mawz Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
peterv wrote:
Actually, the 35 mm is also an f2,5.
Other lenses (accept the 180/3,5, the outstanding 24/3,5 and the 30-90/3,5/5,6) are all f2,8.
The S lenses are very, very good. Nothing like the Canikons. The Otus? Probably close but certainly not better from what I've seen, besides, you loose AF which you have on all S lenses (accept for the T/S) and the S equivalent to the Otus is about the same price with AF, which on the S is not the fastest, but extremely accurate.
As for the D800 vs S, lemons and oranges, totally different beasts really. The CCD is not as good as the latest and greatest CMOS WRT high ISO's (I use the S2 regularly @1250 ISO and wouldn't hesitate to print at 20x30") but otherwise the IQ from the S sensor is in a different league as far as color, acuity and tonal smoothness are concerned. Don't be misguided by the fact that the D800, the A7r (fine cameras) and the S have around the same amount of MP's, there's more to IQ.
As for the original S to E mount adapter question, I think that would be a very logical step for Metabones, Novoflex and/or Conorus. Last summer I asked the people at Conorus about this, and they replied they don't comment on future products in any way. We'll have to wait and see ...
Regards,
Peter...Show more →
Peter, there's no doubt the S2's sensor wins in terms of acuity. Tonal smoothness is a tossup IMHO (it's got more to do with pixel count and the ADC than with sensor size or type, unlike with film) and it's FAR behind the D800 in DR. Calling the IQ contest is pretty much a wash or a D800 win, the S2 has some advantages offset by the D800's (and D800E) own set of advantages which are frankly somewhat more wide ranging (DR, noise, colour accuracy). The main issue here is all the S2's real advantages in IQ are in areas where the PhaseOne backs are far better than the S2. It's nice, but it's no IQ280 (which is the real problem, where the S2 outmatches the D800, the Phase backs outmatch the S2)
Note the some of the Nikon lenses are significantly superior to anything the S system offers. There's nothing comparable to the 24 or 45 PC-E, nothing comparable to the 24/1.4G or 14-24. If you add in the Zeiss MF glass it's even more telling (the 180 is no 135 APO-Sonnar). The flip side is there's nothing in F mount comparable to the 120 macro and I will agree that if you want AF and primes the S2 probably has the better all-round lineup for lenses as the AF Nikkors in the same class are few and far between, a truly high-end system for the D800 relies highly on Zeiss MF glass. Although given the effective difference in aperture, nothing comparable to the fastest F mount lenses exists in S mount.
The Otus appears to outmatch the 70/2.5. It's not even close at wide aperture from the samples I've seen and that's no indictment of how good the 70/2.5 is, it's a superb lens and better than any other F mount normal by a fair margin. But the Otus seems to be in a class of its own in terms of outright performance at wide aperture, stopped down it's probably a wash, but given the 70/2.5 is more expensive and at best an equal that's not a great claim. Remember you need to stop the Otus down to f2 to get the equivalent DoF and total illumination of the 70/2.5 wide open.
Edited on Dec 03, 2013 at 12:43 AM · View previous versions
|