Making a fast wide angle (SLR) prime lens

[daveleo]

Very interesting commentary. It is finally 🙄 sinking in that it is NOT the APS format that is threatened by mirrorless, it's the DSLR/APS that is.

Also . . . This is not directly relevant to my original question, but . . . Here is an interesting comparison of Nikon prime lenses I have. They are all 24mm - 50mm FL.
4 are Full Frame, 1 is APS format.

The FF lenses are not larger than the APS lens.

The second picture shows the two Full Frame 50mm/f1.8's (one with, one without a drive motor) compared to the APS format kit zoom at 50mm . Comparing the leftmost lens (FF 50mm/f1.8) with the zoom (APS 50mm/f5.6) it's easy to see the size penalty you pay for zooming.

 

[gavinlg]

Very interesting commentary. It is finally 🙄 sinking in that it is NOT the APS format that is threatened by mirrorless, it's the DSLR/APS that is.

Also . . . This is not directly relevant to my original question, but . . . Here is an interesting comparison of Nikon prime lenses I have. They are all 24mm - 50mm FL.

The 3 smaller lenses here are Full Frame ("35mm"). The 2 larger lenses are for APS format. The FF's are smaller ! , whereas the APS's should be (what?, 25%) smaller than the FF's ?
The APS's are larger because the drive motor is in the lens. So . . . if the market could go for manual focusing, the DSLR/APS setup could be made very small indeed.

The second picture shows the two 50mm/f1.8's (one with, one without a drive motor) compared to the kit zoom at 50mm (back to my preference for prime lens sizes). The very small lens on the left is FF, the other 2 are APS!)

Hmm... That 50mm f1.8G is a full frame lens, not an DX lens. The 35mm f1.8 IS a DX lens though.

 

[daveleo]

Hmm... That 50mm f1.8G is a full frame lens, not an DX lens. The 35mm f1.8 IS a DX lens though.

You are correct. I tripped over my tongue on that one !

I edited the photos with labels, and reworded some of what I said.
I appreciate the correction !

 

[Aristophanes]

Very interesting commentary. It is finally 🙄 sinking in that it is NOT the APS format that is threatened by mirrorless, it's the DSLR/APS that is.

I think that an over-generalization.

The SLR format with its WYSIWYG OVF potential, extremely versatile lens mount and specialities (super-teles, macro), fast PDAF, optional CDAF, and staggering lens availability, legacy, and durability is not to be trifled with.

The SLR and DSLR are proven racehorses with sunk costs, great form factor, and huge installed base. The flaws in the design are still outweighed by the bonuses. I consider fast WA primes to be a limited market that only nips at the edges, and there are options, one of which is high-ISO sensors obviating "fast".

The market is fracturing so lots of consumer choice, which is good. In the same way that SLR's did not completely erase RF's from the market, mirrorless will not do the same to the SLR. Camera manufacturers want you to own more than one camera design. The market rarely completely replaces one system with another. If it did, we'd all be driving pick-up trucks 🙄

 

[rxmd]

There just won't be any cheap fast wide primes coming probably ever.

The old law still holds: fast, cheap, wide - pick any two

 

[Frontman]

It's not a question of engineering, it's one of economics. Zooms are more popular than primes in the general market, most people who buy cameras are not photographers. The cost of developing and manufacturing a zoom lens is no more than that of a prime, but a camera company could probably expect to sell 20 zooms to each prime, meaning there isn't enough market and profitability to develop a fast prime.

The fast super-wide-angle lenses currently available on the market from Canon and Nikon are good examples. These lenses are quite expensive, but have never been popular. They are also quite large and heavy, and not easy to sell to the general consumer. Reducing their price would not necessarily increase the number of lenses sold, so manufacturers don't bother to make more or sell them for less.