37 years ago I bought a 85/1.4 Zeiss Planar and a 35/1.4 Distagon for Contax/Yashica. Don't try to make a f/1.4 look like something modern - it's not. There was a Planar 85/1.2 (1982) for Contax a while before Canon also had one (1989). Fast primes are no novelty. From 1928 Dr. Erich Salomon used an Ermanox with an f/2 lens, which later became f/1.8. Pre-war stuff...
And by putting things into perspective: I know it's not very common in the Netherlands to see prices like 1.98 € and pay them - usually it's 2.00 € then. But camera manufacturers tried to avoid the "slow" f/2.0 (as a lot of cheap lenses were f/2 something) and went for the compromise.
It's difficult to steer away from this reputation of cheap compromise. Fuji has two lines, one with f/1.4 or faster and one with f/2.0 or slower, and much more compact. This inbetween crap makes me wonder if Nikon really thinks someone is gonna pay an extra added plus for an f/1.4 to come? There's only one f/1.2 on the roadmap. One is close to "none". And as it's just another bloody 50 mm, I'm not interested anyway.
Also, for just f/1.8 no one needs a bigger mount diameter aslong as the primes are not exceeding 105 mm.
And by putting things into perspective: I know it's not very common in the Netherlands to see prices like 1.98 € and pay them - usually it's 2.00 € then. But camera manufacturers tried to avoid the "slow" f/2.0 (as a lot of cheap lenses were f/2 something) and went for the compromise.
It's difficult to steer away from this reputation of cheap compromise. Fuji has two lines, one with f/1.4 or faster and one with f/2.0 or slower, and much more compact. This inbetween crap makes me wonder if Nikon really thinks someone is gonna pay an extra added plus for an f/1.4 to come? There's only one f/1.2 on the roadmap. One is close to "none". And as it's just another bloody 50 mm, I'm not interested anyway.
Also, for just f/1.8 no one needs a bigger mount diameter aslong as the primes are not exceeding 105 mm.