Manual Focus Nikon Glass
/forum/topic/929565/2755

1       2       3              2755      
2756
       2757              4265       4266       end

rafaelcasd
Registered: Jan 07, 2011
Total Posts: 1427
Country: United States

This is truly my last 55mm 1.2 SC test posting, I decided to draw a quick comparison between the SC and the 50mm 1.2 ais. I did not want to work too much, therefore decided NOT to use the D800. The differences between these lenses are decades, therefore the difference should be obvious on a D3, right!

Pictures first, comments at the end. I will not post crops, but these pictures are full res in flickr if you care to inspect.

Test under bright sunlight with white subjects in the frame, worst condition for these lenses. ISO 100 D3. NO aberration correction, lateral or logitudinal, Color balance manual to sunlight. NO processing whatsoever other than NX2 RAW rendition as landscape, equal settings.

Both focused carefully in the same spot, a little flower that is in the shade of the white ones, to place the white flowers ever so slightly out of focus.

First the 55 full open

NIKON NIKKOR 55MM 1.2 SC D3 FULL APERTURE BRIGHT SUN by Rafael CA, on Flickr

The 50 full open


NIKON NIKKOR 50MM 1.2 D3 AT 1.2 BRIGHT SUN by Rafael CA, on Flickr

The 55 at 5.6, optimal aperture for detail definition


NIKON NIKKOR 55MM 1.2 D3 AT 5.6 BRIGHT SUN by Rafael CA, on Flickr

The 50mm at 5.6


NIKON NIKKOR 50MM 1.2 D3 AT 5.6 BRIGHT SUN by Rafael CA, on Flickr

My conclusions:

The 55 is a tinge warmer, the 50 a tinge sharper, but I am not too sure as these are small diferences.

Hereby I authoritatively conclude:

Maybe I am not such a good tester.

Maybe the difference between these two lenses is really not significant, at least for weed photography in sunlight. One would need to spend a full day with a D800E under all kinds of light conditions, subjects, apertures and distances, which I do not care to do.

Maybe this type of testing is a waste of time. The only good lens test is to verify a lens you bought is not damaged.

PS: Maybe a little frustrated the more beautiful rendition of the 55mm and the much sharper 50mm did not obviate their differences, casting doubt in my pre-conceptions.

Hereby I leave you more enlightened.





saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 2322
Country: United States

Sam, Chin, John and Ronny, nice images all!!

I got a bit paranoid peering at my 20 3.5 UD front element, wondering if what I am looking at are fungus streaks or small scuffs and coating scratches. I have concluded that its not fungus. The 20 UD is my roughest manual lens even though its not the oldest. Nevertheless, that got me thinking about storage of these lenses for the long term in something other than just cabinet shelves. I got hold of a couple Rubber Maid sealed containers (about 15 x 11 X 5"), and a bunch of the silica gel dry packs in each.

Almost all the lenses (except the 400 AIS) fit in the containers, in fact I organized them by wide angles and normals in one container and 85 to 300 AIS in the other. The 500 F4P came with its own case which has a number of those silica gel packs positioned around the lens.

Samy



leighton w
Registered: Nov 12, 2010
Total Posts: 9355
Country: United States

Rafael, thank you for these. My observation is that wide open, they are very similar. Stopped down to 5.6 is when the 55 looks a little warmer and maybe the 50 a tad sharper.

I think one could be happy with either version.



Reagan
Registered: Jan 10, 2010
Total Posts: 2950
Country: United States

rafaelcasd wrote:
Lieutenant Z wrote:
Hi all,
When my daughter is in the mood for a little spring cleaning......
85 1.8 HC



Did you notice that Philippe's and John's daughters look alike? MF gene similarity



+1

Reagan



asiostygius
Registered: Nov 29, 2011
Total Posts: 2622
Country: Brazil

As I sold one more garbage AF lens from the discount D600 kit (the "plastic fantastic" 24-85mm f/4.5-5.6 VR: it is trounced at borders by the 50-135mm ...), I had the opportunity to buy a really cheap (for Brazilian standards) 85mm f/2.

This is one of the first test shots, reddish clouds yesterday afetr sunset.
Though I made no formal test (some day perhaps i will made the "battle of the MF 85s), it appears to be very sharp, contrary to some reports in internet, but in accordance with our lately absent friend, Mihai,


After sunset clouds with 85mm f/2 AI by labecoaves, on Flickr

One of the first test shots with the Nikkor 85mm f/2 AI.
D600 + Nikkor 85mm f/2 AI + tripod, ISO 800, f/4 at 1.3 seconds of exposure.



jhinkey
Registered: Jan 08, 2010
Total Posts: 5996
Country: United States

rafaelcasd wrote:
Lieutenant Z wrote:
Hi all,
When my daughter is in the mood for a little spring cleaning......
85 1.8 HC



Did you notice that Philippe's and John's daughters look alike? MF gene similarity


Hah! Hopefully Philippe's daughter are more well behaved than mine.

Great B&W conversions aren't they?

John



rafaelcasd
Registered: Jan 07, 2011
Total Posts: 1427
Country: United States

asiostygius wrote:
As I sold one more garbage AF lens from the discount D600 kit (the "plastic fantastic" 24-85mm f/4.5-5.6 VR: it is trounced at borders by the 50-135mm ...), I had the opportunity to buy a really cheap (for Brazilian standards) 85mm f/2.

This is one of the first test shots, reddish clouds yesterday afetr sunset.
Though I made no formal test (some day perhaps i will made the "battle of the MF 85s), it appears to be very sharp, contrary to some reports in internet, but in accordance with our lately absent friend, Mihai,


After sunset clouds with 85mm f/2 AI by labecoaves, on Flickr

One of the first test shots with the Nikkor 85mm f/2 AI.
D600 + Nikkor 85mm f/2 AI + tripod, ISO 800, f/4 at 1.3 seconds of exposure.



Beautiful colors, I love my 85mm 2.0. use the 1.8 more but the 2.0 is just as good, IMHO



asiostygius
Registered: Nov 29, 2011
Total Posts: 2622
Country: Brazil

Thanks Rafael.
I would add the 85/2 would be perfect to stay light: it is almost the same size of a 50mm! I was luck enough to get a near pristine copy.



saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 2322
Country: United States

Jose, you get some of the best skyscapes here! Good choice to get the 85 f2 AI, you certainly are being a self-adjuvant

asiostygius wrote:
As I sold one more garbage AF lens from the discount D600 kit (the "plastic fantastic" 24-85mm f/4.5-5.6 VR: it is trounced at borders by the 50-135mm ...), I had the opportunity to buy a really cheap (for Brazilian standards) 85mm f/2.

This is one of the first test shots, reddish clouds yesterday afetr sunset.
Though I made no formal test (some day perhaps i will made the "battle of the MF 85s), it appears to be very sharp, contrary to some reports in internet, but in accordance with our lately absent friend, Mihai,


One of the first test shots with the Nikkor 85mm f/2 AI.
D600 + Nikkor 85mm f/2 AI + tripod, ISO 800, f/4 at 1.3 seconds of exposure.




saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 2322
Country: United States

First time there's better weather and sun to try out the TC16A with the 500 F4 P. This is at 1/4000s, f/9 (effective since the lens aperture was set at f/5.6), and ISO 800.

Cardinal at 800mm:







saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 2322
Country: United States

And a quick crop of the cardinal image to check how the 500 F4 P holds up after tacking on the TC16A converter.







asiostygius
Registered: Nov 29, 2011
Total Posts: 2622
Country: Brazil

Samy, fantastic details!
You managed very well this 800mm f/6.4 heavy artillery.



saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 2322
Country: United States

Just a brief note on the TC-16A. It definitely assists in the focus and in good light snaps right to the little green dot. But the caveat is one has to turn the focus ring manually to a very narrow band around the correct focus, so the photographer is still doing let's say 95% of the work.

Can't remember if I tried it with the 400 5.6 AIS, it certainly would turn it into a 640 f9. The TC is very small so it won't add much to the very doable weight/bulk of the 400 for walks/hikes. Will have to see if the 400 maintains its superb quality with the TC though. I would think a monopod would be essential for that FL.

BTW, the 800mm combo for the cardinal was balanced on the window sill. Could get better results on a stable tripod.

Samy



saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 2322
Country: United States

Thanks Jose! I have also tried to combine the TC16A and the TC301 on the 500mm to tackle the moon at 1600mm but my tripod didn't cooperate, have to work more on stabilizing that particular setup.

Samy

asiostygius wrote:
Samy, fantastic details!
Your manged very well this 800mm f/6.4 heavy artillery.



bruni
Registered: Feb 15, 2012
Total Posts: 1422
Country: Australia

asiostygius wrote:
Wow Ronny, how did you get this "misty" effect around the plane??



+1

double WOW

that's freaky Ronny - yes I'd like to know about that misty effect too.

ben



bruni
Registered: Feb 15, 2012
Total Posts: 1422
Country: Australia

Lieutenant Z wrote:
Hi all,
When my daughter is in the mood for a little spring cleaning......
85 1.8 HC




Phillippe - welcome back - been a long time even for you......too long!! .......don't do that again, please.

amazing focussing with the 85 - Curtis tells me my own copy is on its way back to me (not sure I believe him) but if it ever arrives I'll take it out and see if I can manage this kind of shot (although I know the answer - I've tried it with the zeiss 85 and there's no way - my hat off to you)

ben



designdog
Registered: Oct 05, 2004
Total Posts: 198
Country: United States

Very nice photos here! I even have some of these lenses, but could not get close to the talent on display here!

Perhaps I can be helpful though. For the moment at least, I have decided to abandon Lightroom, in favor of Photoshop. Why? Because I can do everything in Photoshop that I can do in Lightroom, plus (using Smart Objects) go back and rework the raw file after applying layers, etc. Yes, the files can get larger. but there will be fewer of them, as gone will be the tiff files you get going back and forth from Lightroom to Photoshop.

What about all of my Lightroom presets? Here is where I am helpful! I found this:
http://www.fotoff.by/lr2acr.htm
Simply upload your Lightroom preset (you can do more than one at a time) and it is converted to ACR. Then place it in the appropriate folder on your computer, and you are good to go.

This may not last. But for now...



bruni
Registered: Feb 15, 2012
Total Posts: 1422
Country: Australia

rafaelcasd wrote:
This is truly my last 55mm 1.2 SC test posting, I decided to draw a quick comparison between the SC and the 50mm 1.2 ais. I did not want to work too much, therefore decided NOT to use the D800. The differences between these lenses are decades, therefore the difference should be obvious on a D3, right!

Pictures first, comments at the end. I will not post crops, but these pictures are full res in flickr if you care to inspect.

Test under bright sunlight with white subjects in the frame, worst condition for these lenses. ISO 100 D3. NO aberration correction, lateral or logitudinal, Color balance manual to sunlight. NO processing whatsoever other than NX2 RAW rendition as landscape, equal settings.

Both focused carefully in the same spot, a little flower that is in the shade of the white ones, to place the white flowers ever so slightly out of focus.

First the 55 full open
[urlckr

The 50 full open

[url=n Flickr

The 55 at 5.6, optimal aperture for detail definition

[urlckr

The 50mm at 5.6

[urlon Flickr

My conclusions:

The 55 is a tinge warmer, the 50 a tinge sharper, but I am not too sure as these are small diferences.

Hereby I authoritatively conclude:

Maybe I am not such a good tester.

Maybe the difference between these two lenses is really not significant, at least for weed photography in sunlight. One would need to spend a full day with a D800E under all kinds of light conditions, subjects, apertures and distances, which I do not care to do.

Maybe this type of testing is a waste of time. The only good lens test is to verify a lens you bought is not damaged.

PS: Maybe a little frustrated the more beautiful rendition of the 55mm and the much sharper 50mm did not obviate their differences, casting doubt in my pre-conceptions.

Hereby I leave you more enlightened.






Rafael - I think there must be a lot of sample variation.

I agree the 55 renders more beautifully. Mine's pretty good around f2. I didn't find my 50 1.4 SC was any sharper than my 55 - but then I'm not much of a tester. In my case - my 50 1.4S seems a little sharper than the SC - but the differences are so small as to be irrelevant.....probably.

ben



saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 2322
Country: United States

And another one with the 800mm combo at 1/2500s, also effective f/9, and ISO 800.

It may be the dark eyed junco (?), possibly a juvenile. The bird was just comfortably resting against the pine cone.








Foggy14
Registered: May 01, 2010
Total Posts: 1028
Country: United States

George, very nice Wooly Mammoth.

Jorge, the b&w of the girls on the carnival ride is very eye-catching.

Thanks Samy, love the perspective of the Lincoln statue shot. The long-range cardinal is fantastic!

Philip, great "Box Hat Girl" and the garage door is very cool.

David, nice ones of the flowering tree and the great looking dogs.

Ray, I like your bridge shot, even if it's "Not the Golden Gate Bridge."

Ronny, beautiful tube shots.

Jose, terrific detail on the mosaics and a great evening sky.

Curtis, very nice ferry shots.

John, "Really Dad?" is a classic and "Scrabble" proves that MF lenses can capture fast action.

Philippe, very nice ones of your daughter.

Chin, great pano with 45mm PC-E.

Sam, beautiful Iris shot!



1       2       3              2755      
2756
       2757              4265       4266       end