The only manual focus lens I have tested so far is the 28mm f3.5 AI. This lens looks great on the D800. Much better than on the D3, this is most likely due to the extra fine details that can’t be brought up with twelve megapixels.
I really don’t see lens being worse on the D800 compared to the D3, D700 etc. Yes it is possible that some lens would be the weakest point in the system, but the photos will still be better because of the increased DR and increased details.
There was a lot of speculations about the D800 before it was out in photographers hands that are proving not to be true.
Dennis
good to go..... don't laugh, but I am adding a mac mini to my computing equipment. There is a reason for it... but I am good, as I upgraded my computer last year, and it will handle the workload.
Because it is important. Given the small photosite size, diffraction becomes apparent at wider apertures than on a 12 or 24 MP sensor so you can't depend on f/8 to "clean things up".
No lens can make 50 line pairs per millimeter (or at least, center-to-borders), the D800 sensor has more than 200 pixels per millimeter.
(24*50*2*2)*(36*50*2*2)=34.56 Megapixels.
So, you have to insist in stopping down and getting close (real tests and MTF charts are at infinity, lens performance is usualy better at close distances).
IMHO, Nikon did great and hit the wall down once and for all!
I'm new to Nikon so I had the pleasure of starting from scratch in the lens department. Even still I suppose I've had great luck. I bought a used 17-35 from KEH & it is brilliant on my D800. Also, I bought a new 24-120f4VR from B&H, and it is also remarkable on the D800. I have a 35 1.4G and a 24-70 on the way, so I suppose I'm about to see what this sensor can REALLY do... But in the meantime I can wholeheartedly dismiss all that talk about certain zooms not being up to the task on the D800.
Computing power is another thing: I have a 2 year old Quad 2.3Ghz PC with 8gb of Ram, and loading a set of NEFs into Lightroom really shows the PC's age. It takes about 4 seconds per file to render the 1:1 preview for editing. This will be unacceptable when I load my first 1400-file wedding for editing.
Kittyk wrote:
stopped down is 50f1.4G good, but so is 501.8AF-D and G and they focus lot faster
My 50/1.2 AIS isn't noticeably weaker at f/2 or 2.8 compared to the new G from samples I have seen, and has loads more character. Nikon has at least two patents out for a 50/1.2 G (I think there was a new revision filed about a year ago). KittyK's experience as a pro is not unique and with the D800 out, can't see them leave the 50-pro model unfilled for long.
i think it will take a time, because 50 is rarely used. It is nice portraiture lens for DX but it seems that nikon is going to forgot the idea of pro DX. On FX is 50 rather yawn. I don't miss it really. I use 60micro when i am in urge of that focal length, which on DX is even better portrait lens.
Kittyk wrote:
not really, i would find a good one, even the one returned from calibration was still poor. it is designed to be mainstream fast glass, not pro glass.
Wow, I really ought to keep mine then, because it is truly spectacular wide open. I have used some of the best 50mm lenses in the world, Zeiss ZM F/2, Leica 50mm 1.4 Asph and I find that on film or digital, the Nikon trails only slightly behind them at any aperture, truly a pro lens.
not wide open. stopped down to f5.6 past and the difference is a lot less.
Herb...
Film_Ruled wrote:
Wow, I really ought to keep mine then, because it is truly spectacular wide open. I have used some of the best 50mm lenses in the world, Zeiss ZM F/2, Leica 50mm 1.4 Asph and I find that on film or digital, the Nikon trails only slightly behind them at any aperture, truly a pro lens.
because all my Nikon 50's are not spectacular in the slightest compared to a bunch of other 50's i own. that is unless you like a tiny sharp center area and vignetting. i tested a bunch of 50's in Nikon mount specifically looking for sharpest center and wide enough sharp zone wide open and i ended up with the Sigma. the Sigma also AF's faster than any Nikkor too. it has longitudinal CA that i don't like but i deal with it.
Herb...
Film_Ruled wrote:
Umm, I said wide open my copy is spectacular, why are people *not* getting that, !!!
Right, but that is *your* set Herb, not mine. At this point, regardless of how the Zeiss and 60 2.8 AF-S that I rented perform, I will keep my obviously unique 50 1.4G. I have pulled in tens of thousands of dollars in income from this lens alone on ad campaigns, it is has more than paid for it self.
HerbChong wrote:
because all my Nikon 50's are not spectacular in the slightest compared to a bunch of other 50's i own. that is unless you like a tiny sharp center area and vignetting. i tested a bunch of 50's in Nikon mount specifically looking for sharpest center and wide enough sharp zone wide open and i ended up with the Sigma. the Sigma also AF's faster than any Nikkor too. it has longitudinal CA that i don't like but i deal with it.
