azenis Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
I own a Nikon 28mm F1.4, so I might be biased.
However, from my own observation (I was the poster ocean2059 linked), the 3 lenses came down to the following:
Sharpness:
Zeiss>Leica>Nikon
Color/contrast:
Zeiss*>Leica≈Nikon
This one is actually tough. As far as correctness goes, Otus takes the crown, however, I liked Leica's color rendition the most with Nikon following very closely after. If personal preference is the measurement instead of correctness or what the color really looks like to naked eyes, then result would be Leica≈Nikon>Zeiss
Rendition/Bokeh:
Nikon>Leica=Zeiss
Ok, this one can be highly subjective, but I am simply not a fan of the modern sterile lens look; too well corrected to a point that there's zero character in them and all look pretty much the same
Price:
Leica@$6195>Zeiss@$4995>Nikon@≈$1800 second hand in great-mint condition
I think too many people still have that crazy inflated price a few years back for the Nikon in their mind. The fact is, Nikon 24/1.4G and 28/1.8G have both pushed the 28/1.4D price down to a very reasonable range. Check eBay history and you can see even a collector grade copy with full box and everything sold for under $2000. And as I said in the Nikon thread on Nikon board, as it currently stands, the Nikon is the best 28mm F1.4 lens out there when one consider C/P ratio. The other two are a bit sharper while commanding 2x and 3x the price. I personally don't see the value in there, and TBH, unless you are pixel-peeping, there difference simply won't show. The Nikon still produces an amazing image that justifies its premium lens status with a very unique bokeh. The only reason I'd consider the other two is Zeiss for corner-to-corner sharpness/pixel-peeping happy and Leica to use with a Leica RF (the only reason I'm considering it for)
So, take your pick. There's no absolute best... only a best in the function you are intending to use for.
|