There is a lot of CA in that 58mm. I think I will pass on this lens. Not worth $1700 for my needs. My Sigma 35mm f/1.4 is sharper wide open than the 58mm, but it also has CA. I guess there is not much we can do about that. I think I will stick with my Sigma 35mm and 85mm f/1.4 lenses, they are very sharp wide open. However I need to go to my local camera store and look at one and make my own tests and then I'll know if it is actually that good or not.
I looked at several examples and many look soft. I guess they look that way because of the shallow depth of field. There aren't any 100% crops from the D800/E either. I did see the post from Hardcore where there were examples at night in New York and the full size files but they looked ok. His summary was:::
I really like this lens a lot more than the 50mm f/1.4G … it is better in every respect than the 50mm f/1.4G. But is it $1,200 better? That I can’t answer for you. Everyone has their own needs and criteria for lenses. So that’s a decision you’d have to weigh for yourself.
I guess I was expecting more from this lens. I presume it is still early for good examples. But.... from what I've seen so far, it just a little better than the 50mm f/1.4G and has a lot less coma. I'm sure it will be very nice at f/2.5. Anyway, this is just my opinion. I'll keep watching the forum to check for new samples.
Joe Marquez wrote:
One week with the 58.
Here's a short slideshow of images taken here on the streets and beaches of Oahu.
All but one or two shot wide open at f/1.4 so no danger of sharpness. Linky
I'm pretty surprised by the negative reviews. Although the lens might not be the sharpest at 1.4 it definitely does have attractive rendering from what I have seen so far.
From what I've seen of this lens so far, sharpness is pretty damned good at f/1.4. OK, it's not going to compare with the likes of an 85 shot at f/8, but little else does. CA isn't really much of an issue these days with decent PP software - LR and PS deal with it very well. However, as a compromise between wide open sharpness, subject isolation, and meltingly delicious bokeh there's nothing on the market that compares......
Well, I lost detail posting the way I did, but I can tell you on my MacBook Pro Retina these are sharp sharp! I'm happy with the sharpness, and I'm really happy with the rendering. I'm thinking of selling my 85 1.4G! Seriously.
311erin wrote:
Well, I lost detail posting the way I did, but I can tell you on my MacBook Pro Retina these are sharp sharp! I'm happy with the sharpness, and I'm really happy with the rendering. I'm thinking of selling my 85 1.4G! Seriously.
Interesting. I went into my local camera store today to look at one, but they were out. I'll test one soon. I am curious about its performance.
However, I would keep that 85mm! It's great and a 58mm can't take it's place. If you shoot head and shoulder portraits, a minimum of 85mm is required to control distortion of the nose. Your not supposed to take close up portraits with a ~50mm lens. But people break those rules everyday.
I had the Nikon 85mm f/1.4, but I sold it and bought the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 because it was quite a bit sharper. I also have the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 which is sharper still. This new Nikon 58mm may be nice, but is it really necessary to shoot wide open all the time? I think not. I can see shooting wide open at night, even then I would prefer f/2.0 - 2.8 at night.....unless it is really dark. If that's the case, then you will be dealing with noise from high ISO and that decreases sharpness and your back to square one...
Well, keep the samples coming and Provide 100% Crops so we can really see the IQ.
Trust us. This lens is pretty sharp wide open, not blistering sharp but on a retina type display the images are very nice. I have to figure out a way to post without losing so much resolution.
Todd, you are correct, there is no need to shoot wide open at f/1.4 all the time. However, for the past week I've been shooting wide open to see if it is possible and assess the results. I've probably made it tougher than necessary because many of my shots involve moving targets and quick candids. No doubt I would have sharper images if I stopped down, but I'm enjoying the challenge. Here are a few images from a hula performance - all shot wide open.
Thanks low 325. No rain, just snow. . At the conclusion of the performance they dropped what was supposed to be snow - because of the holidays no doubt. Not sure if it was paper or something else.
Joe Marquez wrote:
Thanks low 325. No rain, just snow. . At the conclusion of the performance they dropped what was supposed to be snow - because of the holidays no doubt. Not sure if it was paper or something else.
In any case that second shot is really excellent. Nice.
Thank you everyone for the nice comments.
This evening in Waikiki, I didn't have a tripod so I placed the camera on a wall: f/16, 2 seconds, iso 2000. I probably could have dropped iso and exposed longer, but oh well, here it is.
Reviewing some of these images, I can see the Canon 50L getting close to this lens- but close is no cigar. I love 50mm, and I'm jealous that Nikon shooters now have one that produces such amazing rendering!
. At the conclusion of the performance they dropped what was supposed to be snow - because of the holidays no doubt. Not sure if it was paper or something else.
