Dream lens not made

snakebunk

Do you have any dream lens that is currently not available but should be possible to make?

My dream lens is a 500/4 PF with built in 1.4 converter. Actually a whole line of long PF prime lenses with built in converters would be nice.

NSXTypeR

Any wide DX prime for us DX shooters would be nice...

We've been asking for it for years since the 35mm 1.8 came out.

Holy crap, the press release for the lens came out in 2009. So almost 10 years ago now.

Even if it were around $500 I'd get one probably.

CaMeRaQuEsT

NSXTypeR said:

Any wide DX prime for us DX shooters would be nice...

We've been asking for it for years since the 35mm 1.8 came out.

Holy crap, the press release for the lens came out in 2009. So almost 10 years ago now.

Even if it were around $500 I'd get one probably.

I stopped dreaming about wide DX primes and took action by buying a used D600 and opening myself to a whole world of dirt cheap used AF and AF-D primes. Still, a sharp and compact 24mm f1.8 DX for my D5500 would be very welcome.

Ton14

Slowly but surely, DX is stopped by all manufacturers, promising everything for DX, but only to sell their DX cameras. All FF lenses work fine on DX cameras.

Nikon D600 with the f/1.8 series, relatively cheap and top quality.

Pistnbroke

15-300 FX

snakebunk

Pistnbroke said:

15-300 FX

Do you think it is possible to make a lens like that with good sharpness over the whole range? Or maybe sharpness is not so important for how you would use it?

Pistnbroke

Well it says Dream lens or is a lense something different ?
what does " maybe sharpness is not so important for how you would use it?" mean ?

snakebunk

Ok.

If I was to dream about a zoom lens I think it would be a 300-800/5.6 PF. But I would miss F4, so a long prime with built in converter is better for me. And with PF technique it would still be possible to carry on board a plane.

snakebunk

Pistnbroke said:

Well it says Dream lens or is a lense something different ?
what does " maybe sharpness is not so important for how you would use it?" mean ?

Hm, I think I mean what it says. For example I mostly use my photographs in the format 1280x720, and if I don't need to crop much I can use images where the sharpness is not perfect. I can't say what is important for you in the way you would use a 15-300 lens, and that is why I asked.

HankB

Ultra high ratio zoom is the right tool for the job in some situations, even if you must give up some performance. It is totally reasonable to expect upcoming technology to reduce the performance trade-off.

snakebunk

HankB said:

Ultra high ratio zoom is the right tool for the job in some situations, even if you must give up some performance. It is totally reasonable to expect upcoming technology to reduce the performance trade-off.

I agree and I can see situations where it is the right tool.There are current compact cameras with similar range as pistnbroke mentions. Maybe harder though to achieve on a larger sensor.

Pistnbroke

what's a lense......I type it and it has a red line under it ...

snakebunk

Pistnbroke said:

what's a lense......I type it and it has a red line under it ...

Sorry, I meant lens. Didn't you understand that?

Edit: I have corrected this now.

Pistnbroke

Thought it might have been an American spelling

HankB

Pistnbroke said:

Thought it might have been an American spelling

Our spelling usually delete letters

WestEndFoto

400mm f/4.0 with 2x reproduction ratio is my dream lens not made. F/5.6 would also be fine and if it only focussed at 5 feet or less that would also be fine.

Hmmm....my 200mm f/4.0 and Kenko extenders kinda does that.....

Capt_Spaulding

Lens, lense who cares. Colour it howsomever you like. Down home in Texas, we have our own version(s) of the Mother tounge.

sport

8-300 f2.8 that weights less than the 70-300. If we are dreaming then go big.

snakebunk

@sport: But is there any lens design that you want Nikon to make and that you think they can make?

sport

Honestly, I just want an updated 50 f1.4. In the future it would nice if they design the lens to be able to convert from f mount to the new mount like Sigma does. If you are spending serious money on a lens it would help justify buying if you know it could be converted in the future. And I am not talking about an add on converter.

WestEndFoto

Yes, a 50 that performed to the new 105 standard would be nice.

snakebunk

@sport: I agree completely about possibility to convert all future f mount lenses to new mount. And of course Nikon would also need to unveil their plans for the future.

Btw, I read that Sigma does not support the f mount for their new 70 mm macro lense. They had an explanation that I did not fully understand, but I think uncertainty about the future of the f mount may be part of it.

sport

snakebunk said:

Btw, I read that Sigma does not support the f mount for their new 70 mm macro lense. They had an explanation that I did not fully understand, but I think uncertainty about the future of the f mount may be part of it.

I read that to mean: "Our marketing team has determined that there will not be enough Nikon sales for this lens to support Nikon F mount."

HankB

I wonder if marketeers and PR spokespeople in general can turn off the BS when they deal with people face to face?

Sports

30-75mm f/1.8, please.
Sigma makes those 18-35 and 50-100 f/1.8 zooms, but one covering the area between the two would be nice.

spraynpray

WestEndFoto said:

Yes, a 50 that performed to the new 105 standard would be nice.

Yes please.

HankB said:

I wonder if marketeers and PR spokespeople in general can turn off the BS when they deal with people face to face?

HAHAHA! No.