Archive 2009 · Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
p.2 #1Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
Really? There are probably more D40X cameras out there than every D700, D3 and D3X combined. And I'm not even counting the D200/300 line.
i dont see your point, are you saying the market/sale for this lens would be better then a fast fx prime ?
Oct 14, 2009 at 06:41 AM
p.2 #2Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
yukselserdar wrote:
i dont see your point, are you saying the market/sale for this lens would be better then a fast fx prime ?
I believe he is. The D40 hobbyist/tourist market is much larger than the forum-viewing pro-amateur market. Not to mention the D40 market probably isn't saturated with 85mm F/1.4s like the pro market is.
It doesn't do anything for me, but I can see if you have a D40 and a 18-55mm and you want a portrait/macro lens, this baby would fit right in.
Earlier quote
Really? There are probably more D40X cameras out there than every D700, D3 and D3X combined. And I'm not even counting the D200/300 line.I believe he is. The D40 hobbyist/tourist market is much larger than the forum-viewing pro-amateur market. Not to mention the D40 market probably isn't saturated with 85mm F/1.4s like the pro market is.
It doesn't do anything for me, but I can see if you have a D40 and a 18-55mm and you want a portrait/macro lens, this baby would fit right in.
Oct 14, 2009 at 06:48 AM
p.2 #3Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
Another benefit in VR in a short tele is video -- the 85/1.4 is lovely (I use mine all the time), but a 3.5 with VR will be more useful much of the time.
Oct 14, 2009 at 07:01 AM
p.2 #4Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
Isn't most macro done stopped down past f5.6 to get as much DOF as possible anyway?
It's light, pretty small, takes cheap 52mm filters, and the price is reasonable. Voigtlander 20mm + 35 1.8 DX + 50 1.8D + this new 85 Micro is, IMO, a fabulous DX light prime kit.
Also, I agree with poisonpill. Nikon can sell D40's, D3000's, etc by the pallet load. It's true that (borrowing a term from the video game console business) that accessory "attachment" rates aren't as high on the consumer bodies, but consumers don't send lenses back for calibration either
We had better hope that Nikon remains competitive in the consumer space, it's the only way for them to generate the capital it takes to keep the pro advancements going. Nikon does not have the luxury that Canon, Sony, or Panasonic have of relying on revenue from other divisions to subsidize R&D. If Nikon doesn't sell lots of cameras and lenses, then Nikon will be either swept aside by the larger Japanese conglomerate players, marginalized to a niche role like Leica, or forced to succumb to acquisition.
It's light, pretty small, takes cheap 52mm filters, and the price is reasonable. Voigtlander 20mm + 35 1.8 DX + 50 1.8D + this new 85 Micro is, IMO, a fabulous DX light prime kit.
Also, I agree with poisonpill. Nikon can sell D40's, D3000's, etc by the pallet load. It's true that (borrowing a term from the video game console business) that accessory "attachment" rates aren't as high on the consumer bodies, but consumers don't send lenses back for calibration either
We had better hope that Nikon remains competitive in the consumer space, it's the only way for them to generate the capital it takes to keep the pro advancements going. Nikon does not have the luxury that Canon, Sony, or Panasonic have of relying on revenue from other divisions to subsidize R&D. If Nikon doesn't sell lots of cameras and lenses, then Nikon will be either swept aside by the larger Japanese conglomerate players, marginalized to a niche role like Leica, or forced to succumb to acquisition. Oct 14, 2009 at 07:25 AM
p.2 #5Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
What's up with this FL (on a 1.5x crop it makes a 127,5mm) 
What's up with the "slow" aperture (why not > 2.8 for a prime)
Why only DX
When is Nikon going to release an updated 35 1.4 and 85 1.4?
What's up with the "slow" aperture (why not > 2.8 for a prime)
Why only DX
When is Nikon going to release an updated 35 1.4 and 85 1.4?
Oct 14, 2009 at 07:31 AM
p.2 #7Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
Doug Weasner wrote:
It's light, pretty small, takes cheap 52mm filters, and the price is reasonable. Voigtlander 20mm + 35 1.8 DX + 50 1.8D + this new 85 Micro is, IMO, a fabulous DX light prime kit.
Yup. Getting closer to a digital Galen Rowell kit than ever before.
It's light, pretty small, takes cheap 52mm filters, and the price is reasonable. Voigtlander 20mm + 35 1.8 DX + 50 1.8D + this new 85 Micro is, IMO, a fabulous DX light prime kit.
Yup. Getting closer to a digital Galen Rowell kit than ever before.
Oct 14, 2009 at 07:44 AM
p.2 #8Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
yukselserdar wrote:
i dont see your point, are you saying the market/sale for this lens would be better then a fast fx prime ?
Yes. Nikon sells far more DX bodies than FX ones. And most of the people buying DX cameras do not really care about the FX vs DX discussion, neither are they interested in buying a very expensive FX camera nor do they frequent internet forums.
The market for a cheap DX (any cheap DX lens) is much bigger than the market for a fast and expensive prime. Simple as that. Make it cheap enough and people will buy it, even if they don't want it. "SLR Joe Bloggs" wants:
1 a small SLR (i.e. D40/60) because "they take good photos" and are reasonably cheap but doesn't want to carry too much weight
2 a standard slow zoom with VR, slow because it is cheap and Joe doesn't even know what a fast aperture is plus the f/2.8 stuff is too heavy, VR because everyone has it
3 a slow telezoom with VR, well for the same reasons as above
4 a cheap fast prime (i.e. 35/1.8 or 50/1.8, but the 50/1.8 won't focus on a D60) because PopPhoto says you need one for portraits
5 a cheap macro lens (i.e. not a 105VR) because macro is probably one of the most interesting and easy types of photography to get into
Add VR and most won't even care about the slow aperture. Which is not really. f/3.5 vs f/2.8 is negligible and all the f/2.8 macros are f/2.8 at infinity. Focus a mm closer than infinity and they drop to f/3.3 and f/3.5.
We can all jump up and down and say "I want a 35/1.4 AFS" but Nikon (and Canon and Pentax and Sony) is in the business of making money first and cameras second. So that'll have to wait.
I'm really curious to see what the street price of it will be.
Earlier quote
Really? There are probably more D40X cameras out there than every D700, D3 and D3X combined. And I'm not even counting the D200/300 line.Yes. Nikon sells far more DX bodies than FX ones. And most of the people buying DX cameras do not really care about the FX vs DX discussion, neither are they interested in buying a very expensive FX camera nor do they frequent internet forums.
The market for a cheap DX (any cheap DX lens) is much bigger than the market for a fast and expensive prime. Simple as that. Make it cheap enough and people will buy it, even if they don't want it. "SLR Joe Bloggs" wants:
1 a small SLR (i.e. D40/60) because "they take good photos" and are reasonably cheap but doesn't want to carry too much weight
2 a standard slow zoom with VR, slow because it is cheap and Joe doesn't even know what a fast aperture is plus the f/2.8 stuff is too heavy, VR because everyone has it
3 a slow telezoom with VR, well for the same reasons as above
4 a cheap fast prime (i.e. 35/1.8 or 50/1.8, but the 50/1.8 won't focus on a D60) because PopPhoto says you need one for portraits
5 a cheap macro lens (i.e. not a 105VR) because macro is probably one of the most interesting and easy types of photography to get into
Add VR and most won't even care about the slow aperture. Which is not really. f/3.5 vs f/2.8 is negligible and all the f/2.8 macros are f/2.8 at infinity. Focus a mm closer than infinity and they drop to f/3.3 and f/3.5.
We can all jump up and down and say "I want a 35/1.4 AFS" but Nikon (and Canon and Pentax and Sony) is in the business of making money first and cameras second. So that'll have to wait.
I'm really curious to see what the street price of it will be.
Oct 14, 2009 at 08:12 AM
p.2 #9Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
Don't worry, people will understand the release of this lens when they see the pictures.
This is one of the sharpest lenses you will see edge to edge.
This is one of the sharpest lenses you will see edge to edge.
Oct 14, 2009 at 08:16 AM
p.2 #11Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
I think the lesson to be learned here is that Nikon will release products that are pretty standard in order to maintain a broad market share in their consumer cameras. Why? Because most consumers do not walk into a camera store having never shot with an SLR before asking to purchase a D300s or D700. It is a matter of building a loyal customer base with high-quality product across the range. I think that we need to stop holding consumer products to a professional standard in this regard, especially because this lens is a stop-gap for DX users who do not want to invest in the 60mm lens or the 105mm. This is the same reason why Nikon released the 35mm f1.8 DX lens - they needed a DX prime lens with a standard cropped FOV that would autofocus on their lower-end bodies.
Nikon will release new lenses in the future, and inevitably they will be your coveted fast-aperture prime lenses. There is an entirely different dynamic that needs to be taken into consideration, as well as a lot of information we never hear about. Parts manufacturing, production runs, and market viability all very much determine what Nikon chooses to do. They are a business, and in order to stay that way they need to remain competitive.
You may feel "entitled" to complain about a company trying to remain diverse and relevant in an increasingly cut-throat industry, but that does not mean people have to listen to you whine. Try contacting your local camera retailer or Nikon supplier and explain to them what you want and why. It will get you a whole lot further.
Nikon will release new lenses in the future, and inevitably they will be your coveted fast-aperture prime lenses. There is an entirely different dynamic that needs to be taken into consideration, as well as a lot of information we never hear about. Parts manufacturing, production runs, and market viability all very much determine what Nikon chooses to do. They are a business, and in order to stay that way they need to remain competitive.
You may feel "entitled" to complain about a company trying to remain diverse and relevant in an increasingly cut-throat industry, but that does not mean people have to listen to you whine. Try contacting your local camera retailer or Nikon supplier and explain to them what you want and why. It will get you a whole lot further.
Oct 14, 2009 at 09:22 AM
p.2 #12Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
posten wrote:
Was price announced?
$529 US MSRP.
Was price announced?
$529 US MSRP.
Oct 14, 2009 at 09:23 AM
p.2 #13Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
Only thing confusing about this is why it's designated a DX lens? At 85mm FL, shouldn't really need for it to be DX... Anyway, I'll betcha it will work fantastic on FX with some light vignetting wide open.
Oct 14, 2009 at 10:07 AM
p.2 #14Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
cturko wrote:
You forget that the "FX and pro market" are already pleased. Professional photographers do not sit and mull over lens ratings for hours on end. They know what works, they know what they want, and they do not sit and complain when camera companies choose to release a consumer lens.
Very well put.
You forget that the "FX and pro market" are already pleased. Professional photographers do not sit and mull over lens ratings for hours on end. They know what works, they know what they want, and they do not sit and complain when camera companies choose to release a consumer lens.
Very well put.
Oct 14, 2009 at 10:09 AM
p.2 #15Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
I want a dx 85mm f/1.0 with VR (add extension tubes when you want macro)
I read that because of the mount on nikon bodies and AF they are unable to go larger than f/1.4 I have no idea how much water that statement carries..........BUT with DX can't we go bigger with the aperture?
I read that because of the mount on nikon bodies and AF they are unable to go larger than f/1.4 I have no idea how much water that statement carries..........BUT with DX can't we go bigger with the aperture?
Oct 14, 2009 at 10:41 AM
p.2 #16Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
Where did this lens come from? Not much different from the 105VR. Ahh, but it is MUCH less expensive.
The 60 micro is short on working distance and the 105VR is expensive, so it all comes down to price point. And speeking of micro lenses, where is the updated 200 mm micro or a micro zoom with 1:1?
Ironically, for all my complaining, if the performance is good and it takes TCs, I might actually go with this new micro over the 105VR ... smaller, lighter, cheeper ... what's not to like?
Aside from that, I agree with those who aske: "Where are the updated fast primes below 200mm?"
24mm f/1.4 --- missing
35mm f/1.4 --- missing (not needed?)
50mm f/1.4 --- CHECK!!!
85mm f/1.4 --- OLD and needs upgrade
135mm f/2 --- OLD and needs upgrade
I think if Nikon at least did the 24mm and the 85mm f/1.4 then people would be happy. Given the relative sale of zooms over primes, I don't think we will see the full line of primes (below 200mm) we did in the past. But come on Nikon, at least fill in 3 of them across the range.
The 60 micro is short on working distance and the 105VR is expensive, so it all comes down to price point. And speeking of micro lenses, where is the updated 200 mm micro or a micro zoom with 1:1?
Ironically, for all my complaining, if the performance is good and it takes TCs, I might actually go with this new micro over the 105VR ... smaller, lighter, cheeper ... what's not to like?
Aside from that, I agree with those who aske: "Where are the updated fast primes below 200mm?"
24mm f/1.4 --- missing
35mm f/1.4 --- missing (not needed?)
50mm f/1.4 --- CHECK!!!
85mm f/1.4 --- OLD and needs upgrade
135mm f/2 --- OLD and needs upgrade
I think if Nikon at least did the 24mm and the 85mm f/1.4 then people would be happy. Given the relative sale of zooms over primes, I don't think we will see the full line of primes (below 200mm) we did in the past. But come on Nikon, at least fill in 3 of them across the range.
Oct 14, 2009 at 10:47 AM
p.2 #17Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
panos.v wrote:
The slow aperture is a bit limiting, but if you are a DX user and want macro, this is it. If the price is in Tamron 90 money. Which it might as well be, given the pricing of the 35/1.8. And if it as good as the 35/1.8...hmmmm yummy yummy.
If you were a DX user and wanted macro, why not use the already very good 60mm or 105mm micro lens they have ? Those are both great glass and work on both DX as well as FX.
I'm personally not dying for fast primes, as the f2.8 zooms are fine for my work, but the logic behind one would make so much more sense.
Nikon did come out with a 35 f1.8 DX which is nice, but that lens only benifits DX users, same as this 85 micro.
A fast prime like a 28mm f1.4 would be something that would appeal to both DX and FX users.
Same with something like a 16-35 or similar F4 range zoom. That would be an amazing lens for the FX shooter who doesn't want the weight of the 14-24, or wants to use filters. They'd sell a ton. If it was opticlly in the league of the 14-24 they'd sell a bunch to DX users as well.
Nikon's glass isn't cheap these days and I think a lot of users who shoot DX might be more inclined to invest in more expensive glass if it also could work for FX down the line, as many people see themselves going that way eventually .
Then while perhaps not the biggest market, the FX shooters certainly represent enough money I don't think you'd want to ignore them.
Sure more people have a D90 than a D700 but there are still lots of D700's and if you put something really cool out, like a line of pro f4 zooms, those folks would surely all buy, I know I would.
The slow aperture is a bit limiting, but if you are a DX user and want macro, this is it. If the price is in Tamron 90 money. Which it might as well be, given the pricing of the 35/1.8. And if it as good as the 35/1.8...hmmmm yummy yummy.
If you were a DX user and wanted macro, why not use the already very good 60mm or 105mm micro lens they have ? Those are both great glass and work on both DX as well as FX.
I'm personally not dying for fast primes, as the f2.8 zooms are fine for my work, but the logic behind one would make so much more sense.
Nikon did come out with a 35 f1.8 DX which is nice, but that lens only benifits DX users, same as this 85 micro.
A fast prime like a 28mm f1.4 would be something that would appeal to both DX and FX users.
Same with something like a 16-35 or similar F4 range zoom. That would be an amazing lens for the FX shooter who doesn't want the weight of the 14-24, or wants to use filters. They'd sell a ton. If it was opticlly in the league of the 14-24 they'd sell a bunch to DX users as well.
Nikon's glass isn't cheap these days and I think a lot of users who shoot DX might be more inclined to invest in more expensive glass if it also could work for FX down the line, as many people see themselves going that way eventually .
Then while perhaps not the biggest market, the FX shooters certainly represent enough money I don't think you'd want to ignore them.
Sure more people have a D90 than a D700 but there are still lots of D700's and if you put something really cool out, like a line of pro f4 zooms, those folks would surely all buy, I know I would.
Oct 14, 2009 at 11:16 AM
p.2 #18Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
I'd love to have more/better/faster primes. I really would. But it's hard for me to see Nikon's recent development of sharp, fast, mid-speed lenses as anything but really good news.
The 35/1.8 is an amazing DX lens. VERY sharp, far better wide open than either of the older AF 50s (I've never shot the AFS, but I doubt it's appreciably better), better bokeh than them, light, and fast handling. I pair mine with my 85/1.4 all the time -- and the little $200 wonder gives up NOTHING to the "pro" lens.
The new 85 weights TWELVE OUNCES. That's not just good for a (rudely stereotyped) "novice", but for demanding amateurs and pros alike who need high quality images but who chafe at Nikon's move toward heavy zooms as the only way to get premium image quality. This is in many ways a return to something Nikon used to do really well -- slightly slower high quality lenses that suited both amateurs and mobile pros who cared more about image quality and getting the shot than looking like a "professional" because they carry a backbreaking zoom on a heavily padded strap.
In the AI/AIS days, a 35/2 wasn't inferior to a 35/1.4 in anything but speed -- the image quality was at least as good optically at comparable stops (and often better). Same for many other MF prime slow/fast pairs. With the move to digital, the gap between "professional" and "consumer" lenses has widened, which is a huge frustration. The 16-85 is an exception, and I see it as part of this newer trend, which is toward lighter slower lenses that are nonetheless optically excellent. It's a vastly more useful lens for demanding uses than something like the 18-200.
If the 85/3.5 is genuinely good -- by that I mean truly excellent wide open, with better bokeh than the 85/1.8 (which is worse at f/3.5 than it is at f/1.8) -- I'll probably try one. It might keep DX viable for me for longer.
A D90 plus 35/1.8, 85/3.5, and a wide zoom (12-24, etc.) is a LOT of "professional" image-making ability in a very compact package.
The 35/1.8 is an amazing DX lens. VERY sharp, far better wide open than either of the older AF 50s (I've never shot the AFS, but I doubt it's appreciably better), better bokeh than them, light, and fast handling. I pair mine with my 85/1.4 all the time -- and the little $200 wonder gives up NOTHING to the "pro" lens.
The new 85 weights TWELVE OUNCES. That's not just good for a (rudely stereotyped) "novice", but for demanding amateurs and pros alike who need high quality images but who chafe at Nikon's move toward heavy zooms as the only way to get premium image quality. This is in many ways a return to something Nikon used to do really well -- slightly slower high quality lenses that suited both amateurs and mobile pros who cared more about image quality and getting the shot than looking like a "professional" because they carry a backbreaking zoom on a heavily padded strap.
In the AI/AIS days, a 35/2 wasn't inferior to a 35/1.4 in anything but speed -- the image quality was at least as good optically at comparable stops (and often better). Same for many other MF prime slow/fast pairs. With the move to digital, the gap between "professional" and "consumer" lenses has widened, which is a huge frustration. The 16-85 is an exception, and I see it as part of this newer trend, which is toward lighter slower lenses that are nonetheless optically excellent. It's a vastly more useful lens for demanding uses than something like the 18-200.
If the 85/3.5 is genuinely good -- by that I mean truly excellent wide open, with better bokeh than the 85/1.8 (which is worse at f/3.5 than it is at f/1.8) -- I'll probably try one. It might keep DX viable for me for longer.
A D90 plus 35/1.8, 85/3.5, and a wide zoom (12-24, etc.) is a LOT of "professional" image-making ability in a very compact package.
Oct 14, 2009 at 11:17 AM
p.2 #19Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
millsart wrote:
If you were a DX user and wanted macro, why not use the already very good 60mm or 105mm micro lens they have ? Those are both great glass and work on both DX as well as FX.
...
A fast prime like a 28mm f1.4 would be something that would appeal to both DX and FX users.
...
Same with something like a 16-35 or similar F4 range zoom. That would be an amazing lens for the FX shooter who doesn't want the weight of the 14-24, or wants to use filters. They'd sell a ton. If it was optically in the league...Show more →
The 60 is too short and lacks VR, and the 105 is a lot heavier and more expensive.
A 28/1.4 prime would cost $1500 and weigh 20 ounces or more. The 35/1.8 is $200 and weighs half a pound.
I agree about the 16-35/4. I would love a lens like that. If it comes out, it's the single most likely thing to push me to FX. For now, the options are older primes that are optically weak, or the expensive and unacceptably heavy 14-24 (or nearly as expensive and heavy 17-35).
I don't understand the people complaining that the 85/1.4 needs to be updated. It's spectacular -- amazing image quality, fast AF, and good handling. VR and AF-S would be nice I guess, but VR might screw it up optically, and it would almost certainly be a $2k lens. It's hard for me to put that anywhere near the top of the list. I'd rather have some updated shorter primes (or the rumored 16-35/4).
The only thing that would make Nikon's reinvigoration of their lightweight high-quality primes even better would be if they were done for FX (would LOVE a 20/4, for example). But the fact that they're doing it at all, after a couple of decades of optically inferior consumer "convenience" zooms (24-120, ugh) is great news.
Edited on Oct 14, 2009 at 11:30 AM · View previous versions
If you were a DX user and wanted macro, why not use the already very good 60mm or 105mm micro lens they have ? Those are both great glass and work on both DX as well as FX.
...
A fast prime like a 28mm f1.4 would be something that would appeal to both DX and FX users.
...
Same with something like a 16-35 or similar F4 range zoom. That would be an amazing lens for the FX shooter who doesn't want the weight of the 14-24, or wants to use filters. They'd sell a ton. If it was optically in the league...Show more →
The 60 is too short and lacks VR, and the 105 is a lot heavier and more expensive.
A 28/1.4 prime would cost $1500 and weigh 20 ounces or more. The 35/1.8 is $200 and weighs half a pound.
I agree about the 16-35/4. I would love a lens like that. If it comes out, it's the single most likely thing to push me to FX. For now, the options are older primes that are optically weak, or the expensive and unacceptably heavy 14-24 (or nearly as expensive and heavy 17-35).
I don't understand the people complaining that the 85/1.4 needs to be updated. It's spectacular -- amazing image quality, fast AF, and good handling. VR and AF-S would be nice I guess, but VR might screw it up optically, and it would almost certainly be a $2k lens. It's hard for me to put that anywhere near the top of the list. I'd rather have some updated shorter primes (or the rumored 16-35/4).
The only thing that would make Nikon's reinvigoration of their lightweight high-quality primes even better would be if they were done for FX (would LOVE a 20/4, for example). But the fact that they're doing it at all, after a couple of decades of optically inferior consumer "convenience" zooms (24-120, ugh) is great news.
Edited on Oct 14, 2009 at 11:30 AM · View previous versions
Oct 14, 2009 at 11:25 AM
p.2 #20Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR AF-S
cturko: please, dont lower the standard. Clearly we disagree, thats fine, thats how the world is, but you being personal, thats just....low.
panos.v: I agree that the dx market is much bigger in terms of profit and volume. But i still believe that, for exampel, a FX 24mm f2 afs lens will sell better then the new 85mm. Because it will not be limited to dx only, and i think the demand for a relatively fast prime is bigger then the demand for a macro for dx.
cturko wrote: You forget that the "FX and pro market" are already pleased. Professional photographers do not sit and mull over lens ratings for hours on end. They know what works, they know what they want, and they do not sit and complain when camera companies choose to release a consumer lens.
Very well put.
Hmm its very new to me that all pros are just plain happy with the nikon lens pipeline, and that none wishes fast primes. But perhaps our definition of "pro" isnt the same.
panos.v: I agree that the dx market is much bigger in terms of profit and volume. But i still believe that, for exampel, a FX 24mm f2 afs lens will sell better then the new 85mm. Because it will not be limited to dx only, and i think the demand for a relatively fast prime is bigger then the demand for a macro for dx.
cturko wrote: You forget that the "FX and pro market" are already pleased. Professional photographers do not sit and mull over lens ratings for hours on end. They know what works, they know what they want, and they do not sit and complain when camera companies choose to release a consumer lens.
Very well put.
Hmm its very new to me that all pros are just plain happy with the nikon lens pipeline, and that none wishes fast primes. But perhaps our definition of "pro" isnt the same.
Oct 14, 2009 at 12:05 PM