Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely? - FM Forums

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

Pre-order new Rokinon 16mm f/2.0 ED AS UMC lens

Pre-order new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens

Bower 35mm f/1.4 price dropped to $379

FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 4 end

Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

fsiagian
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #1 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

Zeiss has a 135mm 1.8 for Sony. Will be great if Nikon makes one.

Nov 17, 2012 at 11:29 PM

Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

135mm f1.4 is possible, only problem would be 1) not much sharp unless made by Leica or Zeiss or Mitakon (or some of these Asian companies which make lately those f0.95 lens) 2) incredibly huge (imagine 200mm f2 size) 3) incredibly expensive

But yes, its possible, just ask Leica, Im sure they are willing to make one, if you pay them enough.

Nov 17, 2012 at 11:40 PM

BenV
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #3 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

Mescalamba wrote:
135mm f1.4 is possible, only problem would be 1) not much sharp unless made by Leica or Zeiss or Mitakon (or some of these Asian companies which make lately those f0.95 lens) 2) incredibly huge (imagine 200mm f2 size) 3) incredibly expensive

But yes, its possible, just ask Leica, Im sure they are willing to make one, if you pay them enough.

I agree on everything but #1, thats just crazy to say.

Nov 17, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Lance B
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #4 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

Zeiss announced the 135mm f2 back on 7th September. A person on DPR was lucky enough to try it and test it, says it is better than the 100 f2 Makro Planner, which is quite a statement. I think I shall get this lens if it lives up to the hype and Nikon doesn't announce a 135 f1.8/2 itself.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/42561911

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09/07/carl-zeiss-presents-apo-sonnar-t-135mm-f2-manuals-focus-lens-at-photokina

Nov 17, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Lee Saxon
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #5 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

fishfilm wrote:
Lee Saxon wrote:
There's a 135mm T1.3 [~ f/1.2] Master Prime...it's 7" long, 4.5" around, weighs over 6 lbs, only covers S35 [~APS] and costs $27,500.

It's not impossible, just really impractical.

Actually there are all sorts of PL mount Motion Picture lenses that are T 1.3/1.4 etc.

Yeah, though most sets that fast max out at 85/90mm, I think. Even the MP 135 has only been around a couple years, IIRC.

Nov 18, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Avantia
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

brett maxwell wrote:
Avantia wrote:
I'd buy a Nikon 135mm 1.8G VR in a heartbeat.

That's my first thought, but my second thought is that it will cost about $2500, and then I'm not so sure

I'd be fine with f/2 + VR for something like 1500-1800$ too !

Nov 19, 2012 at 03:59 AM

Frank_Maiello
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

Even this was a practical lens to design and market, it leads to another question -- can Nikon be confident enough in the accuracy and precision of its autofocus technology to dare offer this hypothetical lens with its correspondingly shallow d.o.f.?

Nov 19, 2012 at 04:39 AM

binary visions
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

Frank_Maiello wrote:
Even this was a practical lens to design and market, it leads to another question -- can Nikon be confident enough in the accuracy and precision of its autofocus technology to dare offer this hypothetical lens with its correspondingly shallow d.o.f.?

Uh. The 200mm f/2 has a shallower DOF than the theoretical 135mm does. The 400mm f/2.8 has a TINY depth of field as you approach its minimum focus distance. Actually, ALL of the exotic telephotos are capable of a much shallower DOF than our theoretical lens.

I don't know about you, but I don't hear much wailing or gnashing of teeth about how terrible the 200mm f/2 is...

Nov 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Frank_Maiello
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

binary visions wrote:
Frank_Maiello wrote:
Even this was a practical lens to design and market, it leads to another question -- can Nikon be confident enough in the accuracy and precision of its autofocus technology to dare offer this hypothetical lens with its correspondingly shallow d.o.f.?

Uh. The 200mm f/2 has a shallower DOF than the theoretical 135mm does. The 400mm f/2.8 has a TINY depth of field as you approach its minimum focus distance. Actually, ALL of the exotic telephotos are capable of a much shallower DOF than our theoretical lens.

I don't know about you, but I don't hear much wailing or gnashing of teeth about how terrible the 200mm f/2 is...

Good points, though 200 and 400 are probably less often used at their minimum focus distances than a 135 tends to be. Also, while I'm admittedly not well versed in lens design and I'm not sure how a 135 f/1.4 design might be different than an 85 f/1.4, but focus shift is already a problem.

Nov 19, 2012 at 02:53 PM

BenV
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #10 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

binary visions wrote:
Frank_Maiello wrote:
Even this was a practical lens to design and market, it leads to another question -- can Nikon be confident enough in the accuracy and precision of its autofocus technology to dare offer this hypothetical lens with its correspondingly shallow d.o.f.?

Uh. The 200mm f/2 has a shallower DOF than the theoretical 135mm does. The 400mm f/2.8 has a TINY depth of field as you approach its minimum focus distance. Actually, ALL of the exotic telephotos are capable of a much shallower DOF than our theoretical lens.

I don't know about you, but I don't hear much wailing or gnashing of teeth about how terrible the 200mm f/2 is...

The 200 f/2 is so horrible I would never dare sell it. Simple because I don't want it to be a burden on anyone else but me

Nov 19, 2012 at 03:49 PM

Lee Saxon
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #11 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

Frank_Maiello wrote:

...though 200 and 400 are probably less often used at their minimum focus distances than a 135 tends to be.

Excellent point!

Nov 21, 2012 at 07:27 PM

Lance B
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #12 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

binary visions wrote:
Frank_Maiello wrote:
Even this was a practical lens to design and market, it leads to another question -- can Nikon be confident enough in the accuracy and precision of its autofocus technology to dare offer this hypothetical lens with its correspondingly shallow d.o.f.?

Uh. The 200mm f/2 has a shallower DOF than the theoretical 135mm does. The 400mm f/2.8 has a TINY depth of field as you approach its minimum focus distance. Actually, ALL of the exotic telephotos are capable of a much shallower DOF than our theoretical lens

Assuming you are refering to the 135mm f1.4, are you sure about this? From my calculations on DOF Master:
135mm f1.4 @ 5mts gives a DOF of 11.3cm.
200mm f2 @ 7.5mts gives a DOF of 16.4cm, camera to subject adjusted by 50% to allow for different focal length of 200mm compared to 135mm of 50%.

Nov 22, 2012 at 12:35 AM

binary visions
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

I wasn't adjusting for focal length because that wasn't the question.

He was asking if the lens would be useless because the autofocus wouldn't be accurate enough for the DOF that the lens was capable of.

I'm stating that there are other lenses in the lineup capable of shallower DOF and the autofocus handles them fine.

Nov 22, 2012 at 02:36 AM

Kittyk
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

135/1.4 would be awesome for full body portraits. DOF is about what 200/2 have and could be smaller. Would be also nice 200/2 replacement for DX users.

Do not say it is not doable, just probably not big enough market when even 200/2 sells in such small quantities.

Nov 22, 2012 at 07:39 AM

Lance B
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #15 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

binary visions wrote:
I wasn't adjusting for focal length because that wasn't the question.

He was asking if the lens would be useless because the autofocus wouldn't be accurate enough for the DOF that the lens was capable of.

I'm stating that there are other lenses in the lineup capable of shallower DOF and the autofocus handles them fine.

No probs.

Nov 22, 2012 at 08:47 AM

SoundHound
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #16 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

The 200 F2.0 is heavy, poorly balanced (the Canon is oh so much better) expensive and large. I love it and often use it at or close to MFD. Nikon might sell more of these lenses except for the opinions of people who don't own/shoot the 200 F2.0.

Questions/statements such as "is one stop faster worth $xxx" and "just use a 135 F2.0 and walk in." Astounding bokeh, VR, contrast, color saturation and, yes, magic that can't be described in words. Maybe why we shoot pictures instead of just writing.

Dec 03, 2012 at 01:39 PM

Zebrabot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #17 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

SoundHound wrote:
The 200 F2.0 is heavy, poorly balanced (the Canon is oh so much better) expensive and large. I love it and often use it at or close to MFD. Nikon might sell more of these lenses except for the opinions of people who don't own/shoot the 200 F2.0.

Questions/statements such as "is one stop faster worth $xxx" and "just use a 135 F2.0 and walk in." Astounding bokeh, VR, contrast, color saturation and, yes, magic that can't be described in words. Maybe why we shoot pictures instead of just writing.

The foot on the 200 f/2 is beyond stupid.

A single 1/4-20 thread for a gigantic lense? stupid.

The foot isn't even a handle. That's just amateur.

I don't see aftermarket feet for the 200mm f/2 either, which is interesting, since all those places are obsessed with reinventing the wheel when it comes to camera and lense plates.

Dec 03, 2012 at 05:37 PM

eSchwab
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #18 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

How many 1/4"-20 bolts/threads have you seen fail on cameras?

Dec 03, 2012 at 07:28 PM

mshi
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

Zebrabot wrote:

I don't see aftermarket feet for the 200mm f/2 either, which is interesting, since all those places are obsessed with reinventing the wheel when it comes to camera and lense plates.

here is one: http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc.aspx?code=LCF-15&type=0&eq=&desc=LCF-15%3A-Foot-for-Nikon-200mm%2Ff2

Dec 03, 2012 at 07:30 PM

Lee Saxon
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #20 · Is a 135mm F1.4 lens possible/likely?

eSchwab wrote:
How many 1/4"-20 bolts/threads have you seen fail on cameras?

It's not strength, it's stability and locating. I've never attached anything to anything else with a single screw WITHOUT having it twist off. I've lost or nearly lost several pieces of gear that way. At best, it stays put but is never quite perfectly aligned no matter how hard you try.

I'd rather have two M4's than one 3/8-16.

Dec 19, 2012 at 10:04 AM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end