Nikon Patents New Lens

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Member's gallery
at the end of the article: With significantly higher costs – with historically Nikon reserving its PF lenses exclusively for professional applications with professional prices. <--- what????
 
Member's gallery
Being Dr. Obvious here, they just put out a lightweight, compact 400mm f4.5, so a PF version would seem redundant. I do recall that when the "what PF lens should come after the 300" discussions took place several years ago there seemed to be a lot of us who really craved a 600mm f5.6. Even if for size and balance reasons this turned into a 600mm f6.3 that would be a terrific lens. I hope I live long enough to see one.
 
Member's gallery
The article itself says the majority of patents never make the light of day. And yet the publish a full feature article (presumably) to get clicks. As @GrandNagus50 stated, there already exists a lightweight 400 f4.5 so why in the world would Nikon produce a PF version of it? The answer is they would not, which gives me little trust in the rest of this article. (It will be nice if they come to production, but I am not holding my breath). If any do come to light, I think a 600 f5.6 would be the most popular.
 
Member's gallery
Thom Hogan mentioned Nikon had new PF patents. This was late last year, but not all, in fact relatively few, ever reach production. The possibility of a 400 f4.5 PF must be obsolescent now surely; as the engineers responsible said they had considered such a design but taken a different approach instead.

A 600 f5.6 S PF is probably the biggest gap, but a 500 f4 PF has advantages, but might be judged too close to the 400 f4.5S. we discussed the subject some weeks ago

Fyi links to previous interviews with Nikon engineers on PhaseFresnel etc. We can expect to be (pleasantly) surprised if a 4th materializes :)

Nikon 800mm PF

I noticed B&H has this lens listed now so hopefully that means it’s just around the bend. I’m curious to see what price range this comes in at. I am guessing $6-7k This would be a phenomenal lens for birds as long as the weight is manageable. This would most likely be a well balanced setup for...
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com

Nikon 300mm AF-S F/4 PF ED VR lens review

I recently upgraded from a nikon D7500 to a D850. I'm still using my tamron 150-600g2. I never shot with a prime lens and was thinking of a getting a nikon 300 to start. I like the idea of the light weight PF model, but I read a lot of mixed reviews. I often carry my camera while kayaking...
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
It's interesting to revisit this 2020 thread on PhaseFresnel telephotos

More Nikon PF Lenses?

I think the PF technology is incredible! However, none of the existing lenses using it are exactly what I want from it. So I thought it would be interesting to talk about other possibilities for the technology. For me, I wish they were slightly heavier. Not cause I want more weight but because I...
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com

EDIT the DCW article is distinctly shallow and fails to explain how Nikon's PF elements drastically reduce the overall length of a telephoto significantly. Judging from the 3 telephotos released to date, the technology also does not require a very expensive fluorite element.

Nikon's Phase-Fresnel technology is different from Canon's Diffraction Optics, Nikon's uses a combination of refraction and diffraction:
https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/waves/Lesson-3/Reflection,-Refraction,-and-Diffraction

The 300 f4E PF was its first application in an ILC camera, derived from its use over many years in Nikon microscopes.

https://www.lenstip.com/431.1-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_300_mm_f_4E_PF_ED_VR_Introduction.html
“What is the main difference between the technologies implemented by Canon and Nikon, though? Canon doesn’t use the ‘Phase Fresnel lens’ term one single time; they call their technology ‘Diffractive Optics’. It is in perfect accordance with the actual state. The height and pitch of concentric grating of optical elements, showed in their pictures, is as big as the wavelength of falling light. As a result there is no refraction process going on but light diffraction exactly. That’s why in the Canon official materials they never employ a term ‘Phase Fresnel lens’ - they use ‘Diffractive Optics’ instead.”

https://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/688994.html

https://inf.news/en/photography/4d2484e428e46c4f75aa4c0c991ca6e2.html

fyi a dpr thread https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61771699
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I’ve recently come close to buying a used 600 f/4E a few times. I might still choose to adapt some used f/4E glass over a Z mount 600 PF, but I’m holding off to see what the lightweight 600 turns out to be first. Maybe it won’t even be a PF lens and instead shed weight like the 400 f/4.5 did.

Was there patent chatter on the 400 f/4.5 non PF lens before the lens was released? Either way, PF or not, I bet a lightweight 600 comes in the next 4 months.
 
Member's gallery
Member's gallery
Lance B said:
How about a 600 f5.6 PF + TC. :giggle:

Or a 500 f4 PF + TC. :giggle:
Click to expand...
Yes, a 600 f5.6 PF with a 107mm window will be shorter than the 2.4kg 800 f6.3 PF (127mm window). So arguably this 600 PF should weigh under 2 kg.

A 500 f4E PF needs a 125mm window, so also shorter and lighter than the 800 PF. A 1000 f8 is also a 125mm window but needs to be longer so heavier.

Read through the earlier threads with links to Nikon interviews etc, cited above. These have covered many of the design trade offs etc.

Nikon has probably examined how to scale down the 800 PF into a 500 f4E PF, or to scale up the 500 f5.6 PF to the 600 f5.6.... in fact there's a link above to the patent for a 600 f5.6 PF
 
Member's gallery
fcotterill said:
Yes, a 600 f5.6 PF with a 107mm window will be shorter than the 2.4kg 800 f6.3 PF (127mm window). So arguably this 600 PF should weigh under 2 kg.

A 500 f4E PF needs a 125mm window, so also shorter and lighter than the 800 PF. A 1000 f8 is also a 125mm window but needs to be longer so heavier.

Read through the earlier threads with links to Nikon interviews etc, cited above. These have covered many of the design trade offs etc.

Nikon has probably examined how to scale down the 800 PF into a 500 f4E PF, or to scale up the 500 f5.6 PF to the 600 f5.6.... in fact there's a link above to the patent for a 600 f5.6 PF
Click to expand...
Good info, Fenton. I haven't read the info you cite, but my thoughts are adding the TC to a PF lens as a point of difference that seems to be what Nikon is about these days.
 
Member's gallery
Wonder if after Nikon gets these lens out the door and supply catches up with demand (as well as the fast primes w the builtin TCs) will Nikon introduce v 2 of these lens with a built in TC?
 
Member's gallery
I just compared the latest patents in JP 2023-23323, which DCW picked up from this website.

It's of interest the overall length of this 600 5.6 PF (~310mm, top image) is close to that of the different design in the 2018 patent (333mm to F mount focal plane (allowing for extra DSLR mirror space)

600 f5.6 Z mount patent 2023.JPG
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


1678118062834.png


The optical formula in this registered patent of the 800 f6.3 (top image) differs slightly from the version that launched last year, but the length to the Z focal plane is very close to the overall length of released model (given the 16mm Z-mount's throat):
800 f6.3 Z mount patent 2023.JPG
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


800 f6.3S PF optics.JPG
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


However, compare the above image to the patented design of the 600 f5.6 PF at top, notably its element L16
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top