Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Best glass for D800?  (Read 31453 times)
erickb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 235


WWW
« Reply #20 on: April 17, 2012, 01:13:21 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't think that Leica and Zeiss lenses generally are better than other lenses. It simply so that some lenses are better than others.
when a Leica 35mm  cost 4000 €  and the same CaNikon 400€ , yes some are better than others
Logged
hasselbladfan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


« Reply #21 on: April 17, 2012, 05:13:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for all your comments. It was very helpfull.

I will start testing the following glass (mostly Zeiss since the Coastal Optics is a bit expensive and has an f/4):

Zeiss 21/2.8 or 25/2 ZF
Zeiss 50/2
Zeiss 100/2

As AF, I will test the 70-200/2.8 and the 200/2, which should cover most of my AF needs.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2012, 05:18:16 AM by hasselbladfan » Logged
ACH DIGITAL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 344



WWW
« Reply #22 on: April 17, 2012, 07:43:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for all your comments. It was very helpfull.

I will start testing the following glass (mostly Zeiss since the Coastal Optics is a bit expensive and has an f/4):

Zeiss 21/2.8 or 25/2 ZF
Zeiss 50/2
Zeiss 100/2

As AF, I will test the 70-200/2.8 and the 200/2, which should cover most of my AF needs.


I'll be very interested in seeing your Zeiss 21 testing. I'm between the 24PCE and this one.. ACH
Logged

Antonio Chagin
www.achdigital.com
JohnBrew
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 706


WWW
« Reply #23 on: April 17, 2012, 09:45:05 AM »
ReplyReply

I am testing the Zeiss 21 right now on my D700. Who knows when my D800E will arrive, but I want to go ahead and check this lens out for future use with the E.
Logged

rgmoore
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51


WWW
« Reply #24 on: April 17, 2012, 09:55:04 AM »
ReplyReply

erickb:

Thank you for providing the quote from digllloyd.  Here is the full discussion form diglloyd's blog:





SATURDAY, APRIL 07, 2012
Reader Asks: Coastal Optics 60mm f/4 UV-VIS-IR APO-macro vs Zeiss 50mm f/2 Makro-Planar


Coastal Optics 60mm f/4 UV-VIS-IR APO-macro
Peter W writes:
I am enjoying all of your coverage of the D800.... I guess I will need to purchase the DAP add-on to go with my Leica and Zeiss subscriptions, so that I can see the full detail of your work with the D800.

I ordered a D800E within 24 hours of B&H first offering pre-orders, but I can see that they have run afoul of Nikon somehow. Who knows when I will have the body? I am amazed by the infinite patience that Henry Posner displays in all of his very professional posts on dpreview.com.

Will you post some shots with your Zeiss 50 F/2?

I am really impressed by your Stanford bicycle shots with the Coastal Optics lens! It looks snappier than the Velvia 120 images I shot years ago with a Schneider lens.

Am I correct to infer that you prefer the Coastal Optics to the Zeiss 50 f/2 (yes, I understand the retail $ difference, but the effects of scale in production way more than explain the difference in price)? Where can I order it, and is it possible to link through your site so you get the spiff? Does anyone rent them to test first?

What I am really hoping is that the new Leica M with its 24 MP sensor will give us M lens lovers a similar "emulsion" to work with as the D800 offers. That body is supposed to be released this summer when Leica opens all of its USA retail stores (a la Apple), so you probably have a very busy year ahead in photography.

DIGLLOYD: I don’t think anyone should assume that B&H has “run afoul” of Nikon. Rather, I think Nikon has its own issues, perhaps being cautious with a new launch and perhaps having production issues and perhaps watching carefully for new camera problems before launching into full-scale production. Add in massive demand, and that’s the picture.

I plan to shoot all of the Zeiss ZF.2 lenses on the Nikon D800, but that is a months-long project. But remember that the Coastal Optics 60/4 is a $4650 lens with an ƒ/4 aperture using almost all fluorite elements. It is a very special beast, and ƒ/4 is not exactly flexible for low-light. The Zeiss ZF.2 50/2 Makro-Planar is a full two stops faster and 1/3 the price. It is not apochromatic, and could not be without raising the price considerably, but it is a symmetric design capable of lovely results.

A big part of the appeal of the Coastal 60/4 images comes from a complete absence of any color errors of any kind, which leads to an unusual clarity. No other lens can match its color correction. Not Leica M, not Leica S, not Leica R, not Zeiss. I’m speaking of publicly for sale DSLR lenses of course. Also, its spectral transmission is unusually even from UV through infrared, leading to highly unusual color rendition— incredibly lifelike. I have been remiss in not using it more often.

You can order the 60/4 directly from Coastal Optics. LensRentals.com rents it.

We shall learn more about the new Leica in May, apparently. The rumors I hear are of a monochrome M10, which would be disappointing to me— I’d like to see a 36MP Leica M10 with Live View. That seems unlikely.
Logged
hasselbladfan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


« Reply #25 on: April 17, 2012, 10:25:42 AM »
ReplyReply

I had exactely the same reflection as Llyod on the Coastal 60mm vs the Zeiss 50mm.

It may be much better, but a F/4 is not so handy for every day and for the price tag I can buy the 21/2.8, the 50/2 and the 100/2. And I know what happens then, the best glass stays in the closet.

But everyone keeps on raising my interest. so I may give a call to Lensrentals. Worth the fun.
Logged
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 774


« Reply #26 on: April 17, 2012, 11:03:04 AM »
ReplyReply

The Coastal might be a very nice fashion lens.  60mm is a good length, and one is shooting at f/8-f/9 most of the time.  But the Nikon 60/2.8 AF-s Micro is distinguished as well.  I'd be interested to see the two compared in practical use.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6925


WWW
« Reply #27 on: April 17, 2012, 11:27:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Are Leica R lenses still made?

A 400€ 35  CaNikon lens will be a moderate aperture amateur lens (without S or L signature), still they may be pretty decent or they may not.  A Zeiss Distagon 35/2 comes in at 800€ here in Sweden. Nikon AF-S 35/14G ED is about 1600€.

Now, large aperture costs a lot of money. There is also a cost in more air to glass surfaces which may increase flare. If you don't need f/1.4 you would probably do better with a f/2 or even f/2.8 lens.

Leica R lenses seem to exist in different generations, some were truly excellent, some less so. Leica did have different approaches, in the Mandler period Leica lenses were more mainstream, in the Kölsch era more oriented to designs without compromise. Several of the old Leica R lenses were Minolta designs, like 16 mm fish eye, 24/2.8 and 75-200 zoom lens. The 28-85 zoom lens was a Sigma design.

I have seen a recent comparison in a German periodical, where they have ranked the Canon 85/1.8 lens ahead of the Canon 85/1.4. In the same article they felt the Zeiss 85/1.4 was lagging behind. This is pretty much consistent with some other tests I have seen.

By the way, I'm a Sony shooter and I do have two Zeiss lenses. They are pretty good, those are the lenses I use mostly.

Best regards
Erik

when a Leica 35mm  cost 4000 €  and the same CaNikon 400€ , yes some are better than others
Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1615



WWW
« Reply #28 on: April 17, 2012, 11:30:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I’d like to see a 36MP Leica M10 with Live View. That seems unlikely.

More's the pity.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6925


WWW
« Reply #29 on: April 17, 2012, 11:36:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I wouldn't rule out. Perhaps no M9? I'd guess that a full frame Leica with AF and live view CMOS sensor is quite feasible.

Best regards
Erik

More's the pity.
Logged

hasselbladfan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


« Reply #30 on: April 17, 2012, 11:57:59 AM »
ReplyReply

They completely stopped producing the R lenses. Another chapter closed.

And by doing so, they openend a very luctrative business for Zeiss ZE / ZF lenses.
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6925


WWW
« Reply #31 on: April 17, 2012, 08:26:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Lens rentals has tested a lot of lenses, it seems that most of the Zeiss lenses were better than their Nikon counterparts. Something that makes Lens Rental's tests interesting is that they test many lenses. The data they published is MTF50 at the optimum aperture. Doesn't say much about maximum aperture.

Erwin Puts is the author of Leica Lens Compendium, great source of information.

You may found this article an interesting read: http://www.imx.nl/photo/optics/optics/page93.html

Here you can find MTF data for the R-lenses:
http://us.leica-camera.com/service/downloads/lenses_for_single_lens_reflex_cameras/index.html

Please note that MTF plots may not be comparable, some are calculated and some measured. Some use 10/30 lp/mm and some  use 10/20/40 lp/mm. Some MTF may be measured in white light some in monochromatic light. Some MTF diagrams seem to be drawn by the marketing department.

Zeiss has MTF data on all their lenses and those are measured in white light.

Photozone has tested lots of lenses using Imatest, their results may be worth checking out: http://www.photozone.de/

Lloyd Chambers makes a lot of real world testing on Zeiss lenses and also other lenses on his different pay sites.
http://www.diglloyd.com/index.html

Best regards
Erik



They completely stopped producing the R lenses. Another chapter closed.

And by doing so, they openend a very luctrative business for Zeiss ZE / ZF lenses.
Logged

erickb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 235


WWW
« Reply #32 on: April 17, 2012, 10:01:36 PM »
ReplyReply

More's the pity.
More sucks
Logged
erickb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 235


WWW
« Reply #33 on: April 17, 2012, 10:03:14 PM »
ReplyReply

I am using a 35 and 50 Summilux , if I stop with Leica I shall get  Zeiss lenses on Sony Body , maybe a NEX 9 24x36  at photokina ?


Hi,

Are Leica R lenses still made?

A 400€ 35  CaNikon lens will be a moderate aperture amateur lens (without S or L signature), still they may be pretty decent or they may not.  A Zeiss Distagon 35/2 comes in at 800€ here in Sweden. Nikon AF-S 35/14G ED is about 1600€.

Now, large aperture costs a lot of money. There is also a cost in more air to glass surfaces which may increase flare. If you don't need f/1.4 you would probably do better with a f/2 or even f/2.8 lens.

Leica R lenses seem to exist in different generations, some were truly excellent, some less so. Leica did have different approaches, in the Mandler period Leica lenses were more mainstream, in the Kölsch era more oriented to designs without compromise. Several of the old Leica R lenses were Minolta designs, like 16 mm fish eye, 24/2.8 and 75-200 zoom lens. The 28-85 zoom lens was a Sigma design.

I have seen a recent comparison in a German periodical, where they have ranked the Canon 85/1.8 lens ahead of the Canon 85/1.4. In the same article they felt the Zeiss 85/1.4 was lagging behind. This is pretty much consistent with some other tests I have seen.

By the way, I'm a Sony shooter and I do have two Zeiss lenses. They are pretty good, those are the lenses I use mostly.

Best regards
Erik

Logged
John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1253


« Reply #34 on: April 18, 2012, 12:34:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Any opinions on the PC Micro 85 on the D800? How about the Micro Nikkor 105 f2.8D?
Logged
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 774


« Reply #35 on: April 18, 2012, 04:19:09 AM »
ReplyReply

More's the pity.

Moiré's the pity?
Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1615



WWW
« Reply #36 on: April 18, 2012, 05:21:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Moiré's the pity?

What's an i between friends?
Logged

kirishima
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #37 on: April 21, 2012, 11:00:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Here's some comparison test I did with the D800 and D800E using 5 lenses.
All of them where shot at f5.6 from the same location, same time, and same angle.
100percent crops on the center and the corner on each lense and camera.

Not the perfect comparison since I didn't have time but gives you an idea on the resolution difference between these two cameras as well as the importance of a good lense.

The lenses used in this test:
Nikkor 14-24mm
Nikkor 35mm 1.4 G
Zeiss 50mm 2.0 macro
Nikoor 85mm 1.4 G
Zeiss 100mm 2.0 macro

link
http://www.flickr.com/photos/androll/sets/72157629502264164/
Logged
hasselbladfan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


« Reply #38 on: April 21, 2012, 05:03:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Great performance by 35/50/85. Personally somewhat disappointed by the 100 and 14-24.

Visible difference between the 800 and 800E.

Thanks for sharing it.
Logged
kirishima
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #39 on: April 21, 2012, 07:12:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, the 14-24 was a bit of a surprise but I guess for a wide zoom, its not bad. I'm looking forward to the 28 1.8. Exactly what I need.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad