Nikon 40 F2 biscuit head fills the gap in the low-end fixed-focus head, a bit like the 50 1.8D on the F mount. With the inherent advantages of the Z mount, even if the 40 F2 has made some sacrifices in performance (with its volume and weight, 4 groups of 6 elements, performance must be sacrificed a lot), but the picture quality is not considered Weak, at least more than enough for street sweeping photography. The 40mm focal length and F2 aperture can replace 35 1.8 and 50 1.8 to a certain extent, giving users who stop at these two mid-to-high-end fixed-focus heads a new choice.
In addition, I have to say that Nikon, which is released at a price of 1799, is indeed a hit to the sub-factory, but the sub-manufacturer is also the same for users. This is a very important option, after all, not every focal length will produce such a cheap fixed focus head. As far as I am concerned, I don't want a deputy factory manager like Vitros to be hit too much.
I used Nikon in the SLR era, but now I don’t want to buy Nikon mirrors anymore. An important issue is that mirrors are not cheap at all. Is it good for me to use SLRs? How cheap are F-mount lenses. As soon as this lens came out, the Z5 instantly fragrant. Many people may have enough of a Z5 kit with this head. It is cheap and light. After all, it is full frame. The final consumer product development direction of Microsing must be portable full-frame plus lens. Sony has long been known and Nikon is also on the road. Next, I would like to ask Panasonic , can I reduce the S5 to the level of gx9.
Nikon did not produce 50 2.8, nor did it produce 45 1.8. Instead, it produced a 40 f/2. In a sense, it has produced 35 1.8 and 50 that are both high in quality and price. After 1.8, the optimal solution for the cheap lens will be presented.
But we can see if it will affect the sales of 35 and 50 at the same time-do users really need a high-quality 1.8 lens?
.
