New Workshop! Lighting 3 | Advanced Off Camera Flash

Gear & Apps

Nikon Patents A 35mm f/2 Lens For A Curved Full Frame Sensor | Our Minds Race At What This Could Mean

By Kishore Sawh on July 21st 2017

After a string of bad press Nikon is back grabbing column inches with some interesting and positive news. First, there was some solid word from Nikon that they were taking the mirrorless space seriously and developing on it, and then today we have a tidbit that Nikon has patented a new lens. Now, while that’s not in-and-of-itself terribly exciting, it’s a 35mm f/2 that’s designed for a curved sensor – and that is.

Nikon has patented a curved sensor before, so why is this exciting?” you may ask. To that I can say it’s merely due to speculation and pontificating about what this could mean given what we know of curved sensors together with Nikon’s statement about its mirrorless efforts.

It should be said here that there is no direct statement about whether this is for a mirrorless camera or a DSLR, but from what we know about curved sensors it would lead us to believe that if this comes into fruition it will be not be for an interchangeable DSLR system. At least it is extremely unlikely to be compatible with current mounts and DSLRs.


So what’s the fuss about curved sensors? Primarily, the advantage to a curved sensor (without getting too boring) is that it provides relief from one of the most common and glaring optical aberrations: field curvature. When an image is projected from a typical lens it’s spherical but onto a planar/flat sensor, which means the outer areas of the image are focused ahead of the sensor, and that can cause the outer areas to look stretched, and blurred.

Lens developers go through hell to design lenses that challenge this, and one of the ways they do this is by adding ‘field flattening elements’. Basically, they add special elements to get the image coming through to focus best on a flat sensor surface. But more elements the more complications. More elements typically mean less light transmission, more weight, more cost, perhaps slower focusing, and of course various other aberrations of their own.

Curved sensors are supposed to do away with the need for these elements, therefore making lenses simpler, and that means the development can be cheaper, quicker, and they can be smaller and lighter and perhaps even brighter/faster. Curved sensors can also, apparently, improve general sensor output. It may all sound a bit too wonderful for words, but I have a few more because it’s not all rainbows and sunshine.

The problem is that for this to work the sensor curvature must match the image that the lens projects, and that’s a neat way of saying the sensor and lens must be matched in design, and this is problematic. Not all lenses have the same degree of field curvature but they’d have to have some level of standard if used on the same sensor. This almost certainly rules out using current lenses on a camera with a curved sensor because lenses now already try to correct for the field curvature, and therefore, to have an interchangeable lens system with curved sensors an entirely new system would have to be created, and a standard curvature adhered to for any kind of systematic growth and longevity. Oh, and the likelihood of being able to use third-party lenses is slim.

So what could this new patent from Nikon suggest given the above? Well, and again this is pure speculation, perhaps it could be used for a fixed lens full frame camera like Sony’s RX1R, which continues to be the most surprising camera I’ve ever used, and positively so (and also is a 35mm f/2). If they go that route the camera would be bespoke to the sensor and as anyone who has used an Rx1 can attest, the results of such designs are nothing short of astonishing.


Perhaps, however, Nikon is really betting big with this and plans to make a whole new system of mirrorless cameras with such sensors and a new mount with new lenses. It’s far fetched but we kind of know Nikon has to be a bit drastic in evolution soon. After killing their whole DL line and disappointing so many in the process, going this far out with either a fixed-lens curved sensor camera (most plausible) or a new mirrorless system would almost certainly gain some public favor.

Source: NikonRumors

This site contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links, however, this does not impact accuracy or integrity of our content.

A photographer and writer based in Miami, he can often be found at dog parks, and airports in London and Toronto. He is also a tremendous fan of flossing and the happiest guy around when the company’s good.

Q&A Discussions

Please or register to post a comment.

  1. adam sanford

    My money’s on a fixed lens offering like the RX1/R/RII models that Sony sells. 

    An all new mount based on a curved sensor would be unbelievable, but also unbelievably expensive — adapting Nikkor glass would not work, so you’d need to build an entirely new line of glass.  After the CX mount debacle, Nikon will be really wary of any spruce goose sort of gambles.

    They may make a one-off product here like the Sony RX1R or Leica Q, but I think their full-blooded mirrorless platform will do what (surely) Canon is doing, which is either a slim new mount + adapter or a full EF mount — but surely a flat sensor to allow the use of all EF lenses.

    | |
    • Kishore Sawh

      Im inclined to agree with you here in that they will make it Rx1R style, which I’m all for. But I think i’ll do another post as to where I see Nikon could go overall, curved sensor aside. I don’t think the curve is critical enough to build around it yet, but I think Nikon could very well create a new mount and could be a win. 

      | |
    • adam sanford

      Both Canon and Nikon could go either way with mirrorless — thin new mount + adapter or just pull the mirror from their SLRs and keep the mount the same. 

      Going thin *and replacing the heart of the EF/FX portfolio* is what doesn’t make sense.  FF mirrorless with a lens attached saves you no space after roughly 85mm f/2 (blame physics), so going thin should still be 90% adaptored EF/FX glass and a handful of native/thin mount lenses to maximize space savings:  a 50 f/1.8, a 35 f/2, a pancake or two, etc.

      But there’s a strong argument that if you are largely going to shoot f/1.4 primes and f/2.8 zooms, just pull the mirror and stick with the full mount (this is the Canon version of this, but would also apply to Nikon).

      | |
    • Kishore Sawh

      adam sanford “ FF mirrorless with a lens attached saves you no space after roughly 85mm f/2 (blame physics), so going thin should still be 90% adaptored EF/FX glass”  I’d agree and disagree. The problem here is thinking that space saving is what it’s about, but it’s not. Again I must reference the RX1R, which is absolutely, positively, knee wobblingly astonishing. The matched perfect lens to sensor can produce magic, and Nikon could perhaps produce it at a lower price point than Sony…or something like it. 

      I also feel that if they made a smaller mount they would make it adaptable, and I think they would. But they could also extend the life of their DSLRs with a few tweaks

      | |
    • adam sanford

      You hit the nail on the head — mirrorless is not remotely all about size.  Once people understand what mirrorless can do *better* than SLRs, eyes get opened and people understand the inevitability of mirrorless taking over.

      I only threw the 10% of lenses could be small just for small’s sake for that intractable chunk of market that has blinders on about mirrorless’ sole point is to reduce size/weight.  They are wrong about that, *but they are not a small group of people*.  Canon and Nikon would be wise to throw them a bone with their new platforms.

      | |