Smallest Aperture Nikon Lens ?

[yoman]

Hey guys, i've got one quick question

does anyone here know the nikon lens that have the smallest aperture ?
for the biggest aperture i know it's nikon 50mm f/1.2 (is that right?)
but i'm just curious here since i've been taking long exposure photos

i've got my nikon 18-105mm and the aperture could go to f/36 on 105mm
is there any lens out there could go even smaller ?

thanks guys

 

[cgipson1]

I have seen F51 on my 105mm Micro, although I have never tried to use it.

 

[CouncilmanDoug]

I don't think any reasonable lens goes past f/36, aren't you worried about diffraction?

 

[o hey tyler]

I'd suggest you get an ND filter before you try and stop a lens down to its minimum aperture. You'll likely see a lot of diffraction which harms image quality. A lot of people use the B+W 10 Stop ND filter for long exposures.

10 Stop ND filter

 

[cgipson1]

^ +1 (Tyler makes a good point!)

 

[480sparky]

I've had my 105 micro down to f/64.

Here's a shot at f/45:

 

[yoman]

I have seen F51 on my 105mm Micro, although I have never tried to use it.

nice ! you might want to try that once and see the result ;D

I don't think any reasonable lens goes past f/36, aren't you worried about diffraction?

yyyyeeeeaaa, ive been taking long exposure photos for quite long (and most of them are more than 30 sec) and what i'm afraid is i dont know the impacts of taking long exposure photos too much, i assume there might be a damage to the camera ?

well, anyway thanks for the comment guys

 

[480sparky]

........ i assume there might be a damage to the camera ?......

Stopping a lens down to minimum aperture won't (can't) damage a camera. It only degrades the image slightly.

 

[yoman]

I'd suggest you get an ND filter before you try and stop a lens down to its minimum aperture. You'll likely see a lot of diffraction which harms image quality. A lot of people use the B+W 10 Stop ND filter for long exposures.

10 Stop ND filter

thanks for the advice ! i'll learn more about the filter and might want to consider it for the future

I've had my 105 micro down to f/64.

Here's a shot at f/45:

wow! that's f/45 ? i thought it would be dark if we take photos at small aperture even in the daylight, anyway, thanks for the comment

 

[o hey tyler]

........ i assume there might be a damage to the camera ?......

Stopping a lens down to minimum aperture won't (can't) damage a camera. It only degrades the image slightly.

Slightly, or vastly... Depending on your quality standards, and the quality of glass you put in front of your camera. I suspect the 105mm Macro isn't too shabby at small apertures, but a lot of lenses REALLY suffer when pushed past f/16 or so.

OP, really, you should look into ND filters for your application and lens.

 

[yoman]

........ i assume there might be a damage to the camera ?......

Stopping a lens down to minimum aperture won't (can't) damage a camera. It only degrades the image slightly.

good then ! i'm becoming more excited to take long exposure photos more and more !

 

[480sparky]

wow! that's f/45 ? i thought it would be dark if we take photos at small aperture even in the daylight, anyway, thanks for the comment

It's a studio shot.

OP, really, you should look into ND filters for your application and lens.

VND, if your budget allows. And a good VND, not a cheapie.

 

[o hey tyler]

........ i assume there might be a damage to the camera ?......

Stopping a lens down to minimum aperture won't (can't) damage a camera. It only degrades the image slightly.

good then ! i'm becoming more excited to take long exposure photos more and more !

Are you even reading posts about ND filters? So far you've ignored everything I've said, and I can't tell exactly why.

 

[yoman]

Stopping a lens down to minimum aperture won't (can't) damage a camera. It only degrades the image slightly.

good then ! i'm becoming more excited to take long exposure photos more and more !

Are you even reading posts about ND filters? So far you've ignored everything I've said, and I can't tell exactly why.

i'm really sorry, when i replied 480sparky's post your post suddenly came up above my reply to 480sparky's post (i guess it's because i'm a slow typer) forgive me about that
and i've told you before i'd look up and learn more about ND filters and might want to consider to buy it later (cause it's a bit expensive for me :mrgreen
thanks for the suggestion guyssssssss !

 

[o hey tyler]

good then ! i'm becoming more excited to take long exposure photos more and more !

Are you even reading posts about ND filters? So far you've ignored everything I've said, and I can't tell exactly why.

i'm really sorry, when i replied 480sparky's post your post suddenly came up above my reply to 480sparky's post (i guess it's because i'm a slow typer) forgive me about that
and i've told you before i'd look up and learn more about ND filters and might want to consider to buy it later (cause it's a bit expensive for me :mrgreen
thanks for the suggestion guyssssssss !

Okay, I guess I didn't see where you quoted my post. My bad, sorry about that.

I've found that ND filters are much less expensive than buying a new lens with a smaller minimum aperture. Just food for thought.