NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Jedi on March 13, 2017, 13:13:34
-
Good morning, I would buy a great prime lens for mountain landscapes, for my Nikon D810, focal 85mm. I have tried my Nikon AF-S 85mm f/1.4G for this purpose (mountain landscapes), but I don't like it for this kind of shoots, I think that the Nikkor AF-S 85mm f/1.4G was born as a portrait lens. I didn't sell it, because I like it for portrait, but i would buy a great lens of 85mm for my Nikon D810 for mountain landscapes. I'm thinking to buy the Zeiss Planar 85mm f/1.4: is it a right choice for mountain landscapes, or it is a portartait lens? I have also the Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII FL, which is a great, great lens, but I want a better performer lens, very superior to the 70-200. Excuse for my English, it isn't good. Thank you!!!!
-
Not sure what it is precisely that you don't like about the 85mm AFS 1.4G?
It has a fantastic rendering close and far with a beautiful Bokeh from wide open and down to f/8, fairly low vignetting,,, I have no issues ever from using it as a landscape lens.
Also it is one of the sharpest Nikkor lenses,,,
-
It so happens that I just returned a Carl Zeiss Planar 85 mm f/1.4 ZF.2 to the dealer. I had high hopes and none survived the first testing period. Despite its hand-signed certificate , the optical performance was simply utterly disappointing. I now understand that decentering and other optical troubles are well known to occur with this lens.
Get a Nikkor instead.
-
Not sure what it is precisely that you don't like about the 85mm AFS 1.4G?
It has a fantastic rendering close and far with a beautiful Bokeh from wide open and down to f/8, fairly low vignetting,,, I have no issues ever from using it as a landscape lens.
Also it is one of the sharpest Nikkor lenses,,,
Yes, I'm agree with you about bokeh for portrait, but I have noticed that it's less sharp than my 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII FL in landscapes shoot (at f/5.6 or f/8); the 70-200mm is a zoom, 3000$ of zoom, but always a zoom and when I bought the 85mm I hoped it was sharper than the 70-200mm; its bokeh for portait is fantastic, but its sharpness at infinity is a little disappointment for me.
-
It so happens that I just returned a Carl Zeiss Planar 85 mm f/1.4 ZF.2 to the dealer. I had high hopes and none survived the first testing period. Despite its hand-signed certificate , the optical performance was simply utterly disappointing. I now understand that decentering and other optical troubles are well known to occur with this lens.
Get a Nikkor instead.
Good morning, excuse me, but I have seen a fantastic shoots (95% portraits) with the Zeiss 85mm, there weren't problems for their authors.....
However, with this topic i would understand if the Zeiss Planar 85mm f/1.4 is an only portrait lens, or I can use it for lanscapes with excellent results.
-
There is also the new Zeiss Milvus which is a new optical formula (also bigger and heavier) and the Zeiss Otus.
Both should be sharp enough for landscapes.
I'm wondering why you are looking beyond the 70-200 for landscapes. The zoom is much more versatile. Maybe you are looking for a lighter package, then the above Zeiss lenses would not be suitable. However, the 70-200/4 is half as heavy as the f/2.8 versions and is very sharp and a nice lens for landscapes, but of course still not as compact as a prime.
-
I do not return lenses without adequate testing, ..., that 85/1.4 Planar was one of the worst performers I have seen for years.
Although I had already paid for the lens, one look at the test images and the dealer refunded the costs.
My point in bringing this up is that not even the 'Zeiss' branding does guarantee a good performing lens.
-
Are you sure you need a so wide aperture for landscape ?
Even if you stop down to use use your lense at its best (2 stops) you have still plenty light with a ''normal'' lens (f/2, f/2.8. f/3.5 ), unless you make night landscapes... ;D
I am very happy, for instance, using my Voitglander 90mm apo lanthar. Light weight, sharp and, in addition, not very expansive.
Don't fall into the trap consisting , when you see very beautiful shots, to believe you could do the same shots with the same lens : filters can enhance a picture, also the framing, lights and post-processing.
Just my opinion... ;)
-
I do not return lenses without adequate testing, ..., that 85/1.4 Planar was one of the worst performers I have seen for years.
Although I had already paid for the lens, one look at the test images and the dealer refunded the costs.
My point in bringing this up is that not even the 'Zeiss' branding does guarantee a good performing lens.
That's sad. Sample variation has been said to be quite low with Zeiss, but bad luck can strike anyone. Will you order a replacement?
-
Why not use a wider lens for landscapes, like the Zeiss Milvus 18mm, which has a great reputation?
-
That's sad. Sample variation has been said to be quite low with Zeiss, but bad luck can strike anyone. Will you order a replacement?
No, I stay away from that brand from now on. Do note this was an item carrying a signed test certificate to indicate it performed to specification, yet what did it deliver? Look below to see a corner of a landscape shot.
-
Which version of the Zeiss 85/1.4 ZF.2 are you discussing, the Classic or the Milvus? They are entirely different optical designs.
-
Why not use a wider lens for landscapes, like the Zeiss Milvus 18mm, which has a great reputation?
Many successful landscape captures are done with longer lenses.
-
Which version of the Zeiss 85/1.4 ZF.2 are you discussing, the Classic or the Milvus? They are entirely different optical designs.
ZF.2 is presumable the 'Classic' version?
-
There is also the new Zeiss Milvus which is a new optical formula (also bigger and heavier) and the Zeiss Otus.
Both should be sharp enough for landscapes.
I'm wondering why you are looking beyond the 70-200 for landscapes. The zoom is much more versatile. Maybe you are looking for a lighter package, then the above Zeiss lenses would not be suitable. However, the 70-200/4 is half as heavy as the f/2.8 versions and is very sharp and a nice lens for landscapes, but of course still not as compact as a prime.
Yes, the zoom is more versatile, but I'm a crazy trekker who walks a lot with his 65 litres backpack, Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 VRII and Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII FL with several Zeiss prime lenses, for the most important shoots (with prime lens I use the tripod). I bear the weight. I want more that the quality of 70-200mm (more sharpness): I can't buy the Otus, because it's too expensive for me for a prime tele, I'd choose to spend money for a wide-angle prime lens or a zoom (and so I did, with Zeiss 18, 21, 25, 28 and 35 Distagon).
However I have no considered Milvus series: is it more great, better, than Planar T?
-
I know that Zeiss lenses have their fameand their excellence first of all for their colour and boken, than their sharpness (and Zeiss sharpness is equally excellent!!!!).
-
I do not return lenses without adequate testing, ..., that 85/1.4 Planar was one of the worst performers I have seen for years.
Although I had already paid for the lens, one look at the test images and the dealer refunded the costs.
My point in bringing this up is that not even the 'Zeiss' branding does guarantee a good performing lens.
Thank you for your valuable opinion, master!
-
Are you sure you need a so wide aperture for landscape ?
Even if you stop down to use use your lense at its best (2 stops) you have still plenty light with a ''normal'' lens (f/2, f/2.8. f/3.5 ), unless you make night landscapes... ;D
I am very happy, for instance, using my Voitglander 90mm apo lanthar. Light weight, sharp and, in addition, not very expansive.
Don't fall into the trap consisting , when you see very beautiful shots, to believe you could do the same shots with the same lens : filters can enhance a picture, also the framing, lights and post-processing.
Just my opinion... ;)
Than you, but it isn't true that the best lenses are often the most fast? I shoot, for landscapes, at f/6.3 - f/8, also f/11, but first of all f/8.
-
Why not use a wider lens for landscapes, like the Zeiss Milvus 18mm, which has a great reputation?
For landscapes you can also use tele focals, not only wide, aren't you agree? Also a 300mm for geometric lines of a flowering field!!
-
No, I stay away from that brand from now on. Do note this was an item carrying a signed test certificate to indicate it performed to specification, yet what did it deliver? Look below to see a corner of a landscape shot.
:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
-
Which version of the Zeiss 85/1.4 ZF.2 are you discussing, the Classic or the Milvus? They are entirely different optical designs.
I talk about classic version.
-
ZF.2 is presumable the 'Classic' version?
Probably, and the barrel will give it away. The Classic looks like a classic MF lens and is a six element double Gauss. The Milvus is a ten element design, weighs more than a kilogram (1.2 kg if memory serves) and looks almost like an AF lens, though it's MF only.
If, I'm not mistaken the Ai-S Nikkor 85/1.4 is a six element double Gauss.
-
Many successful landscape captures are done with longer lenses.
Great master!
-
ZF.2 is presumable the 'Classic' version?
No, I know that "ZF.2" is used to indicate the presence of contacts which can allow to you to word at aperture priority, such as AI-S lenses.
-
Excuse me, but I would to know if the Zeiss Planar 85mm f/1.4 (classic) can be used with excellent results also for landscape. Is it true?
-
The lens that I purchased, tested, and returned, was a Zeiss T* Planar 85 mm f/1.4 ZF.2 ('classic').
-
No, I stay away from that brand from now on. Do note this was an item carrying a signed test certificate to indicate it performed to specification, yet what did it deliver? Look below to see a corner of a landscape shot.
I don't have any experience with this lens (I only own 35mm and 135mm Zeiss lenses, which are both excellent), but this looks horrible. The lens might have been knocked during transportation, since it is quite unlikely that this is the certified performance.
I'm curious why you looked at this lens specifically? Were you searching a lens for a special application?
-
I had in mind a manual medium short lens for my Df. The lens came in the original box, all wrappings and paperwork intact, and was absolutely pristine in external appearance. Not a speck of dust anywhere. No signs it ever had been out of its box.
-
Very strange indeed and frustrating to say the least.
-
As I said, 'Zeiss' is no guarantee for quality.
-
Well, I guess nothing really is. I hope you ask your dealer to report the problem to Zeiss, and I would be curious to know their reaction.
-
As I got my money back, I'm pretty convinced the dealer would want a factory reimbursement to cover his loss.
However, other stories about disappointing quality of this Zeiss lens do appear on the 'net. Thus I'm apparently not alone.
-
Yes, I'm agree with you about bokeh for portrait, but I have noticed that it's less sharp than my 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII FL in landscapes shoot (at f/5.6 or f/8); the 70-200mm is a zoom, 3000$ of zoom, but always a zoom and when I bought the 85mm I hoped it was sharper than the 70-200mm; its bokeh for portait is fantastic, but its sharpness at infinity is a little disappointment for me.
Just post a sample of this please, Thank you.
-
This is the lens and the numbers are stacked against it,
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Carl-Zeiss/Carl-Zeiss-Planar-1.4-85mm-ZF2-Nikon-mounted-on-Nikon-D800E__814
The Milvus apparently is a better performer, even with the dreadful exterior and questionable handling.
-
As I got my money back, I'm pretty convinced the dealer would want a factory reimbursement to cover his loss.
However, other stories about disappointing quality of this Zeiss lens do appear on the 'net. Thus I'm apparently not alone.
I don't know about this particular lens. Since it is a very old design I would think that it is not super-strong in the corners wide open, but I would not expect such a low quality as you have posted. However, I think the AF-S 85/1.4 might fare better in the corners, and I expect that the new Milvus and Otus lenses should be much better than the ZF.2 Planar.
How did it compare to the AF 85/1.4D?
As for a manual lens on the DF, why is the AI-s 85mm not suitable?
On the old site there were quite a few people that owned the Zeiss 85mm Planar and posted sample images. I wonder whether some of them still hang around here?
-
I didn't say the 85/1.4 AIS wasn't suitable ... where did you get that impression? That particular Nikkor was not mentioned at all. I just wanted to have an alternative to my old 85/1.4 at my disposal.
The Zeiss 85/1.4 ZF.2 is still sold brand new here in my country.
-
I should have asked 'is the AIS not suitable?'
Of course you did not say that it was not, but it fits the description and I wonder what makes you look for an alternative.
The Zeiss lenses of course draw very differently from the Nikon lenses, so I can understand that you may want both.
But now not anymore.
I know that the 85mm ZF.2 is still being sold new. While I suspect that you got a lemon, I also think that the lens (even one that is within spec) does not meet today's demands for high sharpness into the corners. I think that is why the Milvus 85mm is completely re-designed and now much heavier and more complex.
Some other lenses in the Milvus line have the same optics as their ZF.2 counterpart, or only minor changes.
-
Jedi, if you are not in need of the f1.4 speed, I guess the PC-E 85/2.8 could be the answer?
-
Jedi, if you are not in need of the f1.4 speed, I guess the PC-E 85/2.8 could be the answer?
I don't know this lens, but I love Zeiss colours......
-
Jedi,
I keep my Nikkor 85mm f1.4 AF-D, in preference to the AF-S version for portraits.
But use a Nikkor 85mm F1.8G AF-S for landscape and general photography. It is small, lightweight, and sharp ....it would seem ideal for your intended use.
-
Jedi,
I keep my Nikkor 85mm f1.4 AF-D, in preference to the AF-S version for portraits.
But use a Nikkor 85mm F1.8 AF-S for landscape and general photography. It is small, lightweight, and sharp ....it would seem ideal for your intended use.
Is it sharper than my 85mm f/1.4G???
-
It is much sharper than my f1.4 AF-D in the corners ....and it was a little sharper than my f1.4G AF-S.
-
It is much sharper than my f1.4 AF-D in the corners ....and it was a little sharper than my f1.4G AF-S.
Thank you, I wait opinions about the sharpness of Zeiss Planar 85mm f/1.4 at infinity.
-
The Milvus does alright according to DxO, 5th for sharpness and 4th overall:
https://www.dxomark.com/lenses/launched-between-1987-and-2017/focal-from-85-to-90/launch_price-from-0-to-13000-usd#hideAdvancedOptions=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=rankDxo
The classic ZF2 hovers somewhere near the bottom of the heap, there's btw also no Nikkor present in the top half :o
But sharpness is overrated ;)
-
If you must have a Zeiss, take a look at the Makro Planar 100mm, it is highly rated for landscapes as well as for closeups, and similar in AOV as the 85mm. Unless you want to go all the way to the APO Sonnar 135; you cannot go wrong on that one if you like Zeiss' rendering, but it is significantly longer than 85mm.
-
If you must have a Zeiss, take a look at the Makro Planar 100mm, it is highly rated for landscapes as well as for closeups, and similar in AOV as the 85mm. Unless you want to go all the way to the APO Sonnar 135, you cannot go wrong on that one if you like Zeiss' rendering, but it is significantly longer than 85mm.
No, thanks, I preferred my Nikkor AF-S 105mm f/1.4E, because for portait i want AF; for portraits it is a monster, to the infinity a great, great lens, also if I regret a little my old Nikkor AF 105mm f/2 Defocus Control, for its natural color and pastel tones.
-
If you must have a Zeiss, take a look at the Makro Planar 100mm, it is highly rated for landscapes as well as for closeups, and similar in AOV as the 85mm. Unless you want to go all the way to the APO Sonnar 135; you cannot go wrong on that one if you like Zeiss' rendering, but it is significantly longer than 85mm.
I seek an 85mm.....
-
So, I think we have narrowed it down then. I think the only lens that fits all criteria that you mention is Milvus 85mm, except for the weight.
-
The Milvus does alright according to DxO, 5th for sharpness and 4th overall:
https://www.dxomark.com/lenses/launched-between-1987-and-2017/focal-from-85-to-90/launch_price-from-0-to-13000-usd#hideAdvancedOptions=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=rankDxo
The classic ZF2 hovers somewhere near the bottom of the heap, there's btw also no Nikkor present in the top half :o
But sharpness is overrated ;)
I have seen the high score of the Sigma 85mm f/1.4, but I don't trust Sigma >:( 8) :-X
-
get the new Tamron or the new Sigma Art
check the Nikon 85 1.8 at infinity here
https://4.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS7360x4912~sample_galleries/5499370516/3885053047.jpg (https://4.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS7360x4912~sample_galleries/5499370516/3885053047.jpg)
-
So, I think we have narrowed it down then. I think the only lens that fits all criteria that you mention is Milvus 85mm, except for the weight.
You're right.
-
get the new Tamron or the new Sigma Art
check the Nikon 85 1.8 at infinity here
https://4.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS7360x4912~sample_galleries/5499370516/3885053047.jpg (https://4.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS7360x4912~sample_galleries/5499370516/3885053047.jpg)
This is impressive. If you can live with the flare/ghosting issues, the 85/1.8 is a great lens in a light package.
-
What the world needs now...in my opinion...is for Zeiss to issue a new version of the [now ancient] 85/2.8 Sonnar made for the Contax RTS. I had one in the film days, and man-oh-man it was small.
http://www.zeissimages.com/mtf/cy/Sonnar2.8_85mm_e.pdf (http://www.zeissimages.com/mtf/cy/Sonnar2.8_85mm_e.pdf)
http://slrlensreview.com/web/reviews/carl-zeiss-lenses-swhorizontalmenu-172/zeiss-telephoto/407-carl-zeiss-sonnar-t-85mm-f28-cy-lens-review (http://slrlensreview.com/web/reviews/carl-zeiss-lenses-swhorizontalmenu-172/zeiss-telephoto/407-carl-zeiss-sonnar-t-85mm-f28-cy-lens-review)
It was about the size of a Nikkor 50/2 Ai with about 1 cm added to the length.
I also owned the Zeiss ZF 85/1.4 in the digital age (used on Nikon D3) and while mine wasn't as bad a Bjørn's copy seems to have been, it's renditions failed to excite me. I later acquired an old Nikon 85/1.8 K/Ai, which I like a lot for it's better handling and old-style rounded imaging.
-
I agree, either that, or Zeiss should give us landscapers an all-new 85 or 90 f/2 APO! 😛
-
Zeiss has already made the manual focus Loxia Sonnar 85/2.4 for Sony mirrorless fullframe cameras. For the big DSLRs it's the big Milvus series lenses.
-
What the world needs now...in my opinion...is for Zeiss to issue a new version of the [now ancient] 85/2.8 Sonnar made for the Contax RTS. I had one in the film days, and man-oh-man it was small.
They have, it's called the Zeiss Loxia 85/2.4 Sonnar :)
I played with one during the Photokina last Sept, its very cute indeed
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8563/29860270701_ce68f8541e_o.jpg)
-
Zeiss has already made the manual focus Loxia Sonnar 85/2.4 for Sony mirrorless fullframe cameras. For the big DSLRs it's the big Milvus series lenses.
I hope they have a more nuanced view and will expand the Milvus line some more.
-
Just post a sample of this please, Thank you.
,,,,,, No samples?,,,,,
While waiting for this 'Not sharp image at distance' from the 85mm AFS 1.4G from Jedi,,, is anyone arable to show a bad image from this lens stopped down at distance on a D810,,, I think not!
In this thread
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,4483.0.html (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,4483.0.html) like this
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5832/30024185752_fa14b0bb0f_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/MK8Np3)_EGL7385 Panorama (https://flic.kr/p/MK8Np3) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
there are a lot of my images with the lens stopped down landscape at distance on D810; sharp to the corner no vignetting,,, if these are not good enough or your copy is a Lemon, just buy a Zeiss or a Sigma and enjoy photography,,, ;D But don't let people believe that lens is a portrait lens only, since nothing could be more misleading!
-
I hope they have a more nuanced view and will expand the Milvus line some more.
I agree completely, which is why I eventually went mirrorless. JA's image may betray the real weight of the Zeiss 85/2.4 though. It actually weighs in at 594 grams.
-
If you would go for Sony E mount, Zeiss also has Batis 85/1.8 now, and you can use ZM Tele-Tessar 85/4.0 via adapter.
-
Too bad the 85 1.4G didn't work for you. I found it a most excellent lens for landscape, especially when stitching. I have a five foot print in my home made by this lens and everyone who sees it comments on the sharpness. The older design ZF.2 Zeiss 85 is rather infamous for being DOA. The newer Milvus is supposed to be a new optical design but is almost as heavy and large as an Otus.
Truth in using: I sold the 85 1.4G because the focus throw for manual focus was too short and too sensitive, imo. Admittedly a mistake on my part as the AF is better than most. I replaced it with the 70-200 f4 and I'm satisfied that this lens is an adequate replacement.
-
If you would go for Sony E mount, Zeiss also has Batis 85/1.8 now, and you can use ZM Tele-Tessar 85/4.0 via adapter.
Those and the Loxia 85/2.4 are all excellent choices. The Loxia 85/2.4 should have a most excellent manual focus feel. :)
-
,,,,,, No samples?,,,,,
While waiting for this 'Not sharp image at distance' from the 85mm AFS 1.4G from Jedi,,, is anyone arable to show a bad image from this lens stopped down at distance on a D810,,, I think not!
In this thread
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,4483.0.html (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,4483.0.html) like this
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5832/30024185752_fa14b0bb0f_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/MK8Np3)_EGL7385 Panorama (https://flic.kr/p/MK8Np3) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
there are a lot of my images with the lens stopped down landscape at distance on D810; sharp to the corner no vignetting,,, if these are not good enough or your copy is a Lemon, just buy a Zeiss or a Sigma and enjoy photography,,, ;D But don't let people believe that lens is a portrait lens only, since nothing could be more misleading!
A moment please, for the samples...., however the AF settimg of my D810 could be not right, also.....
There are also lenses which with MAF to infinity don't give excellent results such as if you usef them for portrait: do you know? An example? Nikon AF-D 135mm DC.
In this topic I haven't said that MY 85/1.4G isn't sharp, but I have said that it is, at infinity, LESS SHARPthan my 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII FL.
-
The Milvus does alright according to DxO, 5th for sharpness and 4th overall:
https://www.dxomark.com/lenses/launched-between-1987-and-2017/focal-from-85-to-90/launch_price-from-0-to-13000-usd#hideAdvancedOptions=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=rankDxo
The classic ZF2 hovers somewhere near the bottom of the heap, there's btw also no Nikkor present in the top half :o
But sharpness is overrated ;)
The Sigma has a high score for sharpness, but in the borders and in the corners it is very very low, see Photozone.de!!
-
The Sigma has a high score for sharpness, but in the borders and in the corners it is very very low, see Photozone.de!!
The same source also reports the classic Zeiss ZF2 to be very bad in the corners and excellent sharpness overall for the 85/1.4G :)
-
The same source also reports the classic Zeiss ZF2 to be very bad in the corners and excellent sharpness overall for the 85/1.4G :)
I'd say the first part of the statement has been corroborated by my sad Zeiss experience ...
-
,,,, LESS SHARPthan my 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII FL.
Well that statement is what I'm questioning, this is what you started out with,,, please show us this with two sample images :)
As JA and Bjørn also states; Photozones, that are quite hands on with things, have the numbers for the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 and the 85mm AFS 1.4G and clearly the Nikkor measures much higher especially in the edges and corners,,,
Also Lensrentals has tested the new Nikkor 70-200mm E FL AFS 2.8 and yes their verdict is that it's very good, most likely the best in it's class and it confirms what I see in pictures.
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/11/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-ed-af-s-vr-mtf-tests/
So yes it's almost the same performance according to their measurements as the 85mm AFS 1.4 G
Tested and compared here:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/09/just-the-lenses-canon-and-nikon-mount-85mm-f1-4-and-1-2-primes/
Again the measurements are comparable to my images, especially the exceptional good performance in the corners and edges, huge amount of depth of focus when stopped down, that yes makes it perfect for stitching landscape images,,,
-
f/11 - the full size image at Flicker is ready for inspection - Yes this is not a JPG straight out of the camera but it displays what is possible IMHO ;)
This is a two image stitch,,,
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5557/29860965390_f1741d216f_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/MuHfES)We read you loud and clear (https://flic.kr/p/MuHfES) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
Here is a single file of the top,,, without the 'We read you loud and clear' processing,,,
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8655/30218616381_a82f8e4e0a_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/N3jiRg)_EGL7505 (https://flic.kr/p/N3jiRg) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
The same source also reports the classic Zeiss ZF2 to be very bad in the corners and excellent sharpness overall for the 85/1.4G :)
In fact with this topic I asked help to you!!!!!!!
-
Well that statement is what I'm questioning, this is what you started out with,,, please show us this with two sample images :)
As JA and Bjørn also states; Photozones, that are quite hands on with things, have the numbers for the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 and the 85mm AFS 1.4G and clearly the Nikkor measures much higher especially in the edges and corners,,,
Also Lensrentals has tested the new Nikkor 70-200mm E FL AFS 2.8 and yes their verdict is that it's very good, most likely the best in it's class and it confirms what I see in pictures.
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/11/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-ed-af-s-vr-mtf-tests/
So yes it's almost the same performance according to their measurements as the 85mm AFS 1.4 G
Tested and compared here:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/09/just-the-lenses-canon-and-nikon-mount-85mm-f1-4-and-1-2-primes/
Again the measurements are comparable to my images, especially the exceptional good performance in the corners and edges, huge amount of depth of focus when stopped down, that yes makes it perfect for stitching landscape images,,,
I don't trust mtf very much I seek your personal experience.
-
Then you are in familiar company,,,
However for confirmation of field test they have their value, especially Lensrentals,,,
I know your not Sigma, but just as a wake up why I'm not;
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,5391.msg89654.html#msg89654
-
Well that statement is what I'm questioning, this is what you started out with,,, please show us this with two sample images :)
As JA and Bjørn also states; Photozones, that are quite hands on with things, have the numbers for the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 and the 85mm AFS 1.4G and clearly the Nikkor measures much higher especially in the edges and corners,,,
Also Lensrentals has tested the new Nikkor 70-200mm E FL AFS 2.8 and yes their verdict is that it's very good, most likely the best in it's class and it confirms what I see in pictures.
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/11/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-ed-af-s-vr-mtf-tests/
So yes it's almost the same performance according to their measurements as the 85mm AFS 1.4 G
Tested and compared here:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/09/just-the-lenses-canon-and-nikon-mount-85mm-f1-4-and-1-2-primes/
Again the measurements are comparable to my images, especially the exceptional good performance in the corners and edges, huge amount of depth of focus when stopped down, that yes makes it perfect for stitching landscape images,,,
So do you confirm, by your personal experience, the results of mtf?
However, it's also true that the excellence of Zeiss lenses are first of all their colours.
MTF tests are done at little distance, isn't true?
-
Not sure what your asking re MTF? There are plenty of info regarding how and what is MTF - Over time I have grown to appreciate the huge amount of work that goes into the information shared by Roger fro Lensrental,,, and his findings correspond with what I see from my lenses.
BTW same can be said about Bjørns reviews, although theses are done from his 'use-perspective' here the agreement of findings are very similar to my own practical results. We have some common similarities in our stylke of shooting and some very different as well,,, That is a long tale,,, Basically he is a huge inspiration especially when we meet up and let go,,,
Zeiss Colour is not something I use as a goal, as should be quite clear by my images,,, It is so easy to shoot in RAW and do the rest in PP so Colour difference between Zeiss and Nikkor is a big non-issue for me.
However contrast and vignetting is often a huge difference between Zeiss and Nikkors! Again these can to some extend be tweaked in PP but not to the same extent.
-
Can you explain me how to insert the samples fot the comparison, please?
The examples aren't the only one, they're the last one, but the result is always the same......
-
Can you explain me how to insert the samples fot the comparison, please?
The examples aren't the only one, they're the last one, but the result is always the same......
Upload them to a site like flickr and simply click on the share button, then past in the BB code. Like this:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3774/33186898772_d9057d756c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SyBwMS)20170227-DSC_5528 (https://flic.kr/p/SyBwMS) by Daniel Han (https://www.flickr.com/photos/133023063@N04/), on Flickr
(Loving my 70-200 FL :D)
Notice that one may also click on the image, it links to the original upload and one can enlarge it for the comparison you've been talking about.
As for an 85mm for landscapes, I'd personally just recommend the small Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 Apo-Lanthar. It's made in the same plant as those Zeisses... Zeissi eh... lenses. Cosina makes them.
-
Upload them to a site like flickr and simply click on the share button, then past in the BB code. Like this:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3774/33186898772_d9057d756c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SyBwMS)20170227-DSC_5528 (https://flic.kr/p/SyBwMS) by Daniel Han (https://www.flickr.com/photos/133023063@N04/), on Flickr
(Loving my 70-200 FL :D)
Notice that one may also click on the image, it links to the original upload and one can enlarge it for the comparison you've been talking about.
As for an 85mm for landscapes, I'd personally just recommend the small Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 Apo-Lanthar. It's made in the same plant as those Zeisses... Zeissi eh... lenses. Cosina makes them.
I try with Imageshack.....
-
I try with Imageshack.....
Yep, any image hosting website would do.
-
http://it.tinypic.com?ref=2vijyvp" target="_blank"><img src="http://i64.tinypic.com/2vijyvp.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a (http://it.tinypic.com?ref=2vijyvp" target="_blank"><img src="http://i64.tinypic.com/2vijyvp.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a)
http://it.tinypic.com?ref=34rhppj" target="_blank"><img src="http://i64.tinypic.com/34rhppj.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a (http://it.tinypic.com?ref=34rhppj" target="_blank"><img src="http://i64.tinypic.com/34rhppj.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a)
-
The 6030.jpg is with 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII FL, while the 6027 is with the Nikkor AF-S 85mm f/1.4G
Good luck!!
-
The 6030.jpg is with 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII FL, while the 6027 is with the Nikkor AF-S 85mm f/1.4G
Good luck!!
-
http://it.tinypic.com?ref=2vijyvp" target="_blank"><img src="http://i64.tinypic.com/2vijyvp.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a (http://it.tinypic.com?ref=2vijyvp" target="_blank"><img src="http://i64.tinypic.com/2vijyvp.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a)
http://it.tinypic.com?ref=34rhppj" target="_blank"><img src="http://i64.tinypic.com/34rhppj.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a (http://it.tinypic.com?ref=34rhppj" target="_blank"><img src="http://i64.tinypic.com/34rhppj.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a)
Your photos aren't showing up in the forum post. Here, I'll do it for you. Or you can update your post by using the (http://) code which is provided on the left hand side of your webpage.
Nikkor AF-S 85mm f/1.4 G 1/250s f/8 ISO 64 D810
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi64.tinypic.com%2F34rhppj.jpg&hash=f21149de347fc6f77d42d42bcb7f4cecb8923e6f)
Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8E VRII FL 1/250s f/8 ISO 64 VR ON D810
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi64.tinypic.com%2F2vijyvp.jpg&hash=d66997b0fb2d95c468d0c75bbbe5aee92de913e1)
-
The 6030.jpg is with 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII FL, while the 6027 is with the Nikkor AF-S 85mm f/1.4G
Good luck!!
From your webpage, I can't see which photo is taken with which lens. Presumably the one a bit wider is the 70-200 FL since a zoom at 85mm may be a bit off?
-
Your photos aren't showing up in the forum post. Here, I'll do it for you. Or you can update your post by using the (http://) code which is provided on the left hand side of your webpage.
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi64.tinypic.com%2F34rhppj.jpg&hash=f21149de347fc6f77d42d42bcb7f4cecb8923e6f)
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi64.tinypic.com%2F2vijyvp.jpg&hash=d66997b0fb2d95c468d0c75bbbe5aee92de913e1)
Can I send you the files of the two images, please? I can't do anything.....
-
Can I send you the files of the two images, please? I can't do anything.....
below with 70-200 f/2.8 VRII FL
CanI send you the files of the images, please? Can you post them for me on the forum?
-
Can I send you the files of the two images, please? I can't do anything.....
You can modify your post, there's a little button on the top right corner of each post.
Paste the code enclosed in the (IMG)(/IMG) code, square brackets instead of curved ones. Or just simply tell me which photo is with which lens.
-
You can modify your post, there's a little button on the top right corner of each post.
Paste the code enclosed in the (IMG)(/IMG) code, square brackets instead of curved ones. Or just simply tell me which photo is with which lens.
the first, ABOVE, is with Nikkor AF-S 85mm f/1.4 G 1/250s f/8 ISO 64 D810
the second, BELOW, is with Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8E VRII FL 1/250s f/8 ISO 64 VR ON D810
-
the first, ABOVE, is with Nikkor AF-S 85mm f/1.4 G 1/250s f/8 ISO 64 D810
the second, BELOW, is with Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8E VRII FL 1/250s f/8 ISO 64 VR ON D810
Thanks, I'll modify that post.
-
Thanks, I'll modify that post.
Thank you
-
I think my D810 hasn't issues with AF, because with all the others my AF lenses, to infinity, the results are perfect. My 85mm at portrait-distance, is great-performer, is very sharp. However, I noticed the tha MAF with the central sensor of MAF is perfect, precise, while sometimes it isn't perfect, it is indecided, uncertain , with lateral sensor, BUT ONLY WITH THE 85mm, also in good light conditions.....
-
I don't see anything special with these small-sized images.
In general, when you want to evaluate lens sharpness you have to control for focus error.
It is best to focus manually with live view.
AF having a problem (i.e. being imprecise at far distances) is a different matter than the lens being unsharp by design or due to mechanical problems!
-
I don't see anything special with these small-sized images.
In general, when you want to evaluate lens sharpness you have to control for focus error.
It is best to focus manually with live view.
AF having a problem (i.e. being imprecise at far distances) is a different matter than the lens being unsharp by design or due to mechanical problems!
The difference, at high resolution, there is, but it is a little difference: 85mm would be sharper sharper shatper than 70-200mm, aren't you agree?
-
A priori I would expect the prime to be slightly sharper than the zoom, but who knows. Zooms have become so good that we often don't really need the primes for sharpness-related reasons.
However, the files that you showed us are not different enough in my opinion to draw any conclusions.
You could share 100% crops that show an area where you are disappointed with the performance of the prime. But please do make sure that your focus is set on that specific area.
-
A priori I would expect the prime to be slightly sharper than the zoom, but who knows. Zooms have become so good that we often don't really need the primes for sharpness-related reasons.
However, the files that you showed us are not different enough in my opinion to draw any conclusions.
You could share 100% crops that show an area where you are disappointed with the performance of the prime. But please do make sure that your focus is set on that specific area.
Yes, I'm agree: in the last times Nikon has spent a lot money for research first of all for zooms, to obtain zoom of very high performance, but, in my opinion, it is true until birth of 105/1.4E G (a monster!), 24/1.4G, 35/1.4G, 200/2G and also 85/1.4G. There is a great difference between my 105/1.4E G and my 70-200mm f/2.8E VRII FL and rightly so. For 24/1.4G, 35/1.4G I think the same thing, but I have choose Zeiss for that focal, so I can't talk for personal experience.
-
I think my D810 hasn't issues with AF, because with all the others my AF lenses, to infinity, the results are perfect. My 85mm at portrait-distance, is great-performer, is very sharp. However, I noticed the tha MAF with the central sensor of MAF is perfect, precise, while sometimes it isn't perfect, it is indecided, uncertain , with lateral sensor, BUT ONLY WITH THE 85mm, also in good light conditions.....
Your D810 has 'AF Fine tune' you can set for each lens,,, This is especially important for shallow depth of field lenses,,,
I don't know what MAF is? There are many settings for AF,,,
Looking forward to some landscapes :)
-
Your D810 has 'AF Fine tune' you can set for each lens,,, This is especially important for shallow depth of field lenses,,,
I don't know what MAF is? There are many settings for AF,,,
Looking forward to some landscapes :)
I thought to this issue (AF not optimized for this lens), but I have fear of use "AF Fine tune" :-[ :-[ :-[ :'( :'( :'( :'(
The MAF is AF-S, obviously.
AF of my D810 is perfect with all the othres my lenses, at every distances!!!
-
However, I will choose Zeiss Milvus 85mm f/1.4 for landscapes (thanks to your councils).
-
,,,
The MAF is AF-S, obviously.
,,,,
And what is AF-C?
-
However, I will choose Zeiss Milvus 85mm f/1.4 for landscapes (thanks to your councils).
Please tell us how it turns out.
-
And what is AF-C?
What do you think??????
I'm 40 and I shoot from 22 years, I began with film, Zenit, Pentax, Minolta SR-T series and then Nikon!!!!!!!!!
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
I thought to this issue (AF not optimized for this lens), but I have fear of use "AF Fine tune" :-[ :-[ :-[ :'( :'( :'( :'(
The MAF is AF-S, obviously.
AF of my D810 is perfect with all the othres my lenses, at every distances!!!
Someone correct me if I'm wrong...
I would NOT set a "Default" AF fine for the camera but I would turn on AF fine tune and AF fine tune the problem lens. Under these conditions the other lenses should not be affected. If the other lenses should be affected just turn off AF Fine Tuning.
If most or all of one's lenses needed-3 that's when I'd use a default.
Dave Hartman
-
Someone correct me if I'm wrong...
I would NOT set a "Default" AF fine for the camera but I would turn on AF fine tune and AF fine tune the problem lens. Under these conditions the other lenses should not be affected. If the other lenses should be affected just turn off AF Fine Tuning.
If most or all of one's lenses needed-3 that's when I'd use a default.
Dave Hartman
You're right.
Only AF tune the entire body if the body displays a constant AF inaccuracy.
But then in such a case... just get it in for a servicing. It's an abnormality.