Roger Cicala on new 50mm lenses

[Thomas Stellwag]

always worth a read imo

https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/9236543269/why-are-modern-50mm-lenses-so-damned-complicated

[Luc]

Interesting read, as always by Roger Cicala. The complexity and (near) optical perfectionism of my Z 50mm f1.8 S prompted me this week to buy a cheap manual focus Meike Z 50mm f1.7 lens. A lens with flaws but also character which is missing in most modern lens designs.

[Akira]

I'm a frequent visitor of dpreview.com and have read the article with interest as well.

As Luc says, today's standard lenses are too well corrected and their bokeh character is to well controlled to be smooth without any double-llining, bubbling or swirling.  The result is that you can only control the DOF by changing the aperture value, which is often boring.

[Erik Lund]

Thx, that new Sony GM 50mm f/1.2 has unbelievable sharpness even wide open,,, I always enjoy his writing style 

[richardHaw]

i had a sigma art...it was fast, sharp and with smooth blur (but with onion ring)

i got bored, i am happier with my Nikkors, Sonnars and Tessars

[Ethan]

While I respect Roger Cigala for his tear downs and tech equipment for testing. But, it is a bit ridiculous to compare a 30 year od Canon with a 21st century lens which is still holding it's stance. The Sigma Art 50/1.4 dates from 2014. Both are great lenses.

Looking forward to a head to head whit a Nikkor 50/1.2 S

And it is even more of a waste buying a f1.2 lens to use stopped down.

Dont you love the way the article starts with a picture of the Nikon Z and the 50/1.2 S and yet NO testing or MTF comparison whatsoever with the 50/1.2 S. Ohhh. a published available diagram of the optical formula was included.

[Dogman]

It frequently seems to me that the more photographic optics progress toward perfection the more boring photographs become. 

Or is that just me being jaded?

[Erik Lund]

There are different tools for different tasks.I find that it's just as fun to shoot new and vintage look lenses.
I find it extremely convenient that one can purchase sharp well corrected lenses relatively affordable, for some images correcting for CA and the like can take for ever in post processing, I prefer using my time doing more creative editing re processing.Same goes for grain and noise also film vs. digital look not to mention vignetting 

[Roland Vink]

I'm also a bit surprised at the big size and complexity of modern fast 50mm lenses. I expected (or hoped) that newer lenses would be like the old AI-S 58mm1.2 Noct. By using high refractive glass and an aspheric front element they were able to produce a compact high-performing fast standard lens using a standard double-gauss structure. Surely by modern glass for better control of CA and another aspheric surface or two it should be possible to improve performance even further without resorting to big complex designs?
Maybe part of the answer is the demands for auto-focus. The old gauss lenses are all unit focusing (a few had floating elements) while most modern 50mm lenses are IF or rear focusing, which must require a different optical structure. Many of the modern lenses are also becoming more complex to reduce focus breathing for shooting video, and also more telecentric to work better with digital sensors.

[richardHaw]

thats why the 58/1.4G is such a bold move

[Erik Lund]

I'm also a bit surprised at the big size and complexity of modern fast 50mm lenses. I expected (or hoped) that newer lenses would be like the old AI-S 58mm1.2 Noct. By using high refractive glass and an aspheric front element they were able to produce a compact high-performing fast standard lens using a standard double-gauss structure. Surely by modern glass for better control of CA and another aspheric surface or two it should be possible to improve performance even further without resorting to big complex designs?
Maybe part of the answer is the demands for auto-focus. The old gauss lenses are all unit focusing (a few had floating elements) while most modern 50mm lenses are IF or rear focusing, which must require a different optical structure. Many of the modern lenses are also becoming more complex to reduce focus breathing for shooting video, and also more telecentric to work better with digital sensors.

 
Yes and flat focus field performance as well as aperture focus shift has to be controlled to use the sharpness,,,

Agreed the 58mm f/1.4 G is a nice lens that does away with the hunt for sharpness - Just too bad they decided to slow down focus speed and make a huge lens case to contain the focus motor and gearbox design - I wished for a fast ring motor design with performance,,, just like the Pro f/2.8 zooms 

[richardHaw]

Just too bad they decided to slow down focus speed and make a huge lens case to contain the focus motor and gearbox design

they have to make it look "premium", too

to be honest, no matter how much i see it i couldnt really understand why its so expensive, it could be $400 cheaper

[John Geerts]

Interesting article.

It may be true the latest Z 50mm are too well corrected, they last a bit of 'character' One of the reasons I only have the Z 50/1.8s  which I especially like at night, or stretched to it's limits

Of course one can add noise or vignet to an image to create another style, it is still extra work.   

The already mentioned 58/1.4G  is a lens I like a lot.  A pity indeed of the missed opportunity  of f/1.2 and the slower AF, but I can live with it.

[Tom Hook]

I own the 50 1.2 S.

When it was announced on the Nikkor roadmap back in 2018. I marked it as a lens I wanted to have. I bought it this winter.

C’est la vie!

I am very happy with the lens having spent much of the past two and half month with it on my Z7. In my estimation,  it has lovely light, color, subject isolation and pleasant out of focus rendering.

For me, it is a keeper.

So, I am distressed by some in this thread stating this lens lacks character, is too well corrected, is a massive complex instrument and in a word - boring. Clearly, there is a difference of opinion here! That’s good, there is no lens that receives universal approval (except maybe the Nocts of which I only have the G version which I love. As an aside, I didn’t even consider getting the 0.95 S as it is simply too expensive).

I don’t know who among you have used this lens, but if you haven’t, you should try it and see for yourselves.

Because of the criticism here, I felt I should give the lens some love by showing a few pictures that have convinced me of its quality. You may see these examples as boring, clinical, over-corrected photos of a lens that is nothing but a vanity project on Nikon’s part and find my taste very much unlike your own. Should that be the case, at least you will know what I like.

All of these are taken wide-open but I have many examples of the lens taken closed down a bit and in a case or two closed down a lot.

Best regards to all,

Tom

[Airy]

Sharpness is difficult to judge from 600*900 pics, but bokeh seems on a par with the often praised 58/1.4G, and LoCA is not noticeable:did you suppress it in PP?

I never found LoCA to be inspiring nor useful in any way (unlike a certain K.R. who wrote that the green outlines behind focus would harmonize with veggie backgrounds), so that's very good news.