It's kind of a shame that Nikon moved to mirrorless so quickly, I'd like to see what they can do with phase fresnel lenses in general.
This is sarcasm, right?
Seriously though - I'm sure we will eventually get PF Z lenses. As far as using PF elements in non-telephoto designs - that's an interesting thought. I wonder if we will get any.
It's not really sarcasm, there's a whole line of legacy lenses for the F mount. I am not planning to go mirrorless anytime soon, so I'm still interested F mount lenses. Plus, you can't use Z mount lenses on film bodies.
I guess the best analogy I can think of is GM's LS3 motor. Still pushrod, still relatively large, but makes massive power easily and fairly simple to work on. I love Japanese cars, but it can take a lot of work to get power out of it. Is it anachronistic today when we have DOHC engines, flat plane cranks and more modern engines? Yes. Does it work well?
Absolutely.
I don't know who mentioned it in prior messages, but I've also noticed a bit of a drop too on F-mount lenses. The new AF-S 70-300 used to sell closer to $700, now it's always available for around $550.
My first impression is that it is quite compact. It has the same general feel as the other S-line lines. At f/1.8 it does isolate the subject from the background quite well, but it doesn’t focus up close. I’ll try it out when I am on the road sometime soon. I don’t know if I’ll be asked to take any portraits again anytime soon, as that isn’t my field, but I’ll try it out on some upcoming travel.
Post edited by Symphotic on
Jack Roberts "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
I would imagine there were already some lens with "uncompromising optics" made before, and they have since been surpassed by better lens.
The point is, "uncompromising optics" is purely a marketing term. It's illogical to expect lens with "uncompromising optics" because so far there is no way to make perfect lens. And as technology advances, we will expect better lens in the future.
I would imagine there were already some lens with "uncompromising optics" made before, and they have since been surpassed by better lens.
The point is, "uncompromising optics" is purely a marketing term. It's illogical to expect lens with "uncompromising optics" because so far there is no way to make perfect lens. And as technology advances, we will expect better lens in the future.
Yes, it is a marketing term. But there is meaning behind it. For example, I would expect better sharpness and zero coma at 1.2 on the 0.95 than the 1.2. But.....we will see.
Look at Nikon's super telephotos. They do have "uncompromising optics" and you can expect that Nikon will produce the same in such an expensive lens as the 0.95. It will offer much more than just f0.95 to justify that price.
I won't buy it either. Too expensive for the limited uses I would make of it. I will get a similar image shot at f1.8 or f1.4 or f1.2 by just moving the subject further from the background to create the additional blur. Plus, I hate working with manual focus and only do it with focus peaking and very old lenses (such at old Russian copies of Leica lenses, after WWII Russians stole designs and machines from the Leica factory and produced the same lenses in Russia under Russian names) for some retro fun at times. But I also am anxious to see some photos taken with this lens.
I want to see the Z 70-200. I just picked up a used F mount VRII version, so I won't be buying right away, but I'm really curious about the size and performance.
"size and performance" will be smaller and better! That is how Nikon is making the S lens line. As for me, it is time to stop buying f mount lenses and build up an S lens line awaiting the inevitable Z8 or Z9 body.
I want to see the Z 70-200. I just picked up a used F mount VRII version, so I won't be buying right away, but I'm really curious about the size and performance.
Yes, 70-200. I'm on vacation right now, and have had numerous situations where a long telephoto would have been helpful. I have a shot of a pair of a brightly-colored Hawaiian birds, but I had to crop horrendously to get a decent composition...
"size and performance" will be smaller and better! That is how Nikon is making the S lens line. As for me, it is time to stop buying f mount lenses and build up an S lens line awaiting the inevitable Z8 or Z9 body.
It will be smaller for sure. I don't know that it will better in any practical sense - the current F mount 70-200 is the best one out there, right? I mean, it will probably measure better, but in terms of real world usage I don't expect it will be any better.
I want to see the Z 70-200. I just picked up a used F mount VRII version, so I won't be buying right away, but I'm really curious about the size and performance.
Yes, 70-200. I'm on vacation right now, and have had numerous situations where a long telephoto would have been helpful. I have a shot of a pair of a brightly-colored Hawaiian birds, but I had to crop horrendously to get a decent composition...
Well a 70-200 2.8 wouldn't be my first choice for vacation pics anyway. Just too big. Do you have the 70-300 AF-P? It's a great lens.
I want to see the Z 70-200. I just picked up a used F mount VRII version, so I won't be buying right away, but I'm really curious about the size and performance.
Yes, 70-200. I'm on vacation right now, and have had numerous situations where a long telephoto would have been helpful. I have a shot of a pair of a brightly-colored Hawaiian birds, but I had to crop horrendously to get a decent composition...
Comments
I guess the best analogy I can think of is GM's LS3 motor. Still pushrod, still relatively large, but makes massive power easily and fairly simple to work on. I love Japanese cars, but it can take a lot of work to get power out of it. Is it anachronistic today when we have DOHC engines, flat plane cranks and more modern engines? Yes. Does it work well?
Absolutely.
I don't know who mentioned it in prior messages, but I've also noticed a bit of a drop too on F-mount lenses. The new AF-S 70-300 used to sell closer to $700, now it's always available for around $550.
If you have to have a second card slot, grip, or compatibility with really old lenses then a refurb D7200 is $694.
https://flic.kr/p/2hgBd9A
"Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
At f/1.8 it does isolate the subject from the background quite well, but it doesn’t focus up close. I’ll try it out when I am on the road sometime soon.
I don’t know if I’ll be asked to take any portraits again anytime soon, as that isn’t my field, but I’ll try it out on some upcoming travel.
"Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
The point is, "uncompromising optics" is purely a marketing term. It's illogical to expect lens with "uncompromising optics" because so far there is no way to make perfect lens. And as technology advances, we will expect better lens in the future.
Well a 70-200 2.8 wouldn't be my first choice for vacation pics anyway. Just too big. Do you have the 70-300 AF-P? It's a great lens.
Edit: fix quoting
https://www.nikon-image.com/products/nikkor/zmount/nikkor_z_24mm_f18_s/
"Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy