NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Frank Fremerey on September 11, 2017, 10:45:21
-
Is the Neo-Noct a sharp lens?
Discussion with Paco on the AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4G started here: http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,6481.msg104660.html#msg104660
referenced was attachment one, the edited full size downscaled version
second attachment here is the unedited result from the camera (100%)
third file here (too large) http://fotokontext.de/temp/QRS_2409_ooc_100percent_sharpening.jpg is the same picture, sharpened with 1.3 radius and 500 strength, which does not seem to be too much in this case (100%)
I would describe the results of the lens at f/1.4 as:
"detailed & dreamy & of special character like the ones of the 1.2/50 or 1.4/35, also strong characters but different ones."
, the term "sharp" does not come to mind.
Questions:
Is this the way the lens should be?
Do we see sample variation here / in general?
Do I need to calibrate the lens for my D500/D850 pair?
-
to me, the 58/1.4G isn't designed to be chart-topping (sharp) but it has many subtleties of its own that harks back to the old Nikkor days where lenses were designed to render "artistically". again, this is just me. :o :o :o
-
Here is a thread with a lot of images with the 58mm 1.4 AFS
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,7.0.html
I think it is sharp enough,,,
-
Focus variation may be more important than sample variation.
Dave
-
to me, the 58/1.4G isn't designed to be chart-topping (sharp) but it has many subtleties of its own that harks back to the old Nikkor days where lenses were designed to render "artistically". again, this is just me. :o :o :o
Agree with the above remark, if 'absolute' sharpness is what you're after, the 1.4/58 AFS may well be the worst choice, especially considering its price
Have no personal experience with them (happy with my 1.4/58mm) but in many test (FWIW) eg Zeiss and/or Sigma 50mm lenses are supposedly much 'better' in that respect, there are even claims even the 'humble' 1.4/50mm AFS Nikkor is.
Love my 58mm for its 'unsharpness', that said, have plenty of images where even when used wide open the result is plenty sharp for me
(although I must admit I most of the time 'mess up' the sharpness with my sloppy 'hand held' shooting technique)
-
When shooting at large apertures at relatively close distance, say 1.5m DoF is very thin such that a small error can rob the image of sharpness. Slight body movement can blow the focus. I found I could increase in focus shots with my 50/1.2 AIS by leaning on a sold object. My focus technique was better than my ability to stand still.
Dave
-
58/1.4G is a fast standard lens without CRC and of a very conventional rack focus type, which suggests that its character changes rather dramatically according to the focusing distance. I think it is designed, just like the old venerable Noct (and possibly Ais 50/1.2, too), to be sharp and coma-free at distance and reasonably sharp but not bitingly so at the portrait distances.
-
Frank, there are many better folk here but I use the Df , 58 1.4G as my standard walkabout lens and particularly from afternoon till late evening. It is not the sharpest lens on the block but I normally shoot it at f1.8-f2 so plenty sharp for people. I thought something was wrong with my lens until the guy that runs NPS for West India came to see me. He saw the Df, 58 on my desk and asked if he could try it (he had never used either). He took shot a of me on the other side of the big Desk which was too sharp for this old guy (at f1.4), that was a wake up call. Over the years of shooting fast action my techniques had really become sloppy. Before the 58 1.4 I used the 60 2.8G as my standard lens (now that is sharp) . I've sold many lenses recently but the 58 1.4 is a keeper.
I really do not want super sharp portraits. My 85 1.4D is not super sharp at f1.4 but still love it. Keep working with it and learn when you want to use it.
All the best and I am certainly tempted by the D850 ;)
Tom
-
Tom: I will shoot and post more with the D850 and the Neo Noct. I will also check calibration with live view and calibration. You did see the RAW files???
-
I tend to use this lens more in the 1.8 to 2.8 range. I think there is a significant jump in sharpness from 1.4 to 1.8 but I´m just getting use to the particularities of the lens and playing with it.
Some different uses in which I think the full open both works and was called for. All with the d750 in fx mode
1, that little boy was the perfect subject
2, iso 3200 + 1.85 in post @ 1.4 and I like it a lot
3 Portrait in very dim light from the sides and back
In every case sharpness compared with the rest of the frame makes it look even sharper than it is.
-
58/1.4G is a fast standard lens without CRC and of a very conventional rack focus type, which suggests that its character changes rather dramatically according to the focusing distance. I think it is designed, just like the old venerable Noct (and possibly Ais 50/1.2, too), to be sharp and coma-free at distance and reasonably sharp but not bitingly so at the portrait distances.
This.
Frank, by all means try to fine-tune the 58/1.4 on the D850; mine needs +18 on my D850.
-
This. Frank, by all means try to fine-tune the 58/1.4 on the D850; mine needs +18 on my D850.
Thank you, will do. I got disappointing results even at f/5.6. I had it at the service with the D600 and it worked from the start with the D500, so I WILL check calibration with the 850. At the horses it worked well at a distance...
-
Thank you, will do. I got disappointing results even at f/5.6. I had it at the service with the D600 and it worked from the start with the D500, so I WILL check calibration with the 850. At the horses it worked well at a distance...
Went out to test calibration (done at short distance in house) at landscape distances, the +18 is then to much. Not easy to get this exactly right. Grr, I planned to take pictures with the D850...
-
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the purpose of this lens was to reduce coma at wide apertures, f/1.4 to f/2.0 and better control spherical aberration. It's primary purpose I would think is night photography not that it can't be used at other times. I would guess the sweet spot for this lens would be between f/4.0 and f/5.6. I can't afford one; I bought an AF-S 50/1.8G.
Dave
-
Went out to test calibration (done at short distance in house) at landscape distances, the +18 is then to much. Not easy to get this exactly right. Grr, I planned to take pictures with the D850...
I just came back from shooting an interesting relatively new phenomenon in German Culture. Watch out for my entry in the daily blog tonight. I had the choice of D500 with 1.8/2OG or D850 with Neonoct or D850 with 1.4/35 Ai-S. I went for the last combo because I do not have to calibrate a MF lens for AF and I wanted to further test MF capability of the new camera. MF is better than it is with the D600 but worse than it is with the D500.
-
My experience with the 58/1.4G is that it is quite sharp at mid to long distances even wide open, but in the near distances (say less than 2-3m) it does get softer at f/1.4, and some stopping down in the near range may be used to alleviate the situation. This is what I would recommend.
Although the D5 autofocuses the f/1.4 AF-S lenses generally excellently I do find that with the 58mm in the near distance range (close to minimum focus distance) at f/1.4 the focus isn't very consistent from shot to shot. At a distance of a few meters, no problems.
I think Nikon designed this lens to have some classical portrait lens characteristics especially since some users used the Noct 58/1.2 on DX as a portrait lens, so out of focus rendering is emphasized and sharpness not as much, when using it in the near distance range. And then it turns into a night light lens towards longer distances.
What I love about the 58/1.4 is the beautiful colour rendering and behavior in backlight which is consistent with the others in the nano coated f/1.4 series. It does have bit of tendency for cat's eyes as does the 105/1.4.
If you want to shoot sports (e.g. vaulting) with the 58/1.4 then I think it would work ok as the horse is quite big and we're clearly outside of the near distance zone of this lens. However, with these lenses you aren't going to get quite as fast focusing as you would (say) with a 24-70/2.8E. If the vaulting is indoors then the low light can also contribute to some focusing errors but the D850 should be as good as any in that respect. If it looks like it's needed, don't be afraid to stop down to f/2 or f/2.8; it's not like the "look" completely disappears. I quite like the 58/1.4G at f/2.8 by the way. You could also compare to 60 AF-S Micro to see how they compare at f/2.8; the 58 has less vignetting at f/2.8 but both have nice looks to the image.
Focus technique is an important topic for any sports photography situation, but especially if you're shooting at f/1.4. My favorite AF area mode is the 9-point dynamic in the D5; on the other hand if you have low light, and don't mind the larger area, group area may perform better but if you are shooting a horizontal image of the horse, then you may not be able to move the group high enough for the rider's head. In the vertical orientation this is easily done with group area. With dynamic area one can move the primary point to the edge or even corner of the focus sensor. However, dynamic area requires a certain amount of precision in using it as the camera basically assumes that you're pointing the primary point always on the subject and only assists briefly with the other points if there is nothing to focus on under the primary point. But if you keep this in mind dynamic area can work really well, especially the smallest one (9-point). Perhaps I would try 9- or 25-point for horizontal shots with a rider and group area for vertical shots.
Do remember that you don't have to shoot at f/1.4 even if you can. :D You might find that there is an intermediate setting which gives the best look to an image. (I tend to shoot way too much myself with 1.4 lenses wide open and seem to have forgotten that excellent results can be obtained also at f/2.8.)
-
Thank you Ilkka. Very helpful post. I conclude that a shorter focal length with the D500 might be the better choice in the rider head example because of the near full coverage of the picture area with AF points.
I will also try the 9 point that the D850 inherited from the D5. Thank you again
-
It is a bit like comparing apples and oranges, but recently I tried to compare sharpness of my new 28 mm 1.4E to the 58 mm 1.4G.
In short the 58 mm doesn't compare very favourably regarding sharpness. It renders out of focus areas very nicely, though.
Just comparing the "abbreviation goobledygook" printed on the lens as well as size, diameter, and weight, you instantly feel that Nikon went an extra mile for the more recent 1.4E lens designs.
My guess is that it won't take long until Nikon will announce a new 50 mm 1.4E - similar price class as the 28 mm E and 105 mm E, probably a similar size/ weight class, too.
Hopefully able to provide some sample photos soon.
Cheers,
Günther
-
It is a bit like comparing apples and oranges, but recently I tried to compare sharpness of my new 28 mm 1.4E to the 58 mm 1.4G.
In short the 58 mm doesn't compare very favourably regarding sharpness. It renders out of focus areas very nicely, though.
Per this discussion, at what distance(s) did you compare these two?
Just wondering...
-
Per this discussion, at what distance(s) did you compare these two?
Just wondering...
City landscapes.
Distance: ca. 50m to several kilometres.
-
In theory, your test distances should be a 'best case scenario' for a lens calculated for large distance.
Is it possible that the lens is calculated for an intermediate distance such 3 meters, and that it's performance falls away at both infinity and close range? I think it's possible considering the lens has been reported here to use unit focusing.
-
Before, in analogic days, it seems that most lenses were optimally corrected for 1:20 to 1:40 reproduction ratio, i.e. for 20 to 40 times the focal distance. It was a good compromise for a good rendition from infinity to 10 times focal lenght.
Micro-Nikkors and other macro lenses were generally corrected for an optimum rendition at 1:10 to 1:5 (depends on makers)... So better corrected for close-ups and macro.
With CRC, Nikon began (since 1967) to correct for long and short distances...With aspheric lenses and ED more correction / progress came along.
But what is today's standard ? Is there a rule for lenses' optimum focus distance and correction ?
Or is this a well kept secret ? Is a "portrait lens" like 1,4/85 or 1,4/105 better corrected for close-ups than other lenses or is it like before optimally corrected for 1:20 or 1:40 i.e. 2m-4m distance ?
Thanks for your precious knowledge !
-
I tried portrait distance and got -2 in the first run. They say you should repeat the process to check for accuracy.
-2 appears to be within the margin of error.
-
I didn´t have to adjust mine with the d750
-
Keep in mind, sharpness is a subjective value. Resolution is what most people are talking about here... The 105/1.4 and 28/1.4 has more resolution wide open. All these lenses have beautiful bookeh, but the 58G wins. Good and natural transitions make this lens a winner, and if you nail the focus the pictures will look as sharp as anything! A color rendition better than any Nikkor I have used. Compared to the 50/1.4G the 58 has more resolution, lets say just enough. For me the 50mm detoriates from f/2 to f/1.4 with a busy bookeh and the resolution at f/1.4 is just on the wrong side. It has been said before, if you understand what this lens is about... The new 105 and 28 did not make me as excited as the 58 when I got them. Though in my mind together they make the holy trinity!
-
Here's a fun, colorful one of my daughter, love the color but I don't worry too much about sharpness!
-
The holy trinity? Wow. I never liked 28mm on film or full frame. On DX it is a very useful angle of view for me, as normal lens as it can get.
Similar thoughts on the 58mm. Being a perfect portrait lens on DX it is a very short tele on FX. I am used to that angle because I have used 60 Micro lenses a lot on my D3.
I want to love the 58 but I am still unsure if I will love it.
I do speak the 85 fluidly on FX/DX, same for 24, 35, 50, 105, 300.
58mm seems either to short or too long on FX. I still cannot previsualise and only see the picture when looking through the viewfinder. Too bad. So I often go on training sessions, only take the 58 and the 850 to force myself into making something of that "dream combination" ... Either I learn to make it sing or I will use the 58 as "DX only".
-
The holy trinity? Wow. I never liked 28mm on film or full frame. On DX it is a very useful angle of view for me, as normal lens as it can get.
Similar thoughts on the 58mm. Being a perfect portrait lens on DX it is a very short tele on FX. I am used to that angle because I have used 60 Micro lenses a lot on my D3.
I want to love the 58 but I am still unsure if I will love it.
I do speak the 85 fluidly on FX/DX, same for 24, 35, 50, 105, 300.
58mm seems either to short or too long on FX. I still cannot previsualise and only see the picture when looking through the viewfinder. Too bad. So I often go on training sessions, only take the 58 and the 850 to force myself into making something of that "dream combination" ... Either I learn to make it sing or I will use the 58 as "DX only".
It's a habit: I come from classical 28/ 50/ 135 mm lens kits (Kodak Retina Reflex II from the 60s).
I also tried 35/ 85 mm and realized that I needed another shorter lens for landscapes.
So at least for me 28 mm is the optimal compromise between 35 mm and wider landscape photos: most often 28 mm suffices.
I never felt much love for 50 mm in the past. But in the meantime I realized that 50 mm really is the most universal focal length (again: for me!). It corresponds quite closely to the human eye angle of view. It's well suited for portrait work from a short/ medium distance.
I am happy with my 28/ 58 mm combination which is actually pretty close to my combination used around Killin (25/ 50 mm).
I am rather unsure whether I'd really make use of a tele lens like the 85mm or 105 mm, though... again a matter of habits... ;-)
Cheers,
Günther
-
It's a habit: I come from classical 28/ 50/ 135 mm lens kits (Kodak Retina Reflex II from the 60s).
I also tried 35/ 85 mm and realized that I needed another shorter lens for landscapes.
So at least for me 28 mm is the optimal compromise between 35 mm and wider landscape photos: most often 28 mm suffices.
I never felt much love for 50 mm in the past. But in the meantime I realized that 50 mm really is the most universal focal length (again: for me!). It corresponds quite closely to the human eye angle of view. It's well suited for portrait work from a short/ medium distance.
I am happy with my 28/ 58 mm combination which is actually pretty close to my combination used around Killin (25/ 50 mm).
I am rather unsure whether I'd really make use of a tele lens like the 85mm or 105 mm, though... again a matter of habits... ;-)
Cheers,
Günther
+1
I enjoy the 28/58 combo as well, and remain uncertain about short tele. I had the 85 1.8G which is wonderful, but sold it because I was just using the 58. Recently purchased a 105mm f/2.5 Ai (mostly because of reading discussions on this web site! It's all NikonGear's fault!)...so...I guess I'll see what happens, but at least the price was right. I agree with you about a matter of habits, we all see differently with our lenses. And well, thank goodness for that because what would we have to argue about otherwise? ;)
-
Under the category of FWIW: I find the 58mm to be two lenses. A unique rendering from 1.4 to about 4. And stopped down 5.6 and beyond it sharpens up like a regular 50. That's my take on it though. Are your experiences similar?
-
It never ceases to amaze me how many people don't actually understand the lens they're interested in ...
NO, the Neo-Noct is *NOT* sharp ... compared to any lens that is considered authentically-sharp ... and that is by design.
Portrait lenses are purposefully "unsharp" ... but designed to have special rendering ... which is exactly what the 58/1.4 embodies.
Even a damned cell phone "purposely blurs" portraits, and renders such images differently, when it recognizes this intent.
I have read hundreds ... and hundreds ... and hundreds ... of posts and cries for "why" the 58 f/1.4 "isn't sharp" ... by those who understand nothing.
And, by the same token, I have read hundreds ... and hundreds ... and hundreds ... of posts and exultations of those who love the 58/1.4 because of its rendering ... by those who understand the purpose of the lens.
And that is pretty much a summary of everything that's ever been discussed about this optic.
-
I thought the NOCT and neo-NOCT were designed for night photography where points of light are rendered as comet like splotches at large apertures by conventional lenses, not as points light.
Dave Hartman
-
The Noct. is the name Nikon coined to reflect the actual indended purpose of the original nocturne 1.2 AI/S lens.
The 'neo-noct' is a term zealots coined in their failed attempt to liken the two (unrelated) lenses together ... based on a misunderstanding of each lens' intended purpose.
-
The Noct. is the name Nikon coined to reflect the actual indended purpose of the original nocturne 1.2 AI/S lens.
The 'neo-noct' is a term zealots coined in their failed attempt to liken the two (unrelated) lenses together ... based on a misunderstanding of each lens' intended purpose.
Erik Lund is a Zealot???
-
The Noct. is the name Nikon coined to reflect the actual indended purpose of the original nocturne 1.2 AI/S lens.
The 'neo-noct' is a term zealots coined in their failed attempt to liken the two (unrelated) lenses together ... based on a misunderstanding of each lens' intended purpose.
It is true that "Neo Noct" is no official Nikon designation.
But shortly after the release of that lens, a Brussels photographer (working at the main camera shop: PCH, rue du Midi) and (old) Noct owner showed me some night shots he made with both lenses, photos that were also published in a photo magazine. The comparison was rather in favour of the "neo noct", especially as far as flare is concerned. So the term is not undeserved.
Concerning the "other personality", I had a similar experience with the Noct : stopped down, and field curvature aside, it becomes a very sharp lens, while contrast always seems to be there (which is the biggest difference with the 50/1.2).
Bokeh-wise, the noct has a good reputation, at least compared to other fifties (I think the Zeiss MP is better though), but the neo noct seems to be even better. So once again, the designation is not inappropriate.
One thing is sure, none of these lenses have been designed to yield optimum results at test chart shooting (which probably triggered some howling in the marketing department). So what. Should I say "fortunately" ?
-
It is true that "Neo Noct" is no official Nikon designation.
But shortly after the release of that lens, a Brussels photographer (working at the main camera shop: PCH, rue du Midi) and (old) Noct owner showed me some night shots he made with both lenses, photos that were also published in a photo magazine. The comparison was rather in favour of the "neo noct", especially as far as flare is concerned. So the term is not undeserved.
Concerning the "other personality", I had a similar experience with the Noct : stopped down, and field curvature aside, it becomes a very sharp lens, while contrast always seems to be there (which is the biggest difference with the 50/1.2).
Bokeh-wise, the noct has a good reputation, at least compared to other fifties (I think the Zeiss MP is better though), but the neo noct seems to be even better. So once again, the designation is not inappropriate.
One thing is sure, none of these lenses have been designed to yield optimum results at test chart shooting (which probably triggered some howling in the marketing department). So what. Should I say "fortunately" ?
I must :) when i read this, well put Airy.
-
It never ceases to amaze me how many people don't actually understand the lens they're interested in ...
NO, the Neo-Noct is *NOT* sharp ... compared to any lens that is considered authentically-sharp ... and that is by design.
Portrait lenses are purposefully "unsharp" ... but designed to have special rendering ... which is exactly what the 58/1.4 embodies.
Even a damned cell phone "purposely blurs" portraits, and renders such images differently, when it recognizes this intent.
I have read hundreds ... and hundreds ... and hundreds ... of posts and cries for "why" the 58 f/1.4 "isn't sharp" ... by those who understand nothing.
And, by the same token, I have read hundreds ... and hundreds ... and hundreds ... of posts and exultations of those who love the 58/1.4 because of its rendering ... by those who understand the purpose of the lens.
And that is pretty much a summary of everything that's ever been discussed about this optic.
Aggressive Angst is bewildering and not needed on this Forum
Use of the term Neo-Noct / "derived from the Noct-Nikkor etc" is widespread WRT the 58 f1.4G. This includes extensive discussion with Nikon designers in Eyes of Nikon, the official book dedicated to Nikkor lens. None other than from the mouth of Haruo Sato, who had waited for decades to apply his concepts, building on what Nikon had acheived with the Noct-Nikkor.
In the [translated] words of Haruo Sato, "The design philosophy of "the point appears in a point" was originally passed down the design philosophy of Noctonikor. Initially I was thinking of bearing the name "Noct". However, the point image is greatly improved so that the depiction will be better, and the MTF is also improved further, so there are parts that exceeded the performance in terms of Nikon's Nikkor. Therefore, we decided not to use the name of the Noct."
https://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/621449.html
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/2210/AF-S-NIKKOR-58mm-f%252F1.4G.html "Flattering, versatile 58mm focal length (87mm equivalent on DX-format D-SLRs) that pays homage to the acclaimed Noct Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 lens.....Paying homage to the acclaimed Noct Nikkor 58mm f/1.2, the 58mm focal length falls in the sweet spot between a standard lens (50mm) and a medium telephoto lens (85mm). "
-
OK. Now we know the official term is not neo noct but "hommage to the noct"
Frankly, I can live with both.
I did not fall in love with this lens at first sight. But the longer I own it the more I love it.
-
It is a very useful lens for non portraiture pics, too:
(f/1.4, sorry for the small file size - quick conversion on my smartphone)
(http://nikongear.net/revival/gallery/0/262-250318132306.jpeg)
-
It is true that "Neo Noct" is no official Nikon designation.
But shortly after the release of that lens, a Brussels photographer (working at the main camera shop: PCH, rue du Midi) and (old) Noct owner showed me some night shots he made with both lenses, photos that were also published in a photo magazine. The comparison was rather in favour of the "neo noct", especially as far as flare is concerned. So the term is not undeserved.
Concerning the "other personality", I had a similar experience with the Noct : stopped down, and field curvature aside, it becomes a very sharp lens, while contrast always seems to be there (which is the biggest difference with the 50/1.2).
Bokeh-wise, the noct has a good reputation, at least compared to other fifties (I think the Zeiss MP is better though), but the neo noct seems to be even better. So once again, the designation is not inappropriate.
One thing is sure, none of these lenses have been designed to yield optimum results at test chart shooting (which probably triggered some howling in the marketing department). So what. Should I say "fortunately" ?
I think I have to retract my statements.
According to Nikon's own literature the two do seem to share objectives:
Of the Original Noct. 58mm f/1.2 (taken from Thousand and One Nights (http://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0016/index.htm)), Nikon says:
- "The Noct NIKKOR that was said to be named after "Nocturne" was released in 1977, the same year the release of the Nikon Photomic A. This lens, as was called "Noct", was designed for taking a picture at night with fully opened aperture stop."
...It was the Noct NIKKOR that was developed for correcting the troublesome sagittal coma flare produced at the maximum aperture.
Of the 58mm f/1.4G (taken from Nikon USA (https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-s-nikkor-58mm-f%252f1.4g.html)), Nikon says:
- "the AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4G, a lens designed to excel in low-light and nighttime applications but with characteristics you'll enjoy for so much more. Its fast f/1.4 maximum aperture produces outstanding evenly lit images with edge-to-edge sharpness—virtually no sagittal coma or light falloff.
In fact they do appear to have been crafted to meet similar objectives.
Thus I'll retract what I said previously :-X
-
It is true that "Neo Noct" is no official Nikon designation.
But shortly after the release of that lens, a Brussels photographer (working at the main camera shop: PCH, rue du Midi) and (old) Noct owner showed me some night shots he made with both lenses, photos that were also published in a photo magazine. The comparison was rather in favour of the "neo noct", especially as far as flare is concerned. So the term is not undeserved.
Concerning the "other personality", I had a similar experience with the Noct : stopped down, and field curvature aside, it becomes a very sharp lens, while contrast always seems to be there (which is the biggest difference with the 50/1.2).
Bokeh-wise, the noct has a good reputation, at least compared to other fifties (I think the Zeiss MP is better though), but the neo noct seems to be even better. So once again, the designation is not inappropriate.
One thing is sure, none of these lenses have been designed to yield optimum results at test chart shooting (which probably triggered some howling in the marketing department). So what. Should I say "fortunately" ?
+ 1
Airy, I agree with your take on the 58.
Here's my favorite article on the Neo-Noct by Steve Simon: https://www.thepassionatephotographer.com/the-nikkor-58mm-f1-4g-lens-me-a-review/
Steve's in alignment with your assessment I think. His article was the tipping point for me to splurge and buy this lens, and no regrets thus far because it is a fun and versatile lens to use, and a reminder that sharpness is not everything. Of course we may desire great sharpness, but for me (emphasis on "for me") sharpness is over-valued because it is one of the easiest aspects of a lens to measure (and again, it is quite fine if others value sharpness more than me for the kind of photography they enjoy). The Neo-Noct and lenses like it, so-called "character lenses," are much more difficult to "measure" because whether or not you appreciate such a lens is quite a subjective decision - and the arguments on such lenses can be massive. In this regard, the passion that so many on NikonGear have for the Vintage Nikkors comes to mind, and the synergy Bjorn describes between his 105mm f/2.5 and Df is a fine example. I do believe we bond with our gear, and that is a value that exceeds all measurements. We just can't expect others to share our passion necessarily, horses for courses as they say [a].
[a] Horses for Courses: (British Proverb) Different people are suited to different things or situations.
-
+ 1
Airy, I agree with your take on the 58.
Here's my favorite article on the Neo-Noct by Steve Simon: https://www.thepassionatephotographer.com/the-nikkor-58mm-f1-4g-lens-me-a-review/
Steve's in alignment with your assessment I think. His article was the tipping point for me to splurge and buy this lens, and no regrets thus far because it is a fun and versatile lens to use, and a reminder that sharpness is not everything. Of course we may desire great sharpness, but for me (emphasis on "for me") sharpness is over-valued because it is one of the easiest aspects of a lens to measure (and again, it is quite fine if others value sharpness more than me for the kind of photography they enjoy). The Neo-Noct and lenses like it, so-called "character lenses," are much more difficult to "measure" because whether or not you appreciate such a lens is quite a subjective decision - and the arguments on such lenses can be massive. In this regard, the passion that so many on NikonGear have for the Vintage Nikkors comes to mind, and the synergy Bjorn describes between his 105mm f/2.5 and Df is a fine example. I do believe we bond with our gear, and that is a value that exceeds all measurements. We just can't expect others to share our passion necessarily, horses for courses as they say [a].
[a] Horses for Courses: (British Proverb) Different people are suited to different things or situations.
Thanks for the link - that article makes for an enjoyable read. Great photos too :-) Another endorsement for the Neo-Noct is from David Yarrow, described as his Desert Island lens
https://davidyarrow.photography/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Digital-Photographer-2015-dec.pdf (https://davidyarrow.photography/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Digital-Photographer-2015-dec.pdf)
https://www.pressreader.com/australia/nphoto/20161222/282282434953684 (https://www.pressreader.com/australia/nphoto/20161222/282282434953684)
FYI, links to other reviews I've logged:
http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/nikon-lens-reviews/nikon-58mm-f14g-af-s.html (http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/nikon-lens-reviews/nikon-58mm-f14g-af-s.html)
http://www.samhurdphotography.com/reviews/nikon-58mm-1-4-review-in-depth-lens-review/ (http://www.samhurdphotography.com/reviews/nikon-58mm-1-4-review-in-depth-lens-review/)
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_afs_nikkor_58mm_f_1_4_g_review (http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_afs_nikkor_58mm_f_1_4_g_review)
http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/nikon/58mm-f1.4g-af-s-nikkor/review/ (http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/nikon/58mm-f1.4g-af-s-nikkor/review/)
http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/883-nikkorafs5814ff (http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/883-nikkorafs5814ff)
https://fstoppers.com/originals/why-i-love-nikon-58mm-f14g-lens-70168 (https://fstoppers.com/originals/why-i-love-nikon-58mm-f14g-lens-70168)
-
Here's my favorite article on the Neo-Noct by Steve Simon: https://www.thepassionatephotographer.com/the-nikkor-58mm-f1-4g-lens-me-a-review/
Thank you for posting this link. Steve Simon is a moderator on the Flickr Digital Learning Center. You might like these...
https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondigitallearningcenter/discuss/72157664009720315/?search=58mm
(https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondigitallearningcenter/discuss/72157664009720315/?search=58mm)
https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondigitallearningcenter/discuss/72157675308273552/?search=58mm (https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondigitallearningcenter/discuss/72157675308273552/?search=58mm)
https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondigitallearningcenter/discuss/72157650328229443/?search=58mm (https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondigitallearningcenter/discuss/72157650328229443/?search=58mm)
Dave
-
don't know if anybody mentioned this.
I vaguely recall the lens designer (Sato-san) mentioning that this lens is a homage to the 58/1.4 (https://richardhaw.com/2017/06/20/repair-nikkor-s-5-8cm-f1-4-auto/) :o :o :o
the lens wasn't calculated for sharpness but for pleasing rendering. I talked to the designer and he had the rendering of human skin in mind when he calculated this. it is a very bold move by Nikon to make such a lens in modern times where MTF charts are all the rage.
I failed to appreciate the lens when it came out but apart from not affording it, i can see no reason not to dislike it.
-
SHB "not to like it" ?
The prince of typos is wondering.
Dave
I wish I could see a reason to dislike it but personally I can't. I had to settle for an AF-S 50/1.8G. :(
-
"not to like it" ?
The prince of typos is wondering.
sorry, hay fever medication is making me drowsy :o :o :o
-
sorry, hay fever medication is making me drowsy :o :o :o
I usually have to make several goes at a post to get it right. I find typos and cut & paste errors in things I've written months back.
Dave
-
Chambeshi and David: Thank you for the links!
-
Thanks for the link - that article makes for an enjoyable read. Great photos too :-) Another endorsement for the Neo-Noct is from David Yarrow, described as his Desert Island lens
I think it would be my Desert Island lens too, although I would be trying to smuggle a 28 with me as well, lol.
-
A thought for the impoverished who might want to use an AF-S 58/1.4G neo-NOCT for candids, street and night photography: if you have a 50/1.8G and a high MP camera you can stand the same distance as you would with a 58mm lens using a 50mm (really 51.6mm) and shoot wide open. Later you crop a bit and all or almost all is well. No this won't help with coma (sagittal coma flare) but that's life in the slow lane.
Dave Hartman who wonders how many here like bats and their wings?
Should "sagittal" remind me of trigonometry and analytical geometry i took long ago?
-
I'm sure most here know this but for those who forget sharpness is much about texture and light that reveals it. A photograph of a church by Ansel Adams taught me this many years ago. The church was white with wood siding. It looked as though it had recently been painted however the wood siding was weathered and so the surface of the church was rich in texture.
A lens with high resolution and low local contrast will give an image that doesn't look so sharp. A lens with moderate resolution and high local contrast can give an image that looks very sharp. Light that bushes across a textured surface with reveal that texture.
Finally smart sharpening with a very small radius like 0.3 pixels can trick the eye into seeing a sharper image while heavy sharpening with a larger radius can destroy data and reduce resolution.
Dave who needs a sharper image but can't afford one.
-
don't know if anybody mentioned this.
I vaguely recall the lens designer (Sato-san) mentioning that this lens is a homage to the 58/1.4 (https://richardhaw.com/2017/06/20/repair-nikkor-s-5-8cm-f1-4-auto/) :o :o :o
the lens wasn't calculated for sharpness but for pleasing rendering. I talked to the designer and he had the rendering of human skin in mind when he calculated this. it is a very bold move by Nikon to make such a lens in modern times where MTF charts are all the rage.
I failed to appreciate the lens when it came out but apart from not affording it, i can see no reason not to dislike it.
I have the greatest respect and gratitude to Sato-San - and his team - for pursuing the concept of this remarkable optic (and others) through to completion :-) It's clear from the interview that new technology (namely OPTIA) and injection molding the aspherical elements. but passion and commitment to realise the ideal stand apart
https://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/621449.html (https://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/621449.html)
Looking forward to 1001 Nights essay on the 58 f1.4G !!
-
A thought for the impoverished who might want to use an AF-S 58/1.4G neo-NOCT for candids, street and night photography: if you have a 50/1.8G and a high MP camera you can stand the same distance as you would with a 58mm lens using a 50mm (really 51.6mm) and shoot wide open. Later you crop a bit and all or almost all is well. No this won't help with coma (sagittal coma flare) but that's life in the slow lane.
The 50/1.8G is pretty good, as far as coma is concerned (I made a few quick tests involving point light sources and point reflections near the edges). Your suggestion is far from being ridiculous.
-
A Cornucopia of reviews, comparisons and more of the Neo-Noct
https://nikonrashii.wordpress.com/af-s-nikkor-58mm-f-1-4g/
At this time a link to this interview with Sato San (the original is since awol from the Nikon Technology series):
https://nikonrashii.wordpress.com/af-s-nikkor-58mm-f-1-4g/