What's new

Why can't Nikon produce large aperture lenses

I just did some quick research on the Nikon F mount, and Canon EF mount.

It looks like its 44mm diameter for the Nikon, and 54mm for the Cannon.

That is a pretty large difference.

The glass on the 85mm 1.2 maxes out the EF mount's dimensions. You may be right that Nikon simply can't do a 1.2.

The Canon FD mount had a flangeback diameter of 42mm. That didn't stop the Canon FD 50mm f/1.2 SSC from existing.
 
Do you think Nikon can make a very fast lens for "DX" body?
 
Didn't Leica or Minolta make a lens with an f-stop of .98? Or was it Canon? I can't remember but it would be on a 35mm camera.

The lowest f-stop I have seen on a Nikon was the 50mm f1.4 Nikkor lens used on the 35mm F-series like the F3. I have a 50mm f1.8 Series E.
 
Didn't Leica or Minolta make a lens with an f-stop of .98? Or was it Canon? I can't remember but it would be on a 35mm camera.

The lowest f-stop I have seen on a Nikon was the 50mm f1.4 Nikkor lens used on the 35mm F-series like the F3. I have a 50mm f1.8 Series E.

There are many lenses with a faster aperture than f/1.

Canon Rangefinder 50mm f/0.95
Leica Nocitlux 50mm f/0.95
Angenieux 25mm f/0.95
 
I just did some quick research on the Nikon F mount, and Canon EF mount.

It looks like its 44mm diameter for the Nikon, and 54mm for the Cannon.

That is a pretty large difference.

The glass on the 85mm 1.2 maxes out the EF mount's dimensions. You may be right that Nikon simply can't do a 1.2.

The Canon FD mount had a flangeback diameter of 42mm. That didn't stop the Canon FD 50mm f/1.2 SSC from existing.

That's not f/1.0 now is it?
 
Didn't Leica or Minolta make a lens with an f-stop of .98? Or was it Canon? I can't remember but it would be on a 35mm camera.

Those were rangefinder cameras.
 
I just did some quick research on the Nikon F mount, and Canon EF mount.

It looks like its 44mm diameter for the Nikon, and 54mm for the Cannon.

That is a pretty large difference.

The glass on the 85mm 1.2 maxes out the EF mount's dimensions. You may be right that Nikon simply can't do a 1.2.

The Canon FD mount had a flangeback diameter of 42mm. That didn't stop the Canon FD 50mm f/1.2 SSC from existing.

OO......Popcorn
 
Time for me to add someone in the ignore list ....
 
Didn't Leica or Minolta make a lens with an f-stop of .98? Or was it Canon? I can't remember but it would be on a 35mm camera.

Those were rangefinder cameras.

Leica and Canon Rangefinders are 35mm cameras...

Reflex cameras have mirrors. That affects the lens designs. See the term 'retrofocus'.

The question posed in the original post was why has Nikon not made any superspeed autofocus lenses, when Canon has. The reason is that Canon's bigger-diameter mount allows it. That's all there is to it. Canon designed their new mount with a larger diameter when they started their autofocus line in he 80s.
 
Time for me to add someone in the ignore list ....

Who?

Why do people insist on putting so many on the ignore list?

If someone is truly harassing you I can understand it.

But putting someone on ignore just because you don't like what they are saying?

I personally would not do this, to each their own though.

Your welcome to ignore me LOL, I won't be hurt by it. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
Those were rangefinder cameras.

Leica and Canon Rangefinders are 35mm cameras...

Reflex cameras have mirrors. That affects the lens designs. See the term 'retrofocus'.

The question posed in the original post was why has Nikon not made any superspeed autofocus lenses, when Canon has. The reason is that Canon's bigger-diameter mount allows it. That's all there is to it. Canon designed their new mount with a larger diameter when they started their autofocus line in he 80s.

He does have a point here. This is in fact what the thread was about.

Can anyone prove this wrong?

It would help if we could all acknowledge that the bigger Canon mount allows for a larger maximum aperture in general vs. the Nikon mount.

This has already been proven in this thread, and theres really no use arguing about it anymore.

The question now seems to be just how wide exactly Nikon can go with their mount for a given focal length, lets talk about that.
 
Leica and Canon Rangefinders are 35mm cameras...

Reflex cameras have mirrors. That affects the lens designs. See the term 'retrofocus'.

He does have a point here. This is in fact what the thread was about.
.

Wasn't calling anything into question...

SImply the post he was referring to said that they believe it was 35mm cameras.

He responded that they were rangefinders

I said... rangefinders were 35mm cameras.

P was being argumentative as usual.
 
Reflex cameras have mirrors. That affects the lens designs. See the term 'retrofocus'.

He does have a point here. This is in fact what the thread was about.
.

Wasn't calling anything into question...

SImply the post he was referring to said that they believe it was 35mm cameras.

He responded that they were rangefinders

I said... rangefinders were 35mm cameras.

P was being argumentative as usual.

No, you were. We're talking about two reflex systems. They have mirrors. It makes all the difference in the world.

The question posed in the original post was why has Nikon not made any superspeed autofocus lenses, when Canon has. The reason is that Canon's bigger-diameter mount allows it. That's all there is to it. Canon designed their new mount with a larger diameter when they started their autofocus line in he 80s.
 
Last edited:

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom