Vento
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
ArizonaImage wrote:
Even the S logo are different. Take a look at the 24-120 vs a 14-24...
This is solely due to the release date of the lens.
Nikon has changed the size and font of the S logo over time, as the Z-mount has been around for several years.
Similar design decisions have also been made in other areas, such as the OLED display, which is now history and can only be found on the earlier releases, Z 14-24/2.8 S, Z 24-70/2.8 S, Z 70-200/2.8 VR S, Z MC 105/2.8 VR S.
The enlarged S logo can be found on the newer releases, such as the Z 85/1.2 S, Z 135/1.8 S Plena, Z 24-120/4 S, Z 400/4.5 VR S, Z 600/6.3 PF VR S, all other Z Supertele solutions, whereas the small S logo can be found on the early Z-mount lenses.
This means on all f/1.8 S primes with the exception of the newer Plena, but also on the Holy Trinity or the Z 24-70/4 S.
Even the Z 58/0.95 S Noct comes, as one of the early Z lenses, with the old, small S-Line logo.
So it is absolutely not a quality feature, but the difference in logo design between the early Z-mount lenses of the S-line and the current ones.
The old S logo was extremely subtle and small, only noticeable at second or third glance, the S is presented in a downright shy, even modest way.
The new S logo is much more aggressive, more visible, and more in keeping with the spirit of the times.
Logically, S-line is of course an inhomogeneous group, which is inevitable when the range extends from the sinfully expensive 58/0.95 S Noct, or Z 400/2.8 TC VRS S, Z 600/4 TC VR S, exotics such as a Z 85/1.2 S, Z 135/1.8 S Plena to a Z 24-70/4 S or Z 24-120/4 S and the effort involved diverges significantly.
In any case, special effort is put into the coatings and types of glass, where the red pencil is used for Z lenses without S badge, but within the lenses marked with S there are of course still significant differences in quality and price.
The latter, in relation to the types of glass used, can already be seen clearly in the lens cross-sections posted above.
The Z 50/1.8 S has 2 ED glass elements and two aspherical lens elements.
The Z 50/1.4 has to do without the ED glass elements and make do with one aspherical element.
The same applies to the coatings, the Z 50/1.4 has to do without the Nano Crystal Coating of the Z 50/1.8 S.
These are ultimately the factors that cause more aberrations at wide apertures, poorer properties in backlighting, stray light, flaring, veiling flare, contrast loss, less consistent sharpness, or simply more character.
To be fair, it has to be said that lens design is always about compromises, so corrective measures are rarely a one-way street.
On the one hand, aspherical elements help to control various optical aberrations, for example, but they can also have a visibly negative effect on the bokeh.
However, modern designs such as the Plena or the new Sony 85/1.4 show that manufacturers in this price range are now getting better and better at combining outstanding bokeh properties with outstanding optically corrected lenses.
There are also quite a few photographers who swear by lenses with as few glass elements as possible and attribute advantages in micro contrast and 3D pop to them.
This is a difficult area because it cannot really be backed up with hard facts.
|
