Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Good wide angle lens for Nikon D800E  (Read 8365 times)
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7884



WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 04, 2012, 07:53:58 PM »
ReplyReply

I only tried one sample - new out of the box - and when shooting a flat subject, 30-50 years from the camera, the edges were not sharp @f5.6 on a tripod.  My sample is too small to draw a broad conclusion, but I have heard from a couple of people that it is not a flat-field lens.  I was really, really surprised by what I saw. Could have been a fluke.

Well, that could be. I have mostly used it for near far compositions well stopped down (typically f9-11) with a bit of tilt and it seemed very good. For genuine distant scenes I tend to shoot with a longer lens and stitch.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1241



WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 04, 2012, 07:54:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi ndevlin,

I have to agree with Bernard I to have the Nikon 24mm PC-E lens and I fine it optically superb. I have shot bathroom interiors with quite a bit of shift and the images are tack sharp right to the corners and when it come to landscapes it is also pin sharp.

Cheers

Simon
« Last Edit: November 04, 2012, 08:10:00 PM by HarperPhotos » Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5735


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #22 on: November 04, 2012, 07:55:21 PM »
ReplyReply

I only tried one sample - new out of the box - and when shooting a flat subject, 30-50 years from the camera, the edges were not sharp @f5.6 on a tripod.  My sample is too small to draw a broad conclusion, but I have heard from a couple of people that it is not a flat-field lens.  I was really, really surprised by what I saw. Could have been a fluke.

I probably didn't phrase my question properly. I did not mean to ask if there is another copy of Zeiss 21mm with better corners. I meant: is there another maker's lens with similar focal length that has better corners? From what I remember, Zeiss 21 advantage is precisely in having better corners than the competition.

That it is not a flat-field lens is no surprise, because no wide-angle is. Most macro lenses are, however, and probably some telephotos.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
ndevlin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 504



WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 04, 2012, 08:20:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Hey Simon & Bernard,

Sorry for the confusion, I was talking about the Zeiss 21mm. As far as the 24mm tilt goes, my copy is ok, but hasn't really impressed me. My 16-35 is better if I pixel peep. Curiously, my 50mm f1.4 G is so bad I'm thinking of making a warranty claim. And it ain't a focus issue. Makes me appreciate that Leica M glass getting dusty in my cupboard  Wink

- N.
Logged

Nick Devlin   @onelittlecamera
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7884



WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 04, 2012, 09:00:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Hey Simon & Bernard,

Sorry for the confusion, I was talking about the Zeiss 21mm. As far as the 24mm tilt goes, my copy is ok, but hasn't really impressed me. My 16-35 is better if I pixel peep.

Oops, sorry about the misunderstanding.  Cry

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1241



WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 04, 2012, 10:45:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

This also could be a good and cheap alternative to a wide angle prime for a Nikon D800 for shooting landscapes.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09/07/samyang-24mm-f3-5-tilt-shift-lens

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
joneil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 139


This is what beer does to you....


« Reply #26 on: November 05, 2012, 07:57:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello,
This also could be a good and cheap alternative to a wide angle prime for a Nikon D800 for shooting landscapes.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09/07/samyang-24mm-f3-5-tilt-shift-lens
Cheers
Simon

      I would love to test one myself.  I am a big fan of Samyang lenses, they are bright, crisp and sharp.  However I find - and your mileage may vary - that the distortion on their wide angle lenses is worse than some other lenses.  To be specific, less than some zooms, especially some lower end "all purpose" zooms, but more than say an older prime Nikkor in the same range.

    On a smaller sensor DX frame, usually - and again, your mileage may and will vary - I find the distortion not as bad.   But on a big, full frame FX sensor?

     What might make this Samyang a great lens is the size of the image circle.  Most lenses have an image circle that barely cover the intended frame, and most of your worst optical distortions, as a general rule are on the outer edge of the image circle.  One reason so many older FX prime lenses look great on a  DX camera.   It's also an old trick in large format shooting - the sharpest lenses I use on my 4x5" usually will cover 8x10".

 Anyhow, in order to achive the wide range/coverage of tilt & shift, I suspect the image circle on most TS lenses has to be pretty big.  So dead on, a good TS lens, even on a FX frame, you would think should be pretty sharp.  So if this new lens is sharp, dead on, with the D800, that would not surpize me.  the 'acid test" would be how it looks in the corners when you start pushing movements to the extreme.
joe
 
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #27 on: November 05, 2012, 09:02:37 AM »
ReplyReply

28mm AIs.  So well corrected.  Sharp as I need by F4.  I've never seriously looked at the corners because I'm not a landscape guy, but I've never seen anything that bothers me.  Oh yeah, its under $200 used.  Not as contrasty as a Zeiss wide, but very natural rendering and very pleasant OOF.
Logged
HSakols
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 376


« Reply #28 on: November 05, 2012, 09:05:43 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't shoot ultra wide that much so I just carry my old Nikon 20mm AFD.  Yeah the corners are not the sharpest but it gives me an interesting look.  Too bad they can't redesign a compact wide prime, but I guess that won't happen with today's sensors.  Anyone else use this lens on digital?  If money were not a problem I would just go with the 16-35.
Logged
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1241



WWW
« Reply #29 on: November 05, 2012, 05:10:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

I agree with Tmark I have a Nikon 28mm Ais lens at up to getting the new Nikon 28mm F1.8G lens it was very good.

This new 28mm from Nikon is the best I have ever seen from them. It is just a great lens and that nano coating they use just does some thing special to my eyes. Hell I recon they are using fairy dust or something.

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
skimasks
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 73


WWW
« Reply #30 on: November 06, 2012, 03:56:04 AM »
ReplyReply

The new 28 1.8 is crazy good...STUPID sharp. In ideal conditions it is sharper than my Schneider glass. The only issue is CA, which is bound to happen on the digital 35mm format.
Logged

jaapb
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #31 on: November 07, 2012, 08:35:51 AM »
ReplyReply

28mm AIs.  So well corrected.  Sharp as I need by F4.  I've never seriously looked at the corners because I'm not a landscape guy, but I've never seen anything that bothers me.  Oh yeah, its under $200 used.  Not as contrasty as a Zeiss wide, but very natural rendering and very pleasant OOF.
Another vote for the 28mm AIS. I did some quick and dirty test shots with this lens on my D800 view here and here.

Jaap
Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 09, 2012, 12:21:57 PM »
ReplyReply

It pains me to say it, but if Nikon made an equivalent to the Canon TS-E 17mm lens or Canon made an equivalent to the Nikon D800E I would probably be using one or the other now.
Logged

JohnBrew
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 734


WWW
« Reply #33 on: November 09, 2012, 01:10:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't really care what the others think, the Zeiss 21 is a terrific lens on a D800. Can't say I've noticed any poor corners. Attached is a pano shot with the 21. Apologies for the jpeg resolution.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2012, 03:10:23 PM by JohnBrew » Logged

alan_b
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 67


WWW
« Reply #34 on: November 09, 2012, 02:54:00 PM »
ReplyReply

It pains me to say it, but if Nikon made an equivalent to the Canon TS-E 17mm lens or Canon made an equivalent to the Nikon D800E I would probably be using one or the other now.

Yup - really need a wider Nikon PC-E lens.  I get by w/ the 14-24 + post, but a 17mm PC-E would make my life soo much easier...
Logged
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1241



WWW
« Reply #35 on: November 09, 2012, 04:18:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

I would sell a kidney to get my hands a Nikon 17mm PC-E lens

Cheers

Simon
« Last Edit: November 09, 2012, 08:03:35 PM by HarperPhotos » Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #36 on: November 10, 2012, 03:32:11 AM »
ReplyReply

...and independent rotation of the tilt and shift mechanisms on the 17 & 24, please.
Logged

FrankJ
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #37 on: November 10, 2012, 04:08:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Makes me appreciate that Leica M glass getting dusty in my cupboard  Wink


A similar experience over here. I used the 14-24 with the D800E at various focal lengths and f/8. The center was very sharp but I did not like the borders and corners. Then I did a side by side comparison at 24mm with the Leica M9 and Elmarit 24/2.8 also at f/8. (The widest lens I have for the M9.) At the center I found almost no difference (maybe a very small advantage for the Nikon) but in the outer parts of the frame the difference was huge. The Leica lens really keeps its sharpness and microcontrast into the corners while the Nikon does not.

While I liked the 14-24 on other camera bodies, I will not use it on the 800E for landscape work and  larger (in my case A2) prints. So I am also interested to hear about other options. (For me it probably makes more sense to invest into wider lenses for the M9 since I use and like this camera a lot...)

-Frank
Logged
MichaelEzra
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 652



WWW
« Reply #38 on: November 10, 2012, 06:59:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Frank, when doing corner sharpness comparison, did you account for field curvature? Likely, none of these lenses are flat fielded, so photographing a flat subject/brick wall would not do justice to the corner sharpness, as corners would be focused at a closer distance than the center. Besides, each lens will focus corners at different distance, since curvature is likely different.
Logged

FrankJ
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #39 on: November 10, 2012, 08:47:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Michael,

Yes, I made sure that field curvature is not causing the effect. I took pictures of 3-dimensional objects, mainly real landscape images with lots of details in the foreground. This way one could see how far the sharpness area extents. I also tried different focus distances. Basically what I would do in real situations for landscape photography (including using a stable tripod and MLU).

-Frank
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad