Interesting that NIKON waits in the wings with an offering that will probably match or exceed the NOCT but use modern glass selection methodology. The used NOCT market may be about to crash.
IMO all the ruffed feathers over the OTUS is odd in light of the $7,000 APO Summicron M 50 f/2 ASPH. Whatever critiques that have been applied to the OTUS 50 f/1.4 are logically the same for the Leica.
The difference with the OTUS is that apparently new performance ground has been broken at the f/1.4 aperture. It seems to me that a VERY HIGH fraction of the len's collected light falls into a 2 micron circle (The diffraction diameter at 1.4) and that moves the photographic bar several notches higher.
First off astronomy applications are now open where they were not possible with previous refractive lens technology at f/1,4. There's a potentially big comet coming (ISON) and Zeiss can expect a fair basket of orders just for that application.
It's clear from the MTF and revealed examples that slow high resolution film may be back on the table as a "new" detector. If only the players could produce an upswept characteristic curve at ISO6-12. TMX100 already offers 5 micron high contrast resolution. In other words: Slow film isn't "Slow" at f/1.4—AND folks who can afford this lens will surely ignore processing/fluid drum scanning costs.
With manual focus technique at a premium the NIKON F6 and its huge finder seems to poised for a true comeback.
I don't expect that Nikon to be anywhere as good as the Otus. And we'll have to wait for the coma control performance of this new Nikon. The Noct is known for good coma control. Other than that, the Noct is not any better than any other fast 50s.
sector99 wrote:
IMO all the ruffed feathers over the OTUS is odd in light of the $7,000 APO Summicron M 50 f/2 ASPH. Whatever critiques that have been applied to the OTUS 50 f/1.4 are logically the same for the Leica.
sector99 wrote:
First off astronomy applications are now open where they were not possible with previous refractive lens technology at f/1,4. There's a potentially big comet coming (ISON) and Zeiss can expect a fair basket of orders just for that application.
Are people really using normal lenses for comet photography?
OK. The new Noct is now launched and the deal breaker versus the Otus is Sagittal Coma.
As for MTF, we already know that each company measures MTF to it's own sauce and the only proof is to have a side by side Noct v Otus test......or check how many copies of each is put up for rent at the ManWithaBigHAt site.
Let's see what each does in the field and not on charts!
Yes, Nikon MTF is calculated at 30lp while Zeiss is measured at 40lp. It is quite clear that this new Nikkor is inferior. I don't see how one can spin it on the Nikon favor in term of IQ. However, it's cheaper, lighter, and has AF. That's most well-off Nikon shooters would need. Others would likely wait for the Sigma Art. In the end, I don't see any place for this new 1.4(slow to be a Noct). Nothing is unique about it.
hiepphotog wrote:
Yes, Nikon MTF is calculated at 30lp while Zeiss is measured at 40lp. It is quite clear that this new Nikkor is inferior. I don't see how one can spin it on the Nikon favor in term of IQ. However, it's cheaper, lighter, and has AF. That's most well-off Nikon shooters would need. Others would likely wait for the Sigma Art. In the end, I don't see any place for this new 1.4(slow to be a Noct). Nothing is unique about it.
The explanation of the graph says that the Nikon MTF is given at 10 and 30 lines per mm, not line pairs. That could be a mistake.
Toothwalker wrote:
Vignetting is very strong. Brrr.
Really? from flickr full szie sample in f1.4, there is virtually no cat eye, so vignette should be minimal as Nikon claimed. Actually, this is one of the nikon selling point
Here is my thought about this lens. posted in Nikon forum.
snapsy wrote:
There is coma but I wouldn't characterize it as a lot. Seems rather modest to my eyes.
WO at 100% in the image above link is decent but far away from sharp.(I can think of many f1.4 lens will outperform this one) Bokeh and DOF transition is wonderful though. Coma for sure from its bokeh highlight! but no much cat eye, so mechanic vignette is indeed small as Nikon claimed. the f1.4 landscape shot show decent sharpness indicate it will perform better at longer distance just as many fast glass do like Leica 50lux ASPH, Zeiss Planar etc..
A decent lens, but $1700, I don't think so....you can't sell 'rendering' this much
zhangyue wrote:
Really? from flickr full szie sample in f1.4, there is virtually no cat eye, so vignette should be minimal as Nikon claimed. Actually, this is one of the nikon selling point
Here is my thought about this lens. posted in Nikon forum.
WO at 100% in the image above link is decent but far away from sharp.(I can think of many f1.4 lens will outperform this one) Bokeh and DOF transition is wonderful though. Coma for sure from its bokeh highlight! but no much cat eye, so mechanic vignette is indeed small as Nikon claimed. the f1.4 landscape shot show decent sharpness indicate it will perform better at longer distance just as many fast glass do like Leica 50lux ASPH, Zeiss Planar etc..
A decent lens, but $1700, I don't think so....you can't sell 'rendering' this much ...Show more →
The first image does not reveal cat's eyes because the lens is stopped down. The other ones are not very telling in this regard. I find that the corner darkening in the cityscape and in the traffic-sign shot is significant - but that could also be the usual two stops in combination with some contrast enhancement.
This one was shot at WO, and there are plenty of cat's eyes. At f/1.2, they might convince people the tag of $1700. But again, there is nothing special here. Definitely doesn't help with the low res pictures on Nikon site.
Yeah, I'm very underwhelmed with the Nikon 58/1.4 samples. It does draw very nicely and the bokeh is gorgeous, but I can say the same thing about my Fuji 35/1.4...doesn't mean I'd pay $1700 for it.
If you want to charge that much for a fast normal, it needs to be near flawless - razor sharp wide open and beautiful transition to smooth bokeh. Basically, it needs to perform like a high end short telephoto does.
I thought that sample from Flickr is WO, looks like I am wrong.
I disagree that the lens is nothing special, it has very very nice Bokeh and DOF transition, and cross frame performance even at f1.4 is good.
I have to agree with value. either f1.2 or much sharper at f1.4 will help the price tag.
I am sure people can get gorgeous shots from this lens. hi, remember Leica 50lux E60 cost $4000, and this one would be close in terms of rendering, IMO.
I think if the lens were $800, you'd have a lot more praise. It does draw beautifully, but charging the kind of money they're charging sets expectations....they're charging quadruple the cost of their 50/1.4. If I'm paying $1700 for a normal lens, it had better crap gold. You can't compare to Leica....at least 1/2 the cost of Leica lenses is due to the name. And Nikon is not Leica.
hiepphotog wrote:
I don't see any place for this new 1.4(slow to be a Noct). Nothing is unique about it.
I disagree, it is the only Nikon 50 which is that good. That is enough for most people. We are the odd ones here, buying off-brand lenses for our cameras.
carstenw wrote:
I disagree, it is the only Nikon 50 which is that good. That is enough for most people. We are the odd ones here, buying off-brand lenses for our cameras.
I admit it is hyperbole on my part to say that it is not unique. Certainly it's better than the old Nikkor 50. It has quite nice bokeh. I shouldn't pass any judgement until we see more test. I guess I felt an itch when many (not here though) seem to suggest this lens would be better than the Otus. But yes, I let my personal feeling get the better . To be honest, the ZA 50/1.4 seems to be not as sharp WO as this lens.
. To be honest, the ZA 50/1.4 seems to be not as sharp WO as this lens.