Why we will never see anymore legendary lenses from Nikon!

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Rita Ä Berkowitz, Mar 17, 2007.

  1. It's called Eco-Glass and is why Nikon will no longer produce lenses with
    such legendary optical quality as the 58/1.2 Noct and 28/1.4. It seems lead
    and arsenic is needed to process this spectacular glass. Looks like us
    Nikon shooters are going to be stuck in DX hell. At least the playing feel
    is level now since Nikon downgraded their glass to Canon's standards.


    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Mar 17, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. This is a classic "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.

    As usual in engineering, there are many solutions to a given problem.
    Optical glasses which used arsenic and lead were one such solution.
    What the Nikon article you cite states is that Nikon has found other,
    more ecologically friendly methods to accomplish the same thing in
    many (but not all) cases. It has absolutely nothing to do with the
    lenses in question, nor does the article claim it does. Nikon and
    the rest of the industry has more choices and options for optical
    materials today than at any point in history.

    The blame for the demise of these optics lies in Adam Smith's
    invisible hand. What the 28mm f/1.4 and 58mm f/1.2 had in common
    were not exotic glass, but hand-ground aspherical lens elements.
    These added so much to the cost that Nikon sold fewer than 1000
    copies a year of each throughout their lifecycle. In the case of
    the 58mm f/1.2, due to mount constraints Nikon couldn't create an
    autofocus version without a substantial change in optical formula.
    So the lenses failed to generate sufficient revenue and profits to
    justify continuing manufacture.
    Michael Benveniste, Mar 17, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Annika1980 Guest

    One of these days, Rita, I'm going to try those lenses and compare
    them with Canon equivalents. Then I'll post the results just to see
    if you can tell the difference. I got 50 bucks on "NO."
    Annika1980, Mar 17, 2007
  4. I'll have to find the link, but I distinctively remember the 28/1.4 and a
    few others were discontinued due to lead in the manufacturing process.
    That's a good point. I'm sure it goes beyond that. I'm guessing it was
    higher production costs adding up to deal with hazardous materials control.

    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Mar 18, 2007
    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.