+- 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 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) (/showthread.php?tid=3198)
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) - Brightcolours - 05-17-2011
[quote name='popo' timestamp='1305633137' post='8406']
At least compare like with like e.g. f/2.8 vs f/2.8. If f/2.8 is all you need then great. Otherwise there's still a hole. But to say more is probably going too off topic.
[/quote]
<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' /> <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' /> Exactly.
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) - youpii - 05-17-2011
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1305587449' post='8383']
Nice one:
http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/622-nikkorafd8518ff
-- Markus
[/quote]
I'm really amazed how well some 30-years-old lenses perform on FF digital cameras.
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) - Brightcolours - 05-17-2011
[quote name='youpii' timestamp='1305639311' post='8411']
I'm really amazed how well some 30-years-old lenses perform on FF digital cameras.
[/quote]
Nikkor AF 85mm f1.8D: 1994. 2011 - 1994 = 17 years.
Nikkor AF 85mm f1.8s: 1988. 2011 - 1988 = 23 years.
I can't imagine any 17yo or 23yo being happy when someone says they look like 30! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) - Guest - 05-17-2011
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1305640472' post='8413']
Nikkor AF 85mm f1.8D: 1994. 2011 - 1994 = 17 years.
Nikkor AF 85mm f1.8s: 1988. 2011 - 1988 = 23 years.
I can't imagine any 17yo or 23yo being happy when someone says they look like 30! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />
[/quote]
I suspect the tested lens is derived from the Zeiss Sonnar design. If so, it's much, much older than that.
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) - Guest - 05-17-2011
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1305587449' post='8383']
Nice one:
http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/622-nikkorafd8518ff
-- Markus
[/quote]
Thanks - another nice Nikkor review.
Note typo: 'expensiveand' needs un-glueing. Intro, 4th line
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) - frank - 05-17-2011
The test results are very impressive! For a photographer who just takes portraits occasionally (like me) this is a great lens, high IQ and reasonable price. For general usage this lens is also better than the 1.4D one due to the much better border and corner resolution, I think.
Frank
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) - Brightcolours - 05-17-2011
[quote name='AAC7man' timestamp='1305643970' post='8414']
I suspect the tested lens is derived from the Zeiss Sonnar design. If so, it's much, much older than that.
[/quote]
No, it isn't. Nikon has had a long and evolving line of 85mm lenses.
Just that any origin of however far back can be argued by anyone, does not make it very valid... Only when it is the exact same design/configuration.
Besides that, isn't "Sonnar" for the range finder cameras, which sit a lot closer to film?
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) - Guest - 05-17-2011
[quote name='popo' timestamp='1305633137' post='8406']
At least compare like with like e.g. f/2.8 vs f/2.8. If f/2.8 is all you need then great. Otherwise there's still a hole. But to say more is probably going too off topic.
[/quote]
Yes, it's still sharper from F2.8 and up than both. Cannikon still has a hole. They don't have a cheap F2.8 85mm lens. That's a hole. twice expensive. You have to pay twice more to get F1.8 lens even though wide open both are inferior.
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) - Guest - 05-17-2011
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1305637016' post='8408']
<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' /> <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' /> Exactly.
[/quote]
Try replying directly, and I will set you straight.
Next PZ lens test report: Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D (FX) - Brightcolours - 05-17-2011
[quote name='oneguy' timestamp='1305649737' post='8419']
Yes, it's still sharper from F2.8 and up than both. Cannikon still has a hole. They don't have a cheap F2.8 85mm lens. That's a hole. twice expensive. You have to pay twice more to get F1.8 lens even though wide open both are inferior.
[/quote]
Popo, I suspect this boy is comparing 85mm f1.8 on full frame from Canon and Nikon to 85mm f2.8 on APS-C <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />
The APS-C measurements show the Canon and Nikon to be sharper <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' /> (and offer f1.8-f2.8 rang, obviously).. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />