Z Nikkor 50/1.2S vs. 50/1.8S

[John Geerts]

Thanks for testing Sten.

Actually this does proof that the 1.8 is a great lens   I would expect to see larger differences between a 1.2 and a 1.8 lens...

[Fons Baerken]

Mentioned before there seems to be a difference in focal between the 1,2 or 1,8 versions.
Suppose you want the 1,2 version for wide open performance and the rest for the 1,8 which seems to be doing
excellent in the comparison.
Thanks for the reviews, Sten.

[Nikfuson]

Field of curvature (at near distance obviously).
F/1.2

[Tristin]

#12 really demonstrates how superior the 1.2S's (lack of) field curvature is to the Ai/Ai-s.  My Ai-s taking the same shot would have displayed it's signature fishbowl look in the background.  That alone solves, imo, the Ai/Ai-s' most significant problem.

Can we get some light star demonstrations?

Thanks Sten!

[Eddie Draaisma]

To me the onion rings in the F/1.8 version seem to be the most striking difference between the two lenses.

[Nikfuson]

Starshots

[Øivind Tøien]

Some coma/astigmatism showing on the 50 f/1.2 S on the brighter stars in the corners. Assuming both are wide open, the performance 1/3-1 stop down can be of interest.
The 50 f/1.8 S capture actually looks better, although there are traces of the same. Both look excellent compared to the 50 f/1.8G - as I recall stopping down several stops was needed for acceptable results even on a DX sensor, so I have not been inspired to use that focal length for astrophotography again.
 

[richardHaw]

still a lot better than the original NOCT
https://richardhaw.com/2016/09/25/repair-noct-nikkor-58mm-f1-2-ai-s/

[ColinM]

still a lot better than the original NOCT ]

Mmm, does this mean a new generation has genuinely arrived?
More power to the march of the S line

[richardHaw]

Mmm, does this mean a new generation has genuinely arrived?
More power to the march of the S line

even the 58/1.4G shows better performance than this