Rangefinderforum.com

Rangefinderforum.com (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/index.php)
-   Nikon Mirrorless (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=240)
-   -   The new NIKKOR Z 50mm f/1.8 S (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166063)

Noserider 08-31-2018 17:41

The new NIKKOR Z 50mm f/1.8 S
 
Whoa! Anyone see what Nikon has stuffed into the new 50 1.8? Even at list price that a lot of juicy optical bits for the money.
http://www.nikon-image.com/products/...18_s/spec.html

NicolasCooper 10-19-2018 23:59

The new S line primes 20/35/50/85 1.8 are what makes me really like the Z System approach so far. These are lenses that were very popular in F mount, just updated optical performance and specs like slightly closer focussing. Really looking forward to these lenses!
The only problem is that they will compete with my M lenses of the same FL ;-)

Cheers

Contarama 10-20-2018 00:11

It's a start I guess... I don't know much about this novel big throat mini stuff I'll admit...electromagnetic diaphragm... I'm trying to wrap my head around that

Sumarongi 10-20-2018 00:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noserider (Post 2831531)
Whoa! Anyone see what Nikon has stuffed into the new 50 1.8? Even at list price that a lot of juicy optical bits for the money.
http://www.nikon-image.com/products/...18_s/spec.html

415g? :eek:

NicolasCooper 10-20-2018 01:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sumarongi (Post 2842371)
415g? :eek:

Interestingly the nikkor Z 35 1.8 weighs only 370g. Is that better? ;)

https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/len...mf18s/spec.htm

Sumarongi 10-20-2018 02:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by NicolasCooper (Post 2842374)
Interestingly the nikkor Z 35 1.8 weighs only 370g. Is that better? ;)

https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/len...mf18s/spec.htm

...and a 62mm filter size? Must be Medium Format lenses, I guess? :p

p.giannakis 10-20-2018 04:18

I thought the idea of mirrorless was smaller size. Am i wrong?

Sumarongi 10-20-2018 06:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by p.giannakis (Post 2842387)
I thought the idea of mirrorless was smaller size. Am i wrong?

Maybeperhapsnotsounlikely we were absolutelytotallycompletely wrong :D

Additionally, if you want your aperture control being part of the lens, you need this huuuuuuge chunk of an adapter:


Huss 10-20-2018 08:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by p.giannakis (Post 2842387)
I thought the idea of mirrorless was smaller size. Am i wrong?

If you are looking at m43/aps-c, yes.
Why would you assume a 'full frame' sensor would make for a smaller body? You still need the same sized AF lenses to cover that sensor. Advantages are the removal of the mirror, focusing directly off the sensor, etc etc.

Check the monstrous size of the Leica SL with 50 1.4 lens.
Akshully my Sigma Art 50 is huge too, and the Zeiss Otus!! Wow! Now I've forgotten what my point was...

(want small - either m43/aps-c or Leica M)

Sumarongi 10-20-2018 09:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huss (Post 2842438)
If you are looking at m43/aps-c, yes.
Why would you assume a 'full frame' sensor would make for a smaller body? You still need the same sized AF lenses to cover that sensor. Advantages are the removal of the mirror, focusing directly off the sensor, etc etc.

Check the monstrous size of the Leica SL with 50 1.4 lens.
Akshully my Sigma Art 50 is huge too, and the Zeiss Otus!! Wow! Now I've forgotten what my point was...

(want small - either m43/aps-c or Leica M)

"Advantages are the removal of the mirror" --- well, that 27.5 mm (edit: or even 30.5 mm?) piece that the camera body is now thinner than an SLR of the same make, is now -- necessarily -- added on all but very few lenses.

So it's a not so small weight addition on each lens -- still an advantage? :confused:

(Erm, IMHO, the true RF concept is still superior, heck, even a humble Leicaflex is still superior ;))

lynnb 10-20-2018 09:44

I think optical excellence rather than size was the priority for both Nikon and Canon's new mirrorless lens offerings. They'll probably release smaller (slower) versions later, after the well-heeled early adopters buy first.

I read somewhere recently that the "mine is bigger than yours" mindset is still a significant factor in consumer purchases. Also explains why Canon's white L lenses were desirable, apart from their optical characteristics: they stood out more.

taemo 10-20-2018 09:46

they definitely achieved the goal of lighter camera gears by going mirrorless.

however with the advent of high megapixel full-frame sensors, they are being held back by the current lenses.

IMO Fuji nailed it by not jumping into the saturated FF market.
If you want something small and light then go Fuji X, if you want best IQ and don't mind the size then go GFX

karateisland 01-09-2019 05:33

Anyone been using this lens on a Z body? The price point makes it mighty tempting.

jsrockit 01-09-2019 07:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by p.giannakis (Post 2842387)
I thought the idea of mirrorless was smaller size. Am i wrong?

Initially it was but not anymore...

karateisland 01-09-2019 08:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit (Post 2860217)
Initially it was but not anymore...

From my reading, it appears that Nikon is starting with their most optically advanced lenses, and following up with smaller/less expensive lenses. Not all is lost.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepa...rom-nikon.html

jsrockit 01-09-2019 09:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by karateisland (Post 2860224)
From my reading, it appears that Nikon is starting with their most optically advanced lenses, and following up with smaller/less expensive lenses. Not all is lost.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepa...rom-nikon.html

How do they go smaller and cheaper than f1.8 primes and f4 zooms? Look at how Sony FF bodies have grown since the first tiny ones.

karateisland 01-09-2019 09:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit (Post 2860239)
How do they go smaller and cheaper than f1.8 primes and f4 zooms? Look at how Sony FF bodies have grown since the first tiny ones.

By compromising somewhat on performance, right? Though, I'd prefer if they did it by going manual focus.

jsrockit 01-09-2019 09:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by karateisland (Post 2860224)
From my reading, it appears that Nikon is starting with their most optically advanced lenses, and following up with smaller/less expensive lenses. Not all is lost.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepa...rom-nikon.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by karateisland (Post 2860240)
By compromising somewhat on performance, right? Though, I'd prefer if they did it by going manual focus.

I don’t think we will see those $100 50mm lenses for this system... but maybe a $250 50mm f2 or something like that.

raid 01-09-2019 10:02

Is the cost around $800? Isn't the 50/1.8G the best bargain Nikkor so far?

35photo 01-09-2019 10:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by taemo (Post 2842449)
they definitely achieved the goal of lighter camera gears by going mirrorless.

however with the advent of high megapixel full-frame sensors, they are being held back by the current lenses.

IMO Fuji nailed it by not jumping into the saturated FF market.
If you want something small and light then go Fuji X, if you want best IQ and don't mind the size then go GFX

All Fuji did is follow there history really.... The FF market is very saturated plus they didn't have any history in that landscape... APC made good sense... X-Trans sensor is it achilles heel I don't care what anyone says... I had the XPro2 nice camera...sensor is flawed with the smearing of detail, watercolor effect..etc Medium Format made perfect sense with there history in that landscape plus that's more a niche market but still has plenty of room to grow...

jsrockit 01-09-2019 11:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid (Post 2860246)
Is the cost around $800? Isn't the 50/1.8G the best bargain Nikkor so far?

About $599... but how is it a bargain compared to the $250 50mm 1.8g?

karateisland 01-09-2019 11:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit (Post 2860260)
About $599... but how is it a bargain compared to the $250 50mm 1.8g?


Not in that comparison, maybe, but given what I've seen of its performance online, its price compares favorably to a lot of the latest-gen 50s for other full-frame systems.



Though I get your point, we're certainly not talking Fuji prices.

jsrockit 01-09-2019 12:00

I guess... I`m just of the opinion that most of these modern lenses are good enough for photography. I can`t get into pixel peeping.

raid 01-09-2019 12:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit (Post 2860260)
About $599... but how is it a bargain compared to the $250 50mm 1.8g?

The 50/1.8 g Nikkor will haunt Nikon for its low cost and amazing performance.

jsrockit 01-09-2019 12:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid (Post 2860271)
The 50/1.8 g Nikkor will haunt Nikon for its low cost and amazing performance.

I`m even a fan of the $100 50mm 1.8D!

Reinvention 01-12-2019 10:51

Here's a picture made with the 50 mm S:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/159377...in/dateposted/

It looks ok to me.

Dante_Stella 01-12-2019 21:07

The MTF is unreal.

Freakscene 01-13-2019 00:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dante_Stella (Post 2861072)
The MTF is unreal.

I noticed that. Although Nikon MTF charts show only 10 and 30 lp/mm, whereas Leica’s charts show 5, 10, 20 and 40 lp/mm, and the only chart I can find for the Nikkor is for f1.8, whereas Leica shows MTF at f2, 2.8 and 5.6, it looks like the Nikkor performs similarly to the Leica APO Summicron ASPH, except the tangential and sagittal traces are more even...incredible.

Marty

newsgrunt 01-13-2019 05:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freakscene (Post 2861086)
...except the tangential and saggital traces are more even...incredible...

ok, gonna admit it, I need someone to translate this for me ;)

Archlich 01-13-2019 05:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by newsgrunt (Post 2861102)
ok, gonna admit it, I need someone to translate this for me ;)

Means it's an extremely well corrected lens even wide open. Good bokeh (some may disagree). At 415 grams it's also one of the (if not the) cheapest, lightest choice if you need this level of performance. Expect other lenses to either weight more than 2 lbs or cost over $6,000, or both.

If you don't have a 40+ MP sensor to cater to though, the older, cheaper, lighter (not quite so though with the adapter) traditional (Double Gauss derived) 50/1.8G and 50/1.8D would totally serve.

Archlich 01-13-2019 06:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit (Post 2860260)
About $599... but how is it a bargain compared to the $250 50mm 1.8g?

Nikon really should have made the new lens f/1.7, f/1.9 or f/2 something and apply lots of magic suffixes like "APO" and "Nano" so people don't automatically assume that it's another stereotypical, "basic" 50/1.8 lenses.

They also let go of the golden ring, and only modestly mentioned during an interview and in a corner of their website that the "S" suffix of the new lenses means premium for the Z cameras.

It was a marketing embarrassment.

Huss 01-13-2019 08:27

When I can see my nose hairs' hairs in selfies using my Sigma Art lenses on my Z7, I think I'm good.

I also have the 'old' 50 1.8G, and while it is very nice, it does not compare to the new stuff from Sigma and Nikon S/Z. It is great on my F6, as film cannot resolve what the other lenses can offer.

But... if pics matter more than peeping, then the 50 1.8G is still just fine. As are most lenses.

Contarama 01-13-2019 18:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit (Post 2860293)
I`m even a fan of the $100 50mm 1.8D!

Yeah...I prefer that one myself :)

Huss 01-13-2019 21:35

The D is a great lens, with less distortion than the G. Problem is Nikon designed the FTZ adapter so that only G lenses can autofocus with it.

Photon42 01-13-2019 21:54

I have only used the 35S so far and I like it very much. Seems like there are some interesting lenses coming our way. Weight in my eyes is nothing to talk about. Size - well. Maybe the pill to swallow.
I wonder whether the 35 and 50 have similar sizes due to some production simplification. Leica did that with their f2 fix focus line-up for the SL.

Freakscene 01-14-2019 00:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by newsgrunt (Post 2861102)
ok, gonna admit it, I need someone to translate this for me ;)

This explains it: https://lenspire.zeiss.com/photo/en/...anual-focusing

For all the love the Nikkor 50mm f1.8 G and D lenses get, despite good sharpness, they have horrible tonality, especially in skin tones typical of caucasian skin (Zone vi-viii) - shoot the same subject on the same roll of film or on the same sensor with one of them and a Zeiss 50/2 Makro Planar with the same exposure and look at the difference. This seems to come from poor resolution of detail in highlights (and yes, I have both, two of the D actually, and have used them a lot).

The S lenses don’t really interest me because I can’t use them on film, but I really hope they perform as well as the claims that are made for them. And I may end up using them for work nonetheless.

Marty


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:21.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.