Based on the samples posted wide open there seems to be sample variation? How common is this with this lens? Some wide open shots seem very sharp while other seem soft? I'd be using this on my D850.
After initial reservations (and wore) Donald Barnatt is not alone in finding an epiphany with this Nikkor. And what pixel peepers (aka bean-counters) condemn as optical faults are also its strengths. Compare the polarity in reviews by Lenstip versus Photography Life and also many photographers with decades of experience and rated as successful professionals.
I also read this lens needs fine-tuning on DSLRs, especially shot fully open. So I ran AFFT on my D850 as soon as I finally found a decent Used 58 f1.4G (ie more affordable). So dare I suggest, calibration and "self-training" explain much of apparent variation.
The MILC benefits with AF go a long way to explain why the Z7 + 58 is such an excellent pair. Plus the MF override that kicks in with focus peaking in the Z EVF
I've had two different copies of this lens in the past year. Both behaved differently, not bad, just different. I feel in our day and age, folks want incredible breath-taking images immediately. With my experience with this lens, it honestly took time. Time to figure out the auto focus fine tune. Time to explore the strengths and weaknesses. The sharpness and focus would change depending on your shooting distance to your subject. There were a ton of factors to consider with this lens. I felt it was an incredible piece of glass. But most 'younger' folks want tack sharp and magic fairy dust right out of the box. This lens will not bring that. Not in my experience. It is there, just takes some work.
My reason for changing up what's in my bag, focal length. For my wedding and portrait work, I was feeling confined with the 58mm. I really enjoy working an 85mm, and this was just too close. I can work all day with 35 and 85 at a wedding. Having the 58, I felt trapped at that distance.
Back in the club! I haven't had the lens for a long time because I got the 105 1.4, and I wanted to cut on cost. I tried different options like the 50 Art, Tamron 45 1.8, Nikon 24-70 2.8 and even a Zeiss 50/2. There's always something missing with those lenses, despite the fact they were all great lenses.
The only lens I had to buy back after going Sony. The 50/1.4 ZA is great, but the 58G is my favorite lens ever. And on my A7R3 there is no need for calibration.
I have had three copies of this lens, and used it on three different Nikon bodies and am now using it on my A7R III. It works absolutely fantastic on my Z6, but the files from the A7R III are something else.
Here's a few of the very first images I shot on the Sony the first day I tried it with the commlite-adapter - which works pretty good with FW3.0.
I recently picked up a mint copy of this lens from eBay and wanted to confirm performance using my USAF resolution wall charts at 1:51 repro ratio on my D850. The results well exceeded expectations. Wide open resolution was 80 lp/mm centrally and 50- lp/mm at the edge and corner when focused on the central chart. At f/2 and smaller, central resolution peaked at 88 lp/mm due to sensor resolution reaching it's limit, not necessarily from lens resolution limit. By f/4, far edge resolution dropped to 44+ lp/mm due to expected curvature of field but it actually picked up to 72+ lp/mm if the lens was autofocused on the edge target using Live View. The lesson is that you should always autofocus the lens on the intended subject if needed to be rendered as sharply as possible even if near the edge of the frame.
center target at f/1.4 (100% crop)
edge target at f/1.4 (100% crop)
center target at f/4 (100% crop)
edge target at f/4 (100% crop)
edge target at f/4: refocused with Live View (100% crop)
alanwilder wrote:
I recently picked up a mint copy of this lens from eBay and wanted to confirm performance using my USAF resolution wall charts at 1:51 repro ratio on my D850. The results well exceeded expectations. Wide open resolution was 80 lp/mm centrally and 56- lp/mm at the edge and corner when focused on the central chart. At f/2 and smaller, central resolution peaked at 88 lp/mm due to sensor resolution reaching it's limit, not necessarily from lens resolution limit. By f/4, far edge resolution dropped to 44+ lp/mm due to expected curvature of field but it actually picked up to 72+ lp/mm if the lens was autofocused on the edge target using Live View. The lesson is that you should always autofocus the lens on the intended subject if needed to be rendered as sharply as possible even if near the edge of the frame....Show more →
Sound advice. Thanks
Yours confirm my findings from trial and error. The spread of AF points across the EVF in the Z7,togtehr with focus-peaking
My wife became a new mama for her Mother's Day gift:
I know these look staged but they were very impromptu and quick. We saw this Radio Flyer by the front door of the winery we were leaving dropped the pup in, and I hardly had time to focus (for obvious reasons). All shot at f/2.2 with a Z6/FTZ converted from RAW with basically no PP except for very minor contrast and resizing.
Even when not wide open, I really like the smooth transition from the focus plane to OOF areas. I feel like it works closer to our own vision and gives everything within the focus region more depth. This is a sophisticated look, IMO, and I prefer it to some lenses that may be sharper but that look flatter within the focus region with a larger separation between F and OOF resulting in the billboard cutout look.
I like these above shots a lot, first think I notice is how they are dressed and it's neither typical formal nor typical American (no pun intended) then how beautiful is this lens rendering even in such light conditions.
. But when I look at the pictures, I decide not to sell it... 
