NikonGear'23

Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: atpaula on March 02, 2016, 14:09:47

Title: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: atpaula on March 02, 2016, 14:09:47
My little Buddha had extra work today.
Just tried to compare five 28mm lenses.
Zeiss f/1.4 Otus and f/2.
Nikkor f/2, f/2.8 and f/3.5.
Not enough patience to include the PC f/4 and f/3.5.
Same D810 for all.

WIDE OPEN:

OTUS
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/aD81_2072_zpsobgywnv7.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/aD81_2072_zpsobgywnv7.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/bD81_2072_zpsickgglei.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/bD81_2072_zpsickgglei.jpg.html)

ZEISS f/2
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/aD81_2074_zpst4tieeo6.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/aD81_2074_zpst4tieeo6.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/bD81_2074_zpsqkvrsj2y.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/bD81_2074_zpsqkvrsj2y.jpg.html)

NIKKOR f/2
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/aD81_2076_zpsdjv6xfth.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/aD81_2076_zpsdjv6xfth.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/bD81_2076_zpsb5s1fss6.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/bD81_2076_zpsb5s1fss6.jpg.html)

NIKKOR f/2.8
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/aD81_2078_zpsllfzesqz.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/aD81_2078_zpsllfzesqz.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/bD81_2078_zpswivff2sw.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/bD81_2078_zpswivff2sw.jpg.html)

NIKKOR f/3.5
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/aD81_2080_zpsseekmx91.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/aD81_2080_zpsseekmx91.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/bD81_2080_zpspvusyiko.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/bD81_2080_zpspvusyiko.jpg.html)


AT f/3.5:

OTUS
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/aD81_2073_zps1bgfdue2.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/aD81_2073_zps1bgfdue2.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/bD81_2073_zpsqxmvqgv2.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/bD81_2073_zpsqxmvqgv2.jpg.html)

ZEISS f/2:
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/aD81_2075_zpsutxsfptq.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/aD81_2075_zpsutxsfptq.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/bD81_2075_zpsluizbskm.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/bD81_2075_zpsluizbskm.jpg.html)

NIKKOR f/2
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/aD81_2077_zpsvcgomnbu.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/aD81_2077_zpsvcgomnbu.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/bD81_2077_zpsq1gg7gmz.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/bD81_2077_zpsq1gg7gmz.jpg.html)

NIKKOR f/2.8
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/aD81_2079_zpsawzozzyd.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/aD81_2079_zpsawzozzyd.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/bD81_2080_zpspvusyiko.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/bD81_2080_zpspvusyiko.jpg.html)

NIKKOR f/3.5 (again)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/aD81_2080_zpsseekmx91.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/aD81_2080_zpsseekmx91.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula005/bD81_2080_zpspvusyiko.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula005/bD81_2080_zpspvusyiko.jpg.html)
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Erik Lund on March 02, 2016, 14:23:00
The first Zeiss image wide open is really good.

The last nikkor shot at f/2.8 looks really good to me.

The Zeiss images look like you focused on the ears when stopped down, I sure hope it doesn't have focus shift,,,

Edit to add; You where not on a tripod,,,
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: atpaula on March 02, 2016, 14:32:28
The first Zeiss image wide open is really good.

The last nikkor shot at f/2.8 looks really good to me.

The Zeiss images look like you focused on the ears when stopped down, I sure hope it doesn't have focus shift,,,

Edit to add; You where not on a tripod,,,

No tripod, sorry.
I placed my elbows on the same spot to hold the camera.
The focus is not precise indeed. I placed the focus brackets on the Buddhas face, but maybe it did not work properly.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Chip Chipowski on March 02, 2016, 20:51:08
Nice to see the f/3.5 Nikkor in this lineup - one of my favorites!
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Erik Lund on March 02, 2016, 21:19:27
28mm f/2.0 shot at f/3.5 i believe ;)
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: John Geerts on March 02, 2016, 21:28:56
I find the Nikkor 28/2 and 28/3.5  surprisingly good in this comparison.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Chip Chipowski on March 02, 2016, 21:31:16
Quote
28mm f/2.0 shot at f/3.5 i believe ;)

I think the OP used three different Nikkors for this comparison, but I could be mistaken.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: atpaula on March 02, 2016, 21:35:57
3 28mm Nikkors: Nikkor f/2, f/2.8 and f/3.5.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Jan Anne on March 02, 2016, 21:38:28
For me foliage is one of the hardest backgrounds to capture in a pleasing manner, in this setting the only way to make it look nice is to use the raw power of a fast lens to throw the background more out of focus at these distances. So regardless of character and draw the Otus wins this round hands down for me because its the only lens that can do this.

If the test would include other f/1.4 28mm lenses the outcome might have been different :)

Thanks for sharing btw and congrats on the new lens, looks like a winner.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: atpaula on March 02, 2016, 21:40:19
For me foliage is one of the hardest backgrounds to capture in a pleasing manner, in this setting the only way to make it look nice is to use the raw power of a fast lens to throw the background more out of focus at these distances. So regardless of character and draw the Otus wins this round hands down for me because its the only lens that can do this :)

If the test would include other f/1.4 28mm lenses the outcome might have been different.

Because of the different max apertures I took some samples with all 5 lenses at f/3.5.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Erik Lund on March 02, 2016, 21:50:54
3 28mm Nikkors: Nikkor f/2, f/2.8 and f/3.5.
Well then you need to be more specific, there are many very different versions for the 28mm Nikkors f/2.8 and f/3.5! Where the 28mm f/2.8 Ais is a stunning performer btw
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Jan Anne on March 02, 2016, 22:06:07
Because of the different max apertures I took some samples with all 5 lenses at f/3.5.
I know but the only pleasing image in this test series is the one taken at f/1.4 ;D

Here's an example with the Sony Zeiss 35/2.8 FE, an amazing lens but as an f/2.8 lens it wasn't able to throw the foliage out of focus enough for my taste at that distance even though the focus was very close. The result was that I brought the much heavier 35/1.2 from that moment on as that lens could have thrown that background more out of focus.

Please remember that I go out with only a few primes spaced well apart so don't have the option to go from a 28mm to a 35mm or from a 35mm to a 50mm so the lens that I have mounted needs have a faster aperture where others might grab a slightly longer lens to smoothen the background blur.

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3954/15553462096_b3a09b625f_o.jpg)
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Andy on March 02, 2016, 22:27:40
@atpaula,
thanks for the work and for sharing your images with the 5 lenses.

In case you are interested, "how" the lenses transition from the focus plane to the background blur, you might setup your little buddha the next time a little bit different.

The current setup has 2 "planes". The "focus plane" and the "background plane", which is out of focus. While this shows the famous bokeh in the background, there is unfortunately no visual elements in between the 2 planes which would show the - what I would consider important - visual transition. It is interesting to see, how lenses with similar focal length but different optical design render this transition differrently - even when set to the same f-stop.

If the foliage in the background is a garden fence: You might shoot your little Buddha not 90 degree towards the fence, but for instance in 45 degrees or in 30 degrees (and closer to the fence). Or any other setup, where you can create a continous depth (i.e. here (http://lichtfusion.net/pop_02.jpg) as an example)


May I share some 50/58mm pics I found on my webserver from the old "comparison" days a few years ago?
Nothing special, just a few quick&dirty shots to get a feeling about the different lens rendering characteristics

4 lenses:
1) AFS 50mm/1.8G
2) AFS 50mm/1.4G
3) AFS 58mm/1.4G
4) AiS 58mm/1.2 Noct


Set at same f-stop - f2

AFS 50mm/1.8G, @ f2
(http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/153307982/original.jpg)

AFS 50mm/1.4G, @ f2
(http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/153307983/original.jpg)

AFS 58mm/1.4G, @ f2
(http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/153307984/original.jpg)

AiS 58mm/1.2 Noct, f2
(http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/153307980/original.jpg)



followed by each lens's max open aperture

AFS 50mm/1.8G @ f1.8
(http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/153308981/original.jpg)

AFS 50mm/1.4G @ f1.4
(http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/153308982/original.jpg)

AFS 58mm/14G, @ f1.4
(http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/153308983/original.jpg)

AiS 58mm/1.2 Noct, @ f1.2
(http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/153308980/original.jpg)


rgds,
Andy
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: atpaula on March 02, 2016, 23:18:52
Well then you need to be more specific, there are many very different versions for the 28mm Nikkors f/2.8 and f/3.5! Where the 28mm f/2.8 Ais is a stunning performer btw

Mine are both Ais late versions.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: atpaula on March 02, 2016, 23:19:58
I know but the only pleasing image in this test series is the one taken at f/1.4 ;D

Here's an example with the Sony Zeiss 35/2.8 FE, an amazing lens but as an f/2.8 lens it wasn't able to throw the foliage out of focus enough for my taste at that distance even though the focus was very close. The result was that I brought the much heavier 35/1.2 from that moment on as that lens could have thrown that background more out of focus.

Please remember that I go out with only a few primes spaced well apart so don't have the option to go from a 28mm to a 35mm or from a 35mm to a 50mm so the lens that I have mounted needs have a faster aperture where others might grab a slightly longer lens to smoothen the background blur.

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3954/15553462096_b3a09b625f_o.jpg)

 :)
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: atpaula on March 02, 2016, 23:21:49
@atpaula,
thanks for the work and for sharing your images with the 5 lenses.

In case you are interested, "how" the lenses transition from the focus plane to the background blur, you might setup your little buddha the next time a little bit different.

The current setup has 2 "planes". The "focus plane" and the "background plane", which is out of focus. While this shows the famous bokeh in the background, there is unfortunately no visual elements in between the 2 planes which would show the - what I would consider important - visual transition. It is interesting to see, how lenses with similar focal length but different optical design render this transition differrently - even when set to the same f-stop.

If the foliage in the background is a garden fence: You might shoot your little Buddha not 90 degree towards the fence, but for instance in 45 degrees or in 30 degrees (and closer to the fence). Or any other setup, where you can create a continous depth (i.e. here (http://lichtfusion.net/pop_02.jpg) as an example)


May I share some 50/58mm pics I found on my webserver from the old "comparison" days a few years ago?
Nothing special, just a few quick&dirty shots to get a feeling about the different lens rendering characteristics


rgds,
Andy

Thanks for the tip and the images Andy.
Next time I'll try this.
In fact I don't have much patience to carry these tests. ;D
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Tristin on March 03, 2016, 03:30:02
Focus issues sour the study.  I quickly found that repeated focusing with LV at full magnification to ensure perfect focus was critical to comparing lenses.  My initial comparisons with the 105mm f/2.5 and f/1.8 were soured by the same error.

Surprised by the lacking performance of the Zeiss f/2 wide open though.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: pluton on March 03, 2016, 06:47:45
Thanks for posting these, Aguinaldo...it's a well chosen test shot setup, though locked down on a tripod would have been better.
I like my Zeiss ZF 28/2, ironically, for stopped down, small aperture shots, and prefer my Nikon Ais 28/2.8 for wide open shots. 
My earlier samples of the Nikon 28/2 Ais were not good wide open, but a very early Nikkor-N.C 28/2 was optically very good, except it had the old-style greenish-yellow color cast which, on film, was not workable at the time.
Some day I'll collect all the 28mm Nikkors just because I like 28mm.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: atpaula on March 03, 2016, 09:55:24
Focus issues sour the study.  I quickly found that repeated focusing with LV at full magnification to ensure perfect focus was critical to comparing lenses.  My initial comparisons with the 105mm f/2.5 and f/1.8 were soured by the same error.

Surprised by the lacking performance of the Zeiss f/2 wide open though.

As I said, it is a brief non scientific test.
Quite annoying when you spend some time to share an honest, yet incomplete,  view of lenses performance and someone can not see it through an useful perspective as it should be.
Classic case of seeing a half empty glass instead of half full.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: atpaula on March 03, 2016, 09:58:10
Thanks for posting these, Aguinaldo...it's a well chosen test shot setup, though locked down on a tripod would have been better.
I like my Zeiss ZF 28/2, ironically, for stopped down, small aperture shots, and prefer my Nikon Ais 28/2.8 for wide open shots. 
My earlier samples of the Nikon 28/2 Ais were not good wide open, but a very early Nikkor-N.C 28/2 was optically very good, except it had the old-style greenish-yellow color cast which, on film, was not workable at the time.
Some day I'll collect all the 28mm Nikkors just because I like 28mm.

My pleasure to share it, Pluton.
My purpose was only to show the most obvious differences among those lenses.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Andy on March 03, 2016, 10:33:22
As I said, it is a brief non scientific test.
Quite annoying when you spend some time to share an honest, yet incomplete,  view of lenses performance and someone can not see it through an useful perspective as it should be.
Classic case of seeing a half empty glass instead of half full.
Aguinaldo,
I hope my suggestion didn't annoy you.
It was rather intended as the usual forward looking recommendation for the next turn - as it is almost the same effort for the setup between the 2 types giving one additional piece of information.
In case it did - sorry. Didn't intend to be seen as a kind of "the glass is empty" statement.
rgds, Andy


Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Erik Lund on March 03, 2016, 10:36:36
Mine are both Ais late versions.
Thanks! Now I understand,,, I know it took a while - was too busy working,,,  ::) Sorry! ;)

I went back and had another look, and yes the new Zeiss really throws out the BG nicely -

Jan Anne; The large aperture size surely helps but also the lens must be able to do this as well! Not all optics are created equal, in the old day I often heard tha WA all had bad Bokeh, The new Zeiss blast that myth, some of the new fast Nikkors does as well ;)

Also don't forget the trick to get closer,,,

Andy; Nice comparison of the new and old Noct, it's quite clear here how the old Noct is kind of very bright/pale wide open, looses contrast in the dark leaves on the ground somehow, I remember seeing this before,,,
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: atpaula on March 03, 2016, 11:14:43
Aguinaldo,
I hope my suggestion didn't annoy you.
It was rather intended as the usual forward looking recommendation for the next turn - as it is almost the same effort for the setup between the 2 types giving one additional piece of information.
In case it did - sorry. Didn't intend to be seen as a kind of "the glass is empty" statement.
rgds, Andy

Of course not Andy. You also saw positive aspects in my post.
I found your suggestion quite useful for the next time I'll do such tests.
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: Tristin on March 04, 2016, 05:38:49
I meant no insult and apologies for showing not voicing appreciation.  There are noticeable differences between these lenses in your comparisons.  Just offering advice to help you get more out of your testing that I only figured out by doing the same. 
Title: Re: 28mm brief non scientific comparison
Post by: JJChan on March 07, 2016, 01:37:23
Lots have been written about the Zeiss 28mm f2 - very pronounced field curvature and high micro-contrast.
I picked up mine very cheap second hand. It is very similar to the AFS 28mm f1.8 but has 'character' that has recently been discussed at length on Yannick Khong's site. It is my favourite 28mm.

Here are 2 shots wide open - give some idea of the transitions on focal plane: icecream with D800E, sweating Porsche with D5200

JJ