would find that wrong. That may be the cause of his difficulty in understanding what I was writing. Anyway my fair question thus is to enable each of us put down the position in simple words instead of keeping on writing paragraphs after paragraphs.

HankB

Simple words:     F/stop = focal length ÷ aperture diameter

• The square of the aperture diameter is proportional to the cross sectional area available to allow light through the lens (just like cross sectional area of a pipe…and the diaphragm is a light valve).
  
• The square of the focal length is proportional to the specific area on the sensor that is illuminated by a given subject at a given distance (i.e.: the area of the image of a given subject at a given distance).
  
• Therefore, at 100% light transmittance efficiency, the INTENSITY of an image on the sensor, will be the same at any focal length, when set to a given f/stop, (assuming focused near “infinity” where the lens is closest to the image plane).
  

This is an extension of the “inverse square law” that pops up so many places in physics.

So T/stop  =     the somewhat numerically higher F/stop value a lens would have if it had 100% transmittance efficiency and therefore only needed a smaller aperture diameter to transmit the same quantity of light as the lens in question.

donaldejose

The comment I quoted was just a NR rumor of NR reader clint's rumor allegedly said by a "a franchise director at LCE." I don't know what LCE is or who this "director" got his information from. This is hearsay at least twice (or more) removed from the original source. Nothing to argue over; just an interesting possibility I had never heard before and probably something we will never hear again.

Msmoto

Someone on the inside said mine would be delivered in about two weeks.... anyone else heard about their order? But, the old stuff still works....from this weekend at VIRginia International Raceway....



Oh, if you have read this far.... as to the delivery date of my new Z300.... April Fools .... I have no idea when I will get it.

donaldejose

Great car, great photo!

Pistnbroke

Don't know what you all getting excited about ..any lens I just set it to F*8 tape up the dials and take photos (ie make money ) why is f 1.2 of any interest to me ???

Vipmediastar_JZ

good question? you know 1.2 can be used for ARTistic photography. There are many portrait photographers how like this or even shooting flowers or random things at 1.2 to create swirly bokeh or bokeh balls. its not all about money, sharpness, technically perfect photo. Create art ... wait this is NRF after all.

mhedges

Leaked pics up now. Looks very yummy. And more rumors that the adapter is included. I don't think I will be able to resist...

Symphotic

Nikkor "S"? So maybe this will be the S6 and S7, not the Z6 and Z7...

A welcome return to a classic camera name! The leaked photos of the body show "Z", not S, so that's too bad...

tc88

@HankB, thanks for chiming in with the explanation.

Now let's have some fun and make some guess on the launch price. You probably have less than a day to do so. I'm guess $3200 for the Z7 and $2200 for the Z6.

I don't have any inside information, my guess is as good as you guys', (I suppose as long as you guess above $1k and below $4k).

donaldejose

Looks like the new bodies are in the D750 build and control range; not as robust and not as many external controls as the D5 and D850 or D500 bodies. You can say they will substitute for the D610 and D750 refreshes. I do like the idea of the same body with two different sensors.