The new Noct is a beast

[Pa]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

2000 gm and $8000

(Photo from DPReview)​

 

[davidzvi]

Right up there with Canon's f/1.2s and the f/2 zoom. It's an interesting piece, but at least Nikon seems to have been more sensible with their first wave.

 

[Mitchell]

Any 58mm lens that needs a tripod collar is a mistake.

 

[Nikoneer]

That is a Big one.....but no F-mount so not of interest to me...and then there`s the price..

 

[Jonathan F/2]

Why do the Z 1.8 lenses look so big? Samyang's 45mm 1.8 E mount lens for Sony is the size of the 50mm 1.8 G F-mount and it's sharp as a razor. Here's hoping Samyang backwards engineer's the Z mount and release their lenses for Nikon!

 

[vinman]

Why do the Z 1.8 lenses look so big? Samyang's 45mm 1.8 E mount lens for Sony is the size of the 50mm 1.8 G F-mount and it's sharp as a razor. Here's hoping Samyang backwards engineer's the Z mount and release their lenses for Nikon!

I wonder the same thing. Nikon grants us a slightly smaller, slightly lighter body series and then ameliorates the benefits by making the lenses larger and heavier. I bought the 24-70/4 to cover the basic focal range until I build back up my Nikon arsenal, but the primes released so far leave me underwhelmed in terms of size, weight, and price. I read they’re crazy sharp, and that’s great. It stands to reason, though, that if you throw out the playbook and take size constraints off the table; yeah, I’m sure you CAN do more. I’ve so far been fighting the logic that “mirrorless really has nothing advantageous to offer over a mirror box”, but frankly, I’ve been super happy with my 70-200/2.8 and 500/4 on the FTZ. In fact, if the 50/1.2 and the 14-24/2.8 Z series is as expensive and heavy as the pattern suggests, I’ll keep buying F mount equivalents and budget in FTZs for all of them.

I DO like my Z6, though.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

I wonder the same thing. Nikon grants us a slightly smaller, slightly lighter body series and then ameliorates the benefits by making the lenses larger and heavier. I bought the 24-70/4 to cover the basic focal range until I build back up my Nikon arsenal, but the primes released so far leave me underwhelmed in terms of size, weight, and price. I read they’re crazy sharp, and that’s great. It stands to reason, though, that if you throw out the playbook and take size constraints off the table; yeah, I’m sure you CAN do more. I’ve so far been fighting the logic that “mirrorless really has nothing advantageous to offer over a mirror box”, but frankly, I’ve been super happy with my 70-200/2.8 and 500/4 on the FTZ. In fact, if the 50/1.2 and the 14-24/2.8 Z series is as expensive and heavy as the pattern suggests, I’ll keep buying F mount equivalents and budget in FTZs for all of them.

I DO like my Z6, though.

Well Nikon does have a 28mm and 40mm (touted as compact primes) on their roadmap, so I'm guessing Nikon just wanted to release some razor sharp/no compromise lenses for initial release. Saying that, Samyang came out of left field and has recently released some stellar compact optics for Sony E mount which kind of throws the whole fast aperture = bigger lenses theory out the door. Small, fast, compact and sharp lenses are possible with mirrorless.

 

[vinman]

Well Nikon does have a 28mm and 40mm (touted as compact primes) on their roadmap, so I'm guessing Nikon just wanted to release some razor sharp/no compromise lenses for initial release. Saying that, Samyang came out of left field and has recently released some stellar compact optics for Sony E mount which kind of throws the whole fast aperture = bigger lenses theory out the door. Small, fast, compact and sharp lenses are possible with mirrorless.

Heck, I’d even take the notion that faster = bigger. It pretty much always has. For heaven’s sake, though - do they have to be even more expensive? I mean, I get the adage - “you can’t have fast, cheap, and good. Pick two.” I’d settle for big and “not light” if they are not absurdly expensive. I’d settle for light and more expensive. Expensive, heavy, and big? That’s a hard sell considering the supposed benefits...

 

[Dalek]

At 8 grand Nikon should give you a Z7 in a package so non-Z guys like me could use it, ha ha ha