No ED glass on Nikon 50mm primes?

[Heitz]

Hey, I was wondering if any of you know why many Nikon primes don't use ED glass. For example, under Nikon's current list of available lenses, none of the 35 or 50mm primes use ED. What's the deal with that? And also, is Nano Crystal Coat really that spectacular (I wouldn't know).

 

[dxqcanada2 1]

Some lenses do not need ED glass to compensate for high levels of aberrations ... they could do it but I think that they want to keep the lenses at an affordable price.
If the manufactures decided to ensure that ALL of their lenses are almost aberration free ... you couldn't afford them, you end up like Zeiss/Leica (etc) and only have a small portion of the market.

http://lenses.zeiss.com/photo/en_DE/home.html

 

[dxqcanada2 1]

Distagon T* 2/35

Distagon T* 1,4/35

Planar T* 1,4/50

 

[Garbz]

The 35mm f/1.4 uses both Nano-Coatings and the front element is Aspherical. ED is cheaper and older by comparison.

The 50mm f/1.4 already has ~1px CA, and reasonably good sharpness. What value does a more expensive process add to the lens if only to make it more expensive?


ED is a solution to a problem which can be worked around by other means.

 

[djacobox372]

The new 50mm f1.8g does have an aspherical element that allows it to outperform the more expensive f1.4g.ED has always been a telephoto thing in the nikon family, e lower focal lengths dont need it.

 

[Markw]

As everyone else said, there's no need for it. Especially since Nikon's 35mm and 50mm primes are beautiful lenses in their own right.

Mark

 

[Derrel]

Bringing the red, green, and blue wavelengths to a common point of focus is NOT that difficult to do when the focal length is short;short lenses have more problems with sperical aberration than with chromatic aberration, so ED glass is simply not needed for 35 and 50mm lenses. As focal lengths increase, beginning around 135 to 180mm as a general guideline, it becomes more and more desirable to use some special Extra-Low Dispersion glass to make a lens that is truly Apochromatic, meaning one that can bring the red,green,and blue light wavelengths to a point of common focus. Apochromatic lens designs are also corrected for spherical aberrations at two different wavelengths, which is one more than simple achromatic designs (which bring one wavelength to good focus.) With decent modern lens design, ED glass is not really needed on 35mm and 50mm lenses. ASPHERICAL ELEMENT designs, and floating, corrective elements are pretty sweet though. Nikon invented "floating element" lens design back in the 1960's, and named it Close-Range Correction or CRC; it is what allowed Nikon wide-angle designs of the 1960's, 1970's, and 1980's to be so superior at both close AND far distances, and better than say, Canon or Minolta or Pentax wide-angles. Nikon also invented Extra-low Dispersion glass, which is pretty cool stuff. Much,much harder and more scratch resistant that Canon's calcium flourite elements, ED glass is also not sensitive to temperature, and is suitable for big front elements if needed, unlike flourite, which scratches easily. As far as I know, Nikon's shortest prime lens with ED glass was the 180mm f/2.8 ED, then moving all the way up to 1200mm everything at the top level had ED glass and a gold ring around the barrel. In the "modern era" of post 1990, I believe there are also even a few lower-priced Nikon zooms that have an ED element or two, and I KNOW there are quite a few newer zooms that use aspherical element designs. Bottom line: Nikon uses ED glass where it is truly needed.

And YES, the Nano-Crystal coating technology, which is another NIKON invention, from Nikon's stepper division, is really,really,really amazing in how it works. Take a quick read here: Nikon | Imaging Products | Behind the scenes - The Nano Crystal Coat

Canon has developed a similar technology for its lenses, and the Canon USA web site has a pretty good article on it, somewhere. I read it 2 years ago or so. Pretty cool!@

 

[MTVision]

The new 50mm f1.8g does have an aspherical element that allows it to outperform the more expensive f1.4g.ED has always been a telephoto thing in the nikon family, e lower focal lengths dont need it.

How does it outperform the 1.4?

 

[Sw1tchFX]

The new 50mm f1.8g does have an aspherical element that allows it to outperform the more expensive f1.4g.ED has always been a telephoto thing in the nikon family, e lower focal lengths dont need it.

The only thing that I can think of where the 1.8G outperforms the 1.4G is distortion. Otherwise, Sharpness and Bokeh are better on the 1.4G.

 

[MTVision]

The only thing that I can think of where the 1.8G outperforms the 1.4G is distortion. Otherwise, Sharpness and Bokeh are better on the 1.4G.

That's what I thought too. This the 2nd time that I've seen that same post - not sure if it's by the same person or not.

Would the aspherical element make that big of a difference?

 

[MTVision]

That's what I thought too. This the 2nd time that I've seen that same post - not sure if it's by the same person or not.

Would the aspherical element make that big of a difference?

I was wrong. It wasn't the same post but the same person said the 1.8 is sharper and has better contrast than the 1.4

 

[Markw]

Mark