Opticallimits
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D - Printable Version

+- Opticallimits (https://forum.opticallimits.com)
+-- Forum: Forums (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Nikon (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D (/showthread.php?tid=3152)



Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D - mst - 06-08-2011

Personally, I'd prefer the AF-S DX 35:



http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/627-nikkorafd3520dx



-- Markus


Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D - PuxaVida - 06-09-2011

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1307566962' post='9080']

Personally, I'd prefer the AF-S DX 35:



[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/627-nikkorafd3520dx"]http://www.photozone...nikkorafd3520dx[/url]



-- Markus

[/quote]



Thanks for the review Markus...



Looking at it's performance, I think it's clearly outdated by the newer 35mm for DX bodies. The only thing which is not boring about this lens is the LaCA chart.



Serkan


Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D - kiwichas - 10-31-2011

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1307566962' post='9080']

Personally, I'd prefer the AF-S DX 35:



http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/627-nikkorafd3520dx



-- Markus

[/quote]

Why do lenses that would not be questioned on film, seem great on D200, suddenly get worse on D7000??

Is the answer to go back to the D200??!!


Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D - thxbb12 - 10-31-2011

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1307566962' post='9080']

Personally, I'd prefer the AF-S DX 35:



http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/627-nikkorafd3520dx



-- Markus

[/quote]



Thanks for the review, Markus!



Yes the 1.8G is much better in all regards except distortion and CA.

Btw, I find the 35 1.8G very disappointing regarding its heavy distortion figure (for a 35mm prime that is).



Any chance you'll review the Nikkor 17-55 on the D7000?

Reviews of the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 and Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 would be nice too <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />


Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D - mst - 11-01-2011

[quote name='thxbb12' timestamp='1320098689' post='12589']

Any chance you'll review the Nikkor 17-55 on the D7000?

[/quote]



I'd love to. But it's to expensive to buy new (just for a review), while I have had several used copies with issues (mostly regarding centering), so I hesitate to buy a used one for testing.



Someone loaning one would be the best option, but I haven't been offered one so far (but also haven't really asked for one <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' /> )



[quote name='thxbb12' timestamp='1320098689' post='12589']

Reviews of the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 and Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 would be nice too <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />

[/quote]



The 17-50 OS is currently not on my list but the 17-70 review is already in progress.



-- Markus


Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D - mst - 11-01-2011

[quote name='kiwichas' timestamp='1320098097' post='12587']

Why do lenses that would not be questioned on film, seem great on D200, suddenly get worse on D7000??

Is the answer to go back to the D200??!!

[/quote]



First of all, film and sensors are very different physical constructions and consequently respond differently to lenses (or the way light hits their surfaces).



The higher pixel density of the D7000 leads to a higher measurement frequency, where a lens might behave differently. In addition, many lenses struggle on the D7000 sensor to deliver very high border resolution figures. This may be a consequence of how the D7000 sensor is physically designed (in terms of AA-filter or micro-lens layout).



That alone, however, is hardly a valid reason to go back to the D200 (or the D80, if you want to keep the body size small).



-- Markus


Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D - kiwichas - 11-02-2011

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1320138616' post='12599']

First of all, film and sensors are very different physical constructions and consequently respond differently to lenses (or the way light hits their surfaces).



The higher pixel density of the D7000 leads to a higher measurement frequency, where a lens might behave differently. In addition, many lenses struggle on the D7000 sensor to deliver very high border resolution figures. This may be a consequence of how the D7000 sensor is physically designed (in terms of AA-filter or micro-lens layout).



That alone, however, is hardly a valid reason to go back to the D200 (or the D80, if you want to keep the body size small).



-- Markus

[/quote]

Hmmm

I have a D90

Would I actually notice better images with regard to edge sharpness on the D90 vs D7000??, if so could be a small but valid reason not to upgrade to D7000 if you like your foreground to be pin sharp as in landscapes. As well as fighting off the habitual upgrade/Nikon Aquisition Syndrome for a year or two....



Thanks for the reply and a great website.


Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D - thxbb12 - 11-02-2011

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1320138363' post='12598']

I'd love to. But it's to expensive to buy new (just for a review), while I have had several used copies with issues (mostly regarding centering), so I hesitate to buy a used one for testing.



Someone loaning one would be the best option, but I haven't been offered one so far (but also haven't really asked for one <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' /> )







The 17-50 OS is currently not on my list but the 17-70 review is already in progress.



-- Markus

[/quote]



Thanks Markus, I'm looking forward to reading your review of the Sig 17-70.



Darn, I wasn't aware the Nikkor 17-55 had such bad QC especially for such a higly priced lens!

Looks like none of the mainstream manufacturers are immune to it regardless of the lens price. One would assume cheapo lenses don't get extensive QC, but pro-grade ones do. I guess this assumption is plain wrong <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Sad' />


Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 35mm f/2.0 D - Guest - 11-03-2011

[quote name='thxbb12' timestamp='1320248207' post='12629']

Thanks Markus, I'm looking forward to reading your review of the Sig 17-70.



Darn, I wasn't aware the Nikkor 17-55 had such bad QC especially for such a higly priced lens!

Looks like none of the mainstream manufacturers are immune to it regardless of the lens price. One would assume cheapo lenses don't get extensive QC, but pro-grade ones do. I guess this assumption is plain wrong <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Sad' />

[/quote]





Yes....



And out of my bagful of Nikkors, the most expensive - 70-200VR2 - had to be swapped after purchase due to decentering. Klaus/Markus would blame the VR unit, I expect. I bought all the others new also, and they're all fine



I also quite fancy a 17-55, and like you I find the reported QC issues offputting.