Will Nikon Drop the Aperture and Meter Coupling Levers Soon?

[David H. Hartman]

I expected E-Type lenses for sometime. I'm thinking the aperture coupling lever is one more feature that limits high frame rates hence the E-Type Nikkor. The aperture coupling lever is complicated. I'll bet the D6 lacks both. I'm thinking a Nikon Df2 or Df3 will one day be the only Nikon to fully support Nikon F lenses from 1959 to date.

Dave

[Akira]

Dave, another major problem of the mechanical aperture coupling is the inability of controling aperture in live view mode and during the video shooting.  Canon has no problem with that in the first place.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Nikon are still introducing new G lenses, the only way to use those lenses is through the mechanical transfer of the aperture information from the body. E lenses seem to be introduced in specific cases where there is a significant advantage for doing so. Given the tens of millions of G lenses in circulation and their relatively recent designs, as well as Nikon's history of supporting older lenses on new cameras, I would not expect an E only camera body in the F mount in the foreseeable future.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Agree with Ilkka. Keeping a maximum of backwards compatibility has been a major concern for Nikon over a very long period. There is no doubt the Nikon engineers would love an all-"E" approach, but that is not going to happen for a [very] long time. The introduction of low-end "E" lenses will be the indication of a future with main emphasis on "E" cameras. As long as "E" is associated with high-end or specialist optics, this has negligible impact on Nikon's policy as long as the thrust is on cheap "G" lenses.

[bjornthun]

The recently introduced f/1.8 G type primes are going to be around for years, and there is no way they won't be supported. For mechanical reasons (physically) long telephoto lenses and PC lenses are obvious candidates to be E type lenses.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

What could be envisioned is a split between classes of cameras and the types of lenses they support natively. We have already seen a move in that direction by the various Dx0-D3xxx - D5xxx - D7xxx models on one hand that have no aperture follower and thus cannot meter with anything without a (native) CPU, and the higher-end cameras D200/D300 plus the single-digit pro-models on the other hand all of which have an aperture follower and thus support metering for lenses without CPU (to some extent).

However, all current Nikons do have an aperture stop-down lever in their mirror box, and that is all what it takes to function with non-E lenses in the future. As long as this stop-down lever is present, all "G" lenses will be supported, and by implication, in fact any lens hosting a CPU capable of communicating with the camera.

Since we already know nearly all manual Nikkors (or lenses with F mount) can be enhanced by installing a CPU in them, there is little to worry about for the future.

[simato73]

The introduction of low-end "E" lenses will be the indication of a future with main emphasis on "E" cameras. As long as "E" is associated with high-end or specialist optics, this has negligible impact on Nikon's policy as long as the thrust is on cheap "G" lenses.

It is funny that now the "E" family of lenses by Nikon defines a high-end class. Once upon a time "E" (albeit Nikon, not Nikkor)  meant Economy - therefore definitely not high-end.

[Akira]

AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm/f2.8-4E ED VR is probably the first "lower-end" lens that indicates that the future lens lineups will drop the mechanical aperture levers, although it would not happen too soon.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

f/2.8 zooms traditionally aren't considered 'low-end' but I get your point. At one point in time, likely many  years ahead, all lower-end cameras will work only with "E" lenses. 

[Akira]

The omission of the aperture lever would also enable Nikon to make fast lenses easier: you don't need to trim the part of the edge of the rear element like on 50/1.2 or Noct 58/1.2.

I happened to find a Nikon's patent for the optical communication between the lens and the body:

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/01/04/nikon-files-a-patent-for-optical-communication-between-lens-and-body.aspx/

Interestingly the optical elements for the commuication are build into the mount like the electric contacts of Pentax KA/FA mounts.  The omission of both the aperture lever and the current contact block should enable Nikon to utilize the full circular opening space of the F-mount.

Of course, moving to optical communication of this system will cause yet another compatibility issue...

[MILLIREHM]

The omission of the aperture lever would also enable Nikon to make fast lenses easier: you don't need to trim the part of the edge of the rear element like on 50/1.2 or Noct 58/1.2.

Still wonder why the new 58 mm is f/1.4 instead of 1.2

I happened to find a Nikon's patent for the optical communication between the lens and the body:

....

Of course, moving to optical communication of this system will cause yet another compatibility issue...

Maybe it will cause a new cleaning issue too

[Akira]

Still wonder why the new 58 mm is f/1.4 instead of 1.2

Maybe it will cause a new cleaning issue too

According to the interviews to Nikon designers, f/1.4 can keep the vignetting at bay when the lens is used wide open.

The fluorine coating may help keep the optical contact clean. 

[David H. Hartman]

There is no doubt the Nikon engineers would love an all-"E" approach, but that is not going to happen for a [very] long time.

I was wondering how fast Nikon might drop these features and guessing a Nikon Df2 or Df3 might hold the compatibility while others might not. I've long wanted an AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED Nikkor but was wondering how long it might be compatible with a D800 series replacement or the replacement's replacement.

Dave

---

Thanks to all for commenting!

[Bjørn Rørslett]

One has to remember Nikon is basically a very conservative company. Thus the notion of providing backwards compatibility is deeply engrained in the company strategy. Thus it is unlikely that support for lenses which are requiring mechanical linkages will be removed in the near future.

An introduction of a FX-type mirrorless system might change the playing cards quite a bit, but speculation here is futile at present.

[MILLIREHM]

An FX-type mirrorless system would require a complete new series of lenses, even if it'd F-mount, caused by flange
Building a mirrorless with the same flange as an SLR appears to make no sense

Elsewhise I see it similar to Bjørn
like the mechanical metering coupling and the screwdriver AF

Looking back they gould have gone directly from D to E and thus having just one compatibility gap instead of two