Fixed focal length DX?

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Beemer, Nov 16, 2006.

  1. Beemer

    Beemer Guest

    Am I correct that Nikon does not make fixed focus DX lenses and why not?

    Beemer, Nov 16, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Beyond a certain focal length, designing for DX does not result in a
    significantly smaller lens. I doubt that DX versions of 135 or larger
    will be smaller than the current lenses. I don't how much the DC feature
    adds to size/weight of the 135/2.
    I think this is a reasonable interpretation of Nikon's actions. Why make
    an endless variety of cheap DX zooms and no high performance wide-angles?
    People who buy cheap cameras are unlikely to buy high-end lenses.

    The Canon 5D is now (with rebates) in the order of $2000. If that trend
    continues, you can expect that the people who are now buying D200s, what
    to have a full frame camera in couple of years.
    Philip Homburg, Nov 16, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Well, the 12-24mm DX is not exactly what I would call a cheap zoom. That
    10.5mm DX converts to rectilinear very nicely in Nikon Capture 4. I have one
    and I love it; it's like two lenses in one. Probably about half my shots
    with it get converted. Maybe there's a slight loss of definition in the
    stretched corners, but it looks fine to me, and a rectilinear lens that wide
    looks a little funny in the corners anyway.

    I'm assuming that Nikon is just gradually building its stable of DX lenses,
    first designing those that are most likely to be very popular in the
    marketplace -- which is to say, zooms. Makes sense to me.

    That seems to be the general expectation, but I wonder about it. No doubt
    many who already own lenses, especially wide angles, for the full 35 format
    are waiting for such a digital model. But I wonder whether full-frame lenses
    made for film may not turn out to be somewhat disappointing when used on a
    CCD or CMOS sensor.

    Full frame has no attraction at all for me.

    Neil Harrington, Nov 16, 2006
  4. But it is a significant argument against DX sensors: with a small sensor
    you already lose one stop in noise performance compared to full frame
    sensors, and the 12-24 is also one stop slower than the 17-35/2.8.

    The same goes for DoF (although it is not clear to me whether shallow
    DoF is all that useful with wide angles).
    The 10.5 and the 12-24 are from 2003.

    In the past Nikon had the 24/2, a 28/1.4, and a 35/1.4.
    High quality lenses seem to work well on full frame.

    The current lack of high performance normal and wide angle lenses does
    make DX less attractive.

    This is not a big problem when the competition is a $8000 1Ds. With
    a $2000 5D it may become a more serious problem. Fast wide angles
    certainly make focusing a lot easier.

    Hopefully, with the introduction of the D40, Nikon will stop playing around
    with cheap consumer cameras for a while, and get back to more professional
    Philip Homburg, Nov 16, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.