Why are there no fast zoom lenses?

[agp]

Man I'm with Fuji, and I don't think there will be a zoom (in the lower ranges) with aperture <2.8...

 

[KmH]

Stanley and John had to have their guys modify 3 lenses they were able to get a hold of that were specially made by Zeiss for the Apollo moon landings to shoot that movie.
Even then, all the film shot with those lenses had to be push-processed to add an additional stop of exposure.

 

[hamlet]

Stanley and John had to have their guys modify 3 lenses they were able to get a hold of that were specially made by Zeiss for the Apollo moon landings to shoot that movie.
Even then, all the film shot with those lenses had to be push-processed to add an additional stop of exposure.

Fair points. Now where the heck are my guy's making that lens for me?

 

[Derrel]

..... I'm still waiting on a f0.7 prime.

Why? What purpose would it serve for you?

Look for an old photocopier lens. Some of those were in the f/0.7 range.

 

[Solarflare]

There are "no" fast zoom lenses because constructing a zoom means an explosion in necessary size. And thus weight and price.

Lowering the maximum aperture of the construct fights this effect. Thus zooms, while still larger than primes, arent TOO much larger.

From the perspective of optics, having a zoom is a very demanding undertaking. Thats also why high quality zooms are typically 3x at most, if not even less. A 5x zoom, like the popular 24-120mm f/4 design, is already called a "convenience zoom" for DSLRs; in many cases their performance is substantly lower than zooms of smaller range, and primes. There are exceptions though - for example, the new Nikon AF-S 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 VR seems to be a quite brilliant piece of glass.

I'm gonna go ahead with: there is just no big enough market for those types of lenses, there is no physical reason it isn't possible. I'm still waiting on a f0.7 prime.

you can get a 50mm 0.95 prime ... it just costs a few dollars more than the nifty-fifty too !!
Leica 50mm Noctilux-M f/0.95 ASPH (6-bit) - DigitalRev

Uuuuh ...

The "nifty fifty" of Leica is a lot more expensive than the 50mm f1.8 from Canikon.

Leica 50mm f/2.0 Summicron M Manual Focus Lens (6-Bit) - 11826

-> Currently $2,350.00

There is other glas thats not THAT expensive:

New Mitakon 50mm f/0.95 lens from MXcamera | Photo Rumors
Buy the new Mitakon 50mm f/0.95 Full Frame lens via MXcamera eBay store! | sonyalpharumors
Mitakon Speedmaster 50mm F 0 95 for Sony A7 A 7 R s 135 Full Frame NEX Camera | eBay

-> Currently $799

So yeah, you dont need to spend 11k$ if you dont want to. Of course the Leica lens is a bit better than the Mitakon.

There is also the SLR Magic Hyperprime 50mm T/0.95 (T/0.95 not f/0.95, its something like f/0.92): SLR Magic Hyperprime LM 50mm T/0.95 - Review / Test Report - I think it was something like 4k or 6k $, so thats also cheaper than the Leica Noctilux.

The weird thing about the nikon version is that they actually went half a stop backwards, it is probably because the price increases disproportionately for that little increase in light. Nikon 58 mm / F 1,4 AF-S NIKKOR G Objektiv: Amazon.de: Kamera & Foto

I've been told that there is no f/0.95 glas for original Nikon because the properties of the lens mount make anything below f/1.2 really hard to do.

Unfortunately I didnt get the explanation of why this would be the case. *shrug* Something to do with large distance between lens and sensor etc. *shrug*

Either way there are no lenses below f/1.2 for Nikon F mount, not counting special constructs that cant focus to infinity, and the f/1.2 lenses that exist are manual only.

Look for an old photocopier lens. Some of those were in the f/0.7 range.

Well, Ibelux produces a manual 40mm f/0.85 for MFT, Sony E (APS-C only), Canon EOS M, and Fuji X. Thats the brightest I know of thats buyable. Of course its only the equivalent of 60mm f/1.2 for full frame if you're interested in shallow depth of field only.

And theres lenses for x-ray scanners, like the Rodenstock 50mm f/0.75.

 

[Coasty]

So then the odds are pretty slim for a Nikor 14-700mm f/1.2 G VRII that weighs less than 32 ounces and that will take a 67mm filter for under $500.00?

 

[astroNikon]

I'm gonna go ahead with: there is just no big enough market for those types of lenses, there is no physical reason it isn't possible. I'm still waiting on a f0.7 prime.

you can get a 50mm 0.95 prime ... it just costs a few dollars more than the nifty-fifty too !!
Leica 50mm Noctilux-M f/0.95 ASPH (6-bit) - DigitalRev

Uuuuh ...

The "nifty fifty" of Leica is a lot more expensive than the 50mm f1.8 from Canikon.

I know. But the person asking the question always seems to have no financial limitations ...
and it is a *few* dollars more, dependent upon your definition of a few dollars.

 

[hamlet]

So then the odds are pretty slim for a Nikor 14-700mm f/1.2 G VRII that weighs less than 32 ounces and that will take a 67mm filter for under $500.00?

The reason these types of lenses we are talking about are so infeasible, is because it requires meticulous attention to detail and immense amount of time to get them to a satisfactory condition. Meanwhile in the real world 3d printing technology is moving to a new place where we will be able to get these ridiculous lenses every time consistently at a steady pace. It's just gonna take some brains and brawns to move this thing where it needs to be:
3D Printed Lenses Coming Soon > ENGINEERING.com
http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/3d-printings/

 

[usayit]

Three focal length lenses in Micro 4/3rds primes are f/0.95; Voigtlander 17.5mm, 25, and 42.5mm.

In Standard four thirds, there are a few faster than f/2.8 zooms; 14-35 f/2 and 35-100 f/2

Most definitely the smaller format does play a role.


Anything is possible but you have to pay the price elsewhere&#8230;. size and price.


There are a few fast zooms for C-mount cinema lenses too. Angenieux 2.2/12-120MM and the 9.5-95mm 1:2.2. Note the price of these zooms AND the relative size for a smallish image circle.

 

[Solarflare]

Three focal length lenses in Micro 4/3rds primes are f/0.95; Voigtlander 17.5mm, 25, and 42.5mm.

I would prefer a 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.8 on a full frame sensor any day though.

Exactly same depth of field, but less noise and better pixels thanks to the larger sensor.

 

[JoeW]

Canon and Nikon have 18-55mm f2.8 lenses, but why are there nothing such as 18-55 f1.4 lenses? Or any zoom (with a large range) lenses with large aperture?

First, practically speaking, f1.4 isn't very practical. I've got an f1.4 prime and I almost never shoot at that aperture....it's just to damn narrow a DoF. Aim it at a person and part of their left eyebrow is in focus and the rest of the eyebrow isn't.

Second, there are a bunch of 200mm zooms at f2.8. Most people with 200mm zooms have something like f4.5 or f5.6 b/c either (a) they don't want to pay $1,500 for a 200mm zoom or (b) they don't want to carry around a zoom with the length, weight, and size of an f2.8 200mm zoom. Those would increase even more if you were talking an f1.4 (or even just f1.8) 200mm zoom. I've got an f2.8 200mm zoom and i wouldn't pay to get an f1.8 200mm zoom.

 

[Braineack]

3D Printed Lenses Coming Soon > ENGINEERING.com

oh boy! I can't wait: AP-LENS

 

[usayit]

Three focal length lenses in Micro 4/3rds primes are f/0.95; Voigtlander 17.5mm, 25, and 42.5mm.

I would prefer a 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.8 on a full frame sensor any day though.

Exactly same depth of field, but less noise and better pixels thanks to the larger sensor.

Distraction... don't turn this into a crop vs FF debate.

Its about fast lenses and in particular zooms. My point was that fast lenses on a larger image circle does introduce complexities. Larger formats see even slower aperture lenses. Smaller formats such the cinema lenses do offer options for faster.

 

[astroNikon]

When I really need it, I just set my camera to f/0


:mrgreen:

 

[robbins.photo]

F0? Wouldn't that cause all life as you know it to stop instantaneously and every molecule in your body to explode at the speed of light? Or is that crossing the streams.. I always get those confused.