Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX)
#21
The weather has been quite ok for a few days and I managed to snap a few sample images.



Review has been updated.



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#22
Thanks for the samples but Markus! We are dealing with rather unigue, in Nikon camp sooooo long awaited f1.4 lens and you didn´t take any f1.4 shot? Come on! :-) I guess most of us were eagery waiting for the samples to check f1.4 samples above all (to judge their sharpness) - P L E A S E could you take 2 pictures at f1.4 at least???
#23
Oops, sorry. I was sure there was at least one shot at f/1.4. However, there is also at least one shot that is somehow missing in the gallery (and that was at f/1.4, IIRC). Must have slipped through.



I'll fix this later and upload at least that one, too.



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#24
Uploaded a sample shot at f/1.4. Only one, though.



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#25
How is this lens compared to the ai or ai-s 35 1.4, in terms of image or optical quality?
#26
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1298587252' post='6341']

Uploaded a sample shot at f/1.4. Only one, though.



-- Markus

[/quote]





Thank you, you did really fast <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />. I wish we could see one more at least - am I too demanding? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' /> I mean picture of lets say building from 20-30m at f1.4 (though I realize it is not meant to use such lens this way).



Why I´m suggesting this.... Well, have you seen the lenstip.com / optyczne.pl reviews? They conclude the lens is of substandard quality at f1.4. Actually, the have tested the lens on D3X and analyzed their data using Imatest exactly like you - and the MTF results at f1.4 are really surprisingly poor. How is this possible? Can you see any problem with their testing methods? Please let me understand why there are such differences in results between your and their test (I don´t believe this is due to simple "sample variations"). You know, I don´t expect you to "bash" them or something, my interest is motivated "scientifically" only.



My plea for a shot of a building at f1.4 reflects their sample shot here:



http://pliki.optyczne.pl/nik1.4-35/nik35_f1.4_4.JPG



The whole test stars here (you have probably seen it, anyway...)



http://www.optyczne.pl/219.1-Test_obiekt..._1.4G.html



(I have just used Google tanslation to "read" it but I think it was understandable this way)
#27
I'll see what I can do, but at least for the next couple of days we'll be buried under heavy clouds here. I know that the shot I uploaded is not the best one, especially since I wasn't exactly parallel to the bar. I'll try to find a better subject, if the weather permits (the lens is scheduled to be listed on eBay next week).



Regarding lenstip, please see my comments here (in #4):



http://forum.photozone.de/index.php?/top...nstip-why/



It's impossible to tell just from their results if something went wrong with the measurement itself or if their sample had issues. However, that review caused lots of discussions in almost any Nikkor related forum ... and if you compare several (trustworthy) reviews (there are lots of them by now) it seems that lenstip is the only one who is off (by quite a margin).



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#28
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1298634669' post='6354']



It's impossible to tell just from their results if something went wrong with the measurement itself or if their sample had issues. However, that review caused lots of discussions in almost any Nikkor related forum ... and if you compare several (trustworthy) reviews (there are lots of them by now) it seems that lenstip is the only one who is off (by quite a margin).



-- Markus

[/quote]



OK, thank you for your post and links, I see.... Let me conclude: For example, if we know that Nikon D200 uses relatively strong AA filter (compared to a hypothetical EOS XY with light or no AA filter at all for instance, but both 10mpx), the same sharp lens would give lower resolution results on Nikon D200 than on such EOS camera?



(I´m referring to your statement that you sharpen a bit the RAW-converted files before the actual measurement)
#29
[quote name='Frank' timestamp='1298622652' post='6347']

How is this lens compared to the ai or ai-s 35 1.4, in terms of image or optical quality?

[/quote]



Sorry, Frank, missed your post. However, I haven't handled the Ai-S myself, so I cannot really comment.



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#30
[quote name='Martin_MM' timestamp='1298649792' post='6367']

Let me conclude: For example, if we know that Nikon D200 uses relatively strong AA filter (compared to a hypothetical EOS XY with light or no AA filter at all for instance, but both 10mpx), the same sharp lens would give lower resolution results on Nikon D200 than on such EOS camera?

[/quote]



Yes, if everything else stays the same. But usually it doesn't, there are a few additional parameters.



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)