Why so few modern Nikon lenses?

crycocyon

Senior Member
I was flipping through an old Nikon lens brochure from 1982. There are 61 lenses. Nikon lists 83 lenses presently on their website, but a lot of those are MF and older D lenses, or DX lenses. If we narrow the search to only FX AF-S lenses, there are only 36.

Why?

Here's the 1982 lineup....

Normal Lenses

50 f1.2, 50 f1.4, 50 f1.8

Three 50 mm so about the same except now we don't have a modern f1.2.

Fisheye Lenses

6 f2.8, 8 f2.8, 16 f2.8

No modern fisheyes.

Wide Angle Lenses

13, 15, 18, 20, 24 f2, 24 f2.8, 28 f2, 28 f2.8, 28 f3.5, 35 f1.4, 35 f2, 35 f2.8

So not only did they have the amazing 13 and 15mm lenses, they had two 24s, three 28s, and three 35s and when you include the E series lenses that makes four 28s and four 35s (!!). Now we have one 24, one 28, and two 35s.

Telephoto Lenses

They had an 85 f2, 85 f1.8, then a 105 f1.8, 105 f2.5, 135 f2, 135 f2.8E, 135 f3.5, 135 f2.8, 180 f2.8ED.

So there were two 85s, two 105s, no less than four 135s, and a 180. Now we have two 85s and a 105 micro. No 135. No 180.

Ultra-Telephoto Lenses

The impressive line continues here. A 200 f4, 200 f2, 300 f2.8, 300 f4.5, 400 f3.5, 400 f5.6, 600 f4, 600 f5.6, 800 f8 and 1200 f11.

So they had two 200s, two 300s, two 400s, two 600s, an 800 and a 1200. Now we have two 200s, and one each of 300, 400, 500, 600 and 800.

Zoom Lenses

More crazy stuff.

A 25-50 f4, 35-70 f3.5, 36-72 f3.5E, 50-300 f4.5, 70-210 F4, 75-150 f3.5E, 80-200 f4, and then the crazy ones.... 180-600 f8, 200-600 f9.5, 360-1200 f11. Look at the redundancy and overlap on the lower short to medium telephoto.

There are a total of 13 modern FX Nikkor lenses, as opposed to 10 vintage ones. This is where the modern lenses exceed the vintage ones and show a trend toward zoom lens product line expansion.

Reflex Lenses

Don't see these produced by the major companies anymore.

500 f8, 1000 f11, 2000 f11

No modern equivalents.


So I realize there are some obvious reasons, but I was going through this brochure and imagining how great it would be if Nikon actually still made such a large collection of modern lenses. What choices! What an amazing selection and collection of superb optics. And they don't even include masterpieces such as the later 300 f2 and 400 f2.8.

So? What are your thoughts about where Nikon has gone in terms of its modern lens production and why it lags so far behind their product line of years past.
 

Mike D90

Senior Member
I can only speak my mind here with an uneducated guess and say that it is due to film versus digital.

Take the 50mm f/1.2. No longer made and I think it is likely because digital SLR ISO is so good there is really no need to put that much aperture into a lens?

Wide angle, well, actually super wide fisheye. Maybe due to the proliferation of DX sensors? An 6mm fisheye isn't really an 6mm fisheye on a DX camera. Not the field of view anyway.
 

480sparky

Senior Member
Also, for foray into the amateur market. Nikon used to be used pretty much by pros and semi-pros. Now, Ashton Kutcher plugs Nikon to every Tom, Dick and Mary.
 

crycocyon

Senior Member
All true. I remember pros who used to carry three or four cameras on them at the same time, hehe. Back then if you had a zoom lens you were not really considered professional. The amateur market is much larger now in proportion to the professional one. That's also probably why Nikon only sells the top of the line versions of their long telephoto lenses (ie: fast).
 

SkvLTD

Senior Member
That and times changing, technology catching up and so on. That and price points as well. I'd imagine the difference between the old 55/1.2 and 50/2 were ~$1000 today, so it gave more leeway for those who didn't need it much like today.

Else remember that what is dictated by bodies today was dictated by lenses back in the day. If there were 10 lenses to 1 body back then, is now 10 bodies to 1 lens.
 

gqtuazon

Gear Head
I'm not worried about the quantity that are available but more on the quality of lenses that are available. I think Nikon has already provided just about every lenses that we might need except for some specialized lenses (primes) such as the 135mm, 180mm and maybe the 300mm f4 lens. Other than that, I am good with what I have and have nothing to complain about.
 

480sparky

Senior Member
400mm f/4 VRIII (sub $1500) PLEASE! :D


How's this?

Nikkor1005002.jpg




Nikkor100500.jpg
 

aroy

Senior Member
I can only speak my mind here with an uneducated guess and say that it is due to film versus digital.

Take the 50mm f/1.2. No longer made and I think it is likely because digital SLR ISO is so good there is really no need to put that much aperture into a lens?

Wide angle, well, actually super wide fisheye. Maybe due to the proliferation of DX sensors? An 6mm fisheye isn't really an 6mm fisheye on a DX camera. Not the field of view anyway.
The 50mm F1.2 AIS is still made so is the 28mm F2.8 AIS and a few more MF lenses. These lenses are all that remain of the MF lense line up. All the MF lenses manufactured still fill in the gaps in the present AF line up, either in the F (F1.2) or sharpness (28mm F2.8) coupled with better materials and lower costs.

For most of the line up Zooms have taken over day to day work, especially for harried professionals who have to change perspective at a moments notice.

What I miss in the line up is the 400mm F5.6 or F4, which should have been there as an inexpensive birding lense.

At wide angle, with digital it is very easy to stitch panoramas so the only utility of a dedicated wide angle is for professionals who have to get it in one shot. For those who need it, the 14-24 is all that is required at this end.
 

Dave_W

The Dude
Sparky's right, in the 80's Nikon was trying to break into the lower end consumer market and developed their "E" lens series that used the word "Nikon" instead of "Nikkor". Nikkor was reserved for their better lens line.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
 

Pretzel

Senior Member
Lots of positive explanatory comments, valid opinions, deep seated thoughts, etc. already here, so I won't dive in TOO deep...

There are still far more lenses out there that I still can't afford, so NAS still wins!!!


*insert sniffles here*
 
Top