Will We EVER see a 50\85 1.2 from Nikon in our lifetime?

[StandingBear1983]

I really don't understand Nikon...Canon has 1.2 primes for ages, yet Nikon never thinks to make those lenses...I just don't get it :banghead:

 

[o hey tyler]

I really don't understand Nikon...Canon has 1.2 primes for ages, yet Nikon never thinks to make those lenses...I just don't get it :banghead:

They have a 50/1.2 AIS. Hit that bad boy up.

 

[Pallycow]

You mean like this one...

NIKKOR 50mm f/1.2 from Nikon

 

[Pallycow]

Dammit Tyler, beat me to it. lol

 

[StandingBear1983]

True, for video it would be great for me, but i find myself needing a auto focus lens, depends on what you shoot but its very difficult to shoot manual focus if your on the go or you can't really take the time to focus perfectly with a manual focus, of course the old geezers here will tell me "your'e just lazy, you just need practice, we did it in a second" but hey i didn't grow up with manual focus in my hands. again for video it will be amazing, for stills its not really practical anymore...at least for me and young folks who are not use to it.

 

[o hey tyler]

True, for video it would be great for me, but i find myself needing a auto focus lens, depends on what you shoot but its very difficult to shoot manual focus if your on the go or you can't really take the time to focus perfectly with a manual focus, of course the old geezers here will tell me "your'e just lazy, you just need practice, we did it in a second" but hey i didn't grow up with manual focus in my hands. again for video it will be amazing, for stills its not really practical anymore...at least for me and young folks who are not use to it.

You need an autofocus lens, okay, I can see that. How often do you need an f/1.2 aperture and f/1.4 won't cut it?

 

[Pallycow]

You shooting with a 3100 or 5100? If so, I doubt you really need a f/1.2 then. Not being a dick...just sayin' it's not a good match.

I shot with a 50 1.4 on my 3100 when learning, and I manually focused it, you actually get pretty good at it pretty quickly...I did anyway. It was rare I missed a shot due to not focusing fast enough. Just turn it till the green dot lights in your view finder. Easy peasy.

 

[StandingBear1983]

you guys are right, you have a point, though the question remains, the topic is not if "I" need 1.2, the point is, why Nikon a very big company that is known worldwide for its amazing lenses don't want to make those lenses when there competitors do make and sell them quite often. I just don't like that one doesn't have the same options, when clearly it won't be too hard for them to make them...

 

[Pallycow]

Um, they do make one. I just linked it earlier.

So your question is "why don't Nikon make a 50mm 1.2 lens that will autofocus on my beginner level camera". That alone should kinda answer your question. Tyler also hinted on it earlier, a 50 1.4 would 99% of the time be more than enough anyway...there really is not a need for a 1.2. The optics on the 1.4 are amazing..it's a fantastic lens. The optics on a 1.2 are not any better if I recall correctly (I did have a chance to shoot with one in the store), so the only benefit of having one is to shoot at 1.2....which I personally don't see a point to really.

They don't make one to work on an entry level camera, because it is not a lens that an entry level user would typically seek out. Just my opinion...however I am willing to bet its shared by many.

 

[tevo]

Why da hell

 

[StandingBear1983]

One can't judge what one needs or not...there is the 0.95 leica lens, and for example Stanley Kubrick, made Barry Lyndon, one of the greatest visual films with a 1.0f lens. and its not connected to the body, i might get a FF and the Nikon users will have the same lack of newer AF-S 1.2 lenses that other companies have.

 

[tevo]

Nikon DX @ 50mm focused to 10 feet

@ 1.4: 0.68ft Total DOF
@ 1.2: 0.57ft Total DOF

Why would you need that fewer .11ft? That's not even an inch and a half.


If my logic is wrong, someone correct me please. And if you really want less than 1.4 for Nikon, just get the Noctilux f/0.95.

 

[StandingBear1983]

Ask Kubrick why he needed 1.0f, and he will tel you, he wanted to shoot scenes in candle light only, which was a revolutionary thing indeed at the time

 

[o hey tyler]

Why would you need that fewer .11ft? That's not even an inch and a half.

Dat bokeh bro. DUH!

 

[o hey tyler]

Ask Kubrick

Okay, hold on while I go to his grave.

Also, do some research into cinema lenses. You'll see they're a fairly different ball game.