jmcfadden wrote:
dude , these exposures are within tenths of a stop of each other
Hehe....thanks for pointing that out. All shots taken within 5 minutes of each other, f/4, 1/125s. I actually had to bump the 70-200 shot up by almost a third of a stop to match the others. Not sure if the lens is actually that much different, or if there was just a passing cloud.
I think is like this:
A: Zeiss 100 f/2.0
B: Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8
C: Nikon 105/2.5
There's no doubt in my mind that Zeiss is the sharpest lens. I mean, this lens at f2.0 is sharper than the brand new Canon 100mm f/2.8L Macro lens at any aperture and the first pic looks the sharpest to me. Second is little bit worse (look at the lips of the guy) and the third is the worst. Am I right Todd?
Look at the skin in each exposure. On my monitor (not calibrated), A has the best exposure. B and C are a little lighter and I like them less. Show a histogram of skin tones.....
I'm guessing C is the 70-200 because the exposure looks pushed up a bit, there's more shadow detail in the hair. C and B could be switched though... I'm guessing A is ZF because of the overall higher contrast and the finer resolving of skin details below the eyes and the chin. The OOF areas are also lower contrast in A than in B.
They all look very similar, I have to say. I am guessing here: 100MP, 105, 70-200.
The first shot gives a greater overall impression of sharpness, especially in the skin, but part of this is because the sharp region spans nosetips to eyeballs, whereas in the second and third shot, the sharp region goes from eyeball to sideburns.
The second shot is nearly as sharp, but something about the way it renders the skin feels a little softer. The third shot just fails to be critically sharp anywhere, but it has a really nice look in the background, a little softer than the other two.
For your next test, it would be great if you could go to the minimum distance of the 105. Also, a future test with harsh light might be educational. I like the 105 very much, but it isn't as good a lens as recent top lenses, I am pretty sure. I may also be able to contribute something at some point. I am planning on picking up the 100MP soon.
Todd, this one is going to show you why the 105 2.5 AI-S or 70-200 zoom may be a better option for portraits. The Zeiss (glass #1) is so unbelievably sharp, it needs to be softened. Everyone do yourself a favor and look at the high-res version and flip back and forth with either the zoom or the AI-S....not even close. The Zeiss is 100% for sure #1. The other 2 are a little harder, but I will try. The zoom is #2 with excellent sharpness and very smooth transition to oof areas. I think it has a little more contrast than #3. The 105 2.5 AI-S has a little bit of that soft glow in #3 which is what makes it such an excellent option as far as portrait shots go. I don't want to say it isn't sharp, but it isn't in the league of the other two. If I have these two flopped, Dj, trash your 105 b/c it clearly isn't right
That being said, someone else mentioned, the focus is slightly off in the shots but I think it is still clear to see when looking at the in focus area which lens is which.
OK, I will reveal the answers below; but ahead of that, my apologies. First, for posting these threads in the first place, because I know they are at best laden with caveats, and at worst, flame-bait. But I enjoy the guessing game, and I think at least some others do as well. And second because the difference in focal planes complicated this one. I hope to do one more test, more extensive and with better focal accuracy. All I can do is green dot, though, and the tiniest movement in the subject can undo me. I will probably resort to AF fine tune, because I’ve done enough careful shooting and staring at files with these lenses to know that the green dot on my 105 puts the focal plane slightly in front of where the Zeiss and the 70-200 want it.
I don’t think anyone nailed it this time, and Roger (drerka) was the only one to make the right call on the Zeiss. TBH, I suspect the fact that he only looked at web versions helped him to see whatever subtle differences may be there, while pixel-peeping may present a distraction. A missing the forest for the trees kind of thing.
Lens A was the Nikkor 105.
Lens B was the 70-200.
Lens C was the Zeiss.
Before anyone protests, I concede that the focus point for image A, being slightly forward of the other two, was better for yielding overall sharpness in the eyes and face. This was not at all intentional. I have NO agenda here, and I did not cherry-pick images or vary the sharpening at all. I like all of these lenses a lot. The thing that makes me most happy about this test is the following: even if I can nail the focal plane identically and that reveals the Zeiss to be a sharper lens (and my guess is that would be the case), my $160 Nikkor (AI version, not AI-S, btw) is freakin’ awesome.
Going back over the thread, I should also give Smiert "honorable mention" for being the only one to believe the old AI could yield the quality of image A.
based solely on the rendering of the picket fence 