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

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2016 · Is possible to have a super tele lens for DX only?
  
 
Staf_ferry
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Is possible to have a super tele lens for DX only?


As above mentioned, I don't have the knowledge on this field, DX has smaller image circle, so theoretically it won't need so much of surfaced area of optical glasses, from here can we decrease the weight of the lens or downsize it? Maybe my question is ridiculous but i hope someone can explain to me, thanks.


Oct 20, 2016 at 02:16 PM
drtaylor23
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Is possible to have a super tele lens for DX only?


Yes?

RE: superzooms with 100x optical zoom?

Going smaller doesn't seem to be a problem.



Oct 20, 2016 at 03:01 PM
Staf_ferry
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Is possible to have a super tele lens for DX only?


drtaylor23 wrote:
Yes?

RE: superzooms with 100x optical zoom?

Going smaller doesn't seem to be a problem.


I mean something like 300 f/2.8 or 500mm f/4 but only for DX



Oct 20, 2016 at 03:50 PM
CanadaMark
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Is possible to have a super tele lens for DX only?


It's not a ridiculous question, and yes it's certainly possible. I imagine it would be very easy for them to do. They just very likely would never make one because it would be costly to make/develop, it would still be quite expensive, and likely a very low volume seller.


Oct 20, 2016 at 03:54 PM
ariot
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Is possible to have a super tele lens for DX only?


I suspect the 200-500 mm F5.6 FX lens (often praised here and elsewhere) was a lens Nikon thought would attract DX camera body users looking for long reach and reasonable speed without blowing 5K on a 300 F2.8 FX prime. (Edited to add, the 300 F4 FX lens too, hell-of-a-do on the DX bodies)




Edited on Oct 20, 2016 at 04:07 PM · View previous versions



Oct 20, 2016 at 04:05 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 

        


Staf_ferry
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Is possible to have a super tele lens for DX only?


CanadaMark wrote:
It's not a ridiculous question, and yes it's certainly possible. I imagine it would be very easy for them to do. They just very likely would never make one because it would be costly to make/develop, it would still be quite expensive, and likely a very low volume seller.


But i think still have a lot of people will consider that, because downsized meaning lighter, and many people using DX for the extra reach, i know there are people will recommend D5 level pro but not all the people can effort it, pro DX yes, for me, never use pro FX to shoot wildlife, but you got the point, expensive cost of manufacture.



Oct 20, 2016 at 04:05 PM
Staf_ferry
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Is possible to have a super tele lens for DX only?


ariot wrote:
I suspect the 200-500 mm F5.6 FX lens (often praised here and elsewhere) was a lens Nikon thought would attract DX camera body users looking for long reach and reasonable speed without blowing 5K on a 300 F2.8 FX prime.



Most of the wildlife photographer wishes to have DX extra reach, lighter prime lens, although the 200-500mm is a very good lens but still, it is not a prime, and not a f/2.8 or f/4. Some people after getting older can‘t live with heavy lens but not going to zoom lens either, they still prefer prime's quality.



Oct 20, 2016 at 04:12 PM
ariot
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Is possible to have a super tele lens for DX only?


I don't disagree, but Nikon doesn't seem interested in DX primes.

The FX 300 F4 is great on a DX. That's a bit lighter.




Oct 20, 2016 at 04:40 PM
EB-1
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Is possible to have a super tele lens for DX only?


The front groups and some others will still be the same size so There is minimal weight and cost savings. Look at a 300/2.8 for micro 4/3 for example.

EBH



Oct 20, 2016 at 09:02 PM







FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password