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)
#5
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1297817302' post='6146']

Just the other day I compared the 35 1.4G and the 35 1.4L on a 5D2... I found the 35L being better in the corners. Will post my findings soon.



GTW

[/quote]

Lenstip finds the same, GTW.

They state (regardfing wide open performance):

"Trying to avoid what is unavoidable would be foolish so let’s state at once that the graph above doesn’t impress us much. The main reason is the performance at the maximum relative aperture. In the frame centre the lens reaches only 25 lpmm when the decency level is situated near 30-31 lpmm. It is a bit sad – after all we buy a very expensive, professional lens of this class in order to get a useful relative aperture. In the case of the Nikkor we are disappointed as the lens’s performance lacks a lot here. You can remind here that the Canon EF 35 mm f/1.4L USM didn’t have any problem with providing useful images by f/1.4."



And:

"It’s worth adding that the results we got on the D3x caused so much consternation among our editorial office staff that we decided to perform one more photo session – this time based on the Nikon D200. Unfortunately the results weren’t even slightly better, remaining in perfect accordance, within the margin of error, with the numbers we had got previously."



Lenstip blames the very high come measurements for the weak resolution results at f1.4 and f2.



They conclude:

"The mere comparison between the number of pros and cons and one glance at the price of the tested lens shows that our summary can’t be positive. If you buy an expensive, fast fixed-focal lens you have every right to expect resolution records and the Nikkor 1.4/35 provides these. However, you don’t expect weak quality of the maximum relative aperture, high level of chromatic aberration, significant coma and noticeable astigmatism along with huge vignetting. "



From the posted samples we really do get to see just how unattractive the bokeh is.



http://www.lenstip.com/286.11-Lens_revie...mmary.html



So maybe you are right, GTW. I have the suspicion that this lens may not deserve the high optical rating Markus have awarded it?



I might also point out that the Canon 35mm f1.4 did not excel in their (lenstip) test either, and it had a centering defect.
  


Messages In This Thread
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX) - by genotypewriter - 02-16-2011, 12:48 AM
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX) - by Brightcolours - 02-16-2011, 12:14 PM
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX) - by genotypewriter - 02-17-2011, 04:22 AM
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX) - by genotypewriter - 02-17-2011, 04:29 AM
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX) - by genotypewriter - 02-18-2011, 04:25 AM
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX) - by Martin_MM - 02-24-2011, 02:49 PM
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX) - by Martin_MM - 02-25-2011, 10:09 AM
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX) - by Martin_MM - 02-25-2011, 04:03 PM
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX) - by genotypewriter - 03-03-2011, 01:49 AM
Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G (FX) - by Martin_MM - 03-03-2011, 08:51 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)