Alf Beharie wrote:I think I have discovered a real gem of a lens for nighshots...The Nikon 35mm f1.4 AI-S.
nice snap shots !,
this lens shows less CA and well corrected, one of my favourite beside EF 1,4/35 L. http://www.flickr.com/photos/convert1/
Kind regards
I really liked my copy on the 5D. Compared to the 35L the 35 AI-S is less sharp wide open and has uglier bokeh. But for the price it is a real gem. It is small and very well built.
I find the 24-70/2.8 L to be quite good, not perfect, but I'd suggest better than the images you've posted which seem to have more flare than I think I've seen with the 24-70.
JohnJ wrote:
I find the 24-70/2.8 L to be quite good, not perfect, but I'd suggest better than the images you've posted which seem to have more flare than I think I've seen with the 24-70.
JJ
What flare?...The thing that impressed me the most with this lens was the total lack of star shaped flares from the bright lights.
Anden wrote:
I really liked my copy on the 5D. Compared to the 35L the 35 AI-S is less sharp wide open and has uglier bokeh. But for the price it is a real gem. It is small and very well built.
the shots are alright, IMO they aren't really impressive, and the images look soft. And on top of all that, there seems to be a good amount of flare where ever lights are present. I dont mean to rain on your parade, but im not that impressed :-/
Alf Beharie wrote:
What flare?...The thing that impressed me the most with this lens was the total lack of star shaped flares from the bright lights.
Uhm, I think you don't know what flare is. Most of the images with light sources in them have quite noticeable flare, especially the first one. The dynamic range seems to be quite low because of flare.
Alf Beharie wrote:
I have yet to see ugly bokeh from this lens:
There is no way to determine the quality of the bokeh from shots like that, since they're all closeups with "too short" DOF. Any lens will do fine bokeh-wise when used like that. Step back a bit and you'll see what ugly bokeh is about. I posted this in an other thread, but here we go again. Nikkor 35/1.4 @ f/1.4 on D700.
Edit: I still love the lens, but it is not very good until stopped down. At f/2.8 - f/5.6 it is sharp as hell in the middle, but the corners never get sharp. Not even at f/11.
JohnJ wrote:
Uhm, I think you don't know what flare is. Most of the images with light sources in them have quite noticeable flare, especially the first one. The dynamic range seems to be quite low because of flare.
JJ
Actually I dont think you know what flare is...This is flare:
JohnJ wrote:
Most of the images with light sources in them have quite noticeable flare, especially the first one. The dynamic range seems to be quite low because of flare.
i have a 35/1.4 AIS, and i love it dearly, but i agree it is not that great for night shots. Wide open, it is not a star performer with harsh contrast/lighting. I mostly use mine as a daytime fast walkaround lens, and dim light snapshots.
Makten wrote:
There is no way to determine the quality of the bokeh from shots like that, since they're all closeups with "too short" DOF. Any lens will do fine bokeh-wise when used like that. Step back a bit and you'll see what ugly bokeh is about. I posted this in an other thread, but here we go again. Nikkor 35/1.4 @ f/1.4 on D700.
Edit: I still love the lens, but it is not very good until stopped down. At f/2.8 - f/5.6 it is sharp as hell in the middle, but the corners never get sharp. Not even at f/11.
What makten just said about bokeh... His example is exactly what I experienced too.
I like the warm characteristics of these MF lenses.
Sure, they're not the latest and greatest, but they're like your best friend from childhood, you love, know them and everything about them and what's wrong with them, but love em still.
Good bokeh from a wide angle is really hard. This is a shot from the 35L wide open on the 5D. This is the best I have seen from a wide angle based on my own shooting. It is not pretty but better than the AI-S. Framed about the same as the shot above. Is it worth the price though?
