Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/4G ED VR on D800. Sample two: flowering rosemary  (Read 2455 times)
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1860



WWW
« on: February 03, 2013, 11:21:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Technical information in caption
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8943


« Reply #1 on: February 04, 2013, 12:05:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Technical information in caption

The trouble is, Ellis, one cannot be sure where the point of focus is with an image like this, shot at 200mm and F4.

If you wish to demonstrate the sharpness of the lens at 200mm and full aperture, then a portrait shot focussed on the eyelashes might be better.  Wink
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8385



WWW
« Reply #2 on: February 04, 2013, 12:52:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Technical information in caption

Nice bokeh!

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1860



WWW
« Reply #3 on: February 04, 2013, 09:07:58 AM »
ReplyReply

"The trouble is, Ellis, one cannot be sure where the point of focus is with an image like this, shot at 200mm and F4."

Why do you think the full resolution crop was included?

And yes I did use the D800's Autofocus Micro-Adjustment controls on the camera, finding the ideal setting using a LensAlign Mark II target and FocusTune software.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2013, 10:02:14 AM by Ellis Vener » Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Rob Reiter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 235



WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2013, 10:43:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, Ellis. I'm saving my pennies for one now. Always good to see anything that bolsters my decision!
Logged

http://www.lightroom.com Fine art printing for photographers and other artists
risedal
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


« Reply #5 on: February 04, 2013, 05:14:04 PM »
ReplyReply

"The trouble is, Ellis, one cannot be sure where the point of focus is with an image like this, shot at 200mm and F4."

Why do you think the full resolution crop was included?

And yes I did use the D800's Autofocus Micro-Adjustment controls on the camera, finding the ideal setting using a LensAlign Mark II target and FocusTune software.

I use both Nikon and Canon in my work, the problem with Nikon D800 is that the camera needs 1. ultra sharp lenses to get the wow effect. 2. a careful and accurate sharpening. Sorry and I will not sound rude  but the photo  and crop you show us do not tell me so much , its looks very fine etc
« Last Edit: February 04, 2013, 05:29:26 PM by risedal » Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8943


« Reply #6 on: February 04, 2013, 05:31:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Why do you think the full resolution crop was included?

Because that's what I'd have done when demonstrating the performance of a new lens. However, if your purpose was only to demonstrate the bokeh, fair enough!
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1860



WWW
« Reply #7 on: February 04, 2013, 07:06:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Because that's what I'd have done when demonstrating the performance of a new lens. However, if your purpose was only to demonstrate the bokeh, fair enough!

Ray,

Perhaps you misunderstand. On the left is a full frame, uncropped view . On the right is a full resolution detail cropped from the same frame.  If I have not made myself clear the attached screenshot should clarify. I apologize for any misunderstanding and confusion I caused in my earlier haste.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8943


« Reply #8 on: February 04, 2013, 09:14:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Ray,

Perhaps you misunderstand. On the left is a full frame, uncropped view . On the right is a full resolution detail cropped from the same frame.  If I have not made myself clear the attached screenshot should clarify. I apologize for any misunderstanding and confusion I caused in my earlier haste.


Sorry Ellis, I guess I did misinterpret your question. When you asked, "Why do you think the full resolution crop was included?", I thought you meant, "Why have you assumed that I included a full resolution crop?"

I have considered getting this new Nikkor lens for my own use. If I were to buy a copy, I'd be very concerned about its sharpness at 200mm and F4. If it is sharpest at F4, as the 70-200/F2.8 VRII is sharpest at F4 when fully extended, then the lens could be useful with teleconverters.

I'd be very interested to see a comparison between the 70-200/F4 with 2x extender, and the Nikkor 80-400 used at 400mm and F8.

Cheers!
Logged
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 848


« Reply #9 on: February 05, 2013, 08:28:20 AM »
ReplyReply

After seeing Ellis' very good-looking samples, I became interested in this lens.  New tests on photozone did not quite measure as high as my own estimate of them.  While the center is consistently Excellent, the edges and corners barely emerge into the Very Good zone at the three usable apertures (4, 5.6, Cool.  I thought for certain that the edge/corner response of this lens was going to measure higher.  But then again, maybe I should trust my eyes on that.  The lens is actually very consistent, and never falls below the Very Good marks.

Ellis, how do the edges/corners look to your eye after checking this lens out?
Logged

Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1860



WWW
« Reply #10 on: February 05, 2013, 09:00:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Sorry Ellis, I guess I did misinterpret your question. When you asked, "Why do you think the full resolution crop was included?", I thought you meant, "Why have you assumed that I included a full resolution crop?"

I have considered getting this new Nikkor lens for my own use. If I were to buy a copy, I'd be very concerned about its sharpness at 200mm and F4. If it is sharpest at F4, as the 70-200/F2.8 VRII is sharpest at F4 when fully extended, then the lens could be useful with teleconverters.

I'd be very interested to see a comparison between the 70-200/F4 with 2x extender, and the Nikkor 80-400 used at 400mm and F8.

Cheers!

Hello Ray,
To your questions: the lens has the best resolution around f/8. This was a test to see how the lens did with an obliquely backlit subject , wide open (f/4), and how well the VR works when the lens is handheld. I can and will be getting my hands on a 70-200mm f/2.8G VRII but have not planned on  the teleconverters (interesting idea) and definitely not  the 80-400 Nikkor. Sorry.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1860



WWW
« Reply #11 on: February 05, 2013, 09:02:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Luke,
 I haven't done a "brick wall" test yet. I suspect how well it will do may depend on the distance to the subject.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 848


« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2013, 01:10:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Luke,
 I haven't done a "brick wall" test yet. I suspect how well it will do may depend on the distance to the subject.

Are you yourself pleased, or still evaluating?  It looks very usable.  How do you think it compares with the 70-200 VR I or II?

[I notice that the characters "f / 8 )" got turned into sunglasses emoti guy, never knew that.]
Logged

Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1860



WWW
« Reply #13 on: February 05, 2013, 03:08:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Still evaluating (Actually I am reviewing it for a publication) . So far I am quite pleased. Does anyone else remeber the origianl 80-200mm f/4.5 Nikkor?
I remember wanting one when I was in high school and early college years (mid to late '70s) but then scoffing at it in the early '80s  thinking "real photographers" use the 180mm f/2.8 AI-S Nikkor. Then Arthur Meyerson(http://www.arthurmeyerson.com) took me aside and showed me the work he had been doing with one: Awesomely high end annual report covers, double truck spreads, posters and prints.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
John E
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 88


« Reply #14 on: February 05, 2013, 05:50:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the link to Meyerson's site, Ellis, some wonderful photos there.

John
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8943


« Reply #15 on: February 05, 2013, 09:24:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello Ray,
To your questions: the lens has the best resolution around f/8. This was a test to see how the lens did with an obliquely backlit subject , wide open (f/4), and how well the VR works when the lens is handheld. I can and will be getting my hands on a 70-200mm f/2.8G VRII but have not planned on  the teleconverters (interesting idea) and definitely not  the 80-400 Nikkor. Sorry.

Hi Ellis,
I'm surprised you find the lens sharpest at F8. This does not augur well for its usefulness with a teleconverter.

My delay in deciding whether or not to buy this lens is not just related to its overall sharpness, and particularly its sharpness at F4, but the usefulness of its FL range compared with my current lens, the Nikkor 24-120/F4. In other words, those increased focal lengths from 120 to 200 may be less significant and less useful than the loss of focal lengths between 24mm and 70mm.

If I'm going to sacrifice those very useful focal lengths between 24 & 70mm, I feel I need a longer maximum reach than 200mm, which is why I've been interested in the new Tamron 70-300/F4-6.5 USD VC.

A thanks to Luke Kaven for mentioning that Photozone have just recently tested the Nikkor 70-200/F4 VR on the D3X. I can now compare the lens with the Tamron which has also been tested by Photozone on the same camera.

The Tamron lens is considerably cheaper, marginally lighter, and has a reach of 300mm at F5.6. One certainly wouldn't expect it to be nearly as sharp as the Nikkor at any focal length that both lenses have in common, so I was very surprised to see that the Photozone results show the Tamron lens is in some respects sharper than the Nikkor at 70mm. Refer attached comparison charts.

Whilst the Nikkor is marginally sharper at F4 (3744 as opposed to 3635 in the centre), the Tamron is sharper at both F8 and F11, and very marginally sharper at F5.6. However, I'm sure such differences are within the range of 'quality control variation' amongst different copies of the same model of lens, so one shouldn't place too much significance on such minor differences.

At other focal lengths, the Nikkor begins to pull ahead and at 135mm is clearly sharper in the centre a F4, than the Tamron is at F4.5. But again, the Tamron is marginally sharper at F8 and F11, in the centres and in the borders.

At 200mm one sees the biggest difference. The Nikkor is sharper at all apertures, including the borders, with the exception of F11 where the Tamron is very marginally sharper to a degree which is of no consequence.

What I see at 200mm is that the Nikkor should be visibly sharper only in the centre at F4 and F5.6. Differences at the borders and extreme corners are very similar for both lenses at all F/stops.

At 300mm, the Tamron takes a dive, but at 300mm it's still sharper than the Nikkor 80-400 is at 400mm, particularly at the borders.

I'm going with the Tamron plus a 24mp D3200. Both lens and camera together will cost about $800 as opposed to $1300 for the Nikkor lens alone. The greater pixel density of the 24mp cropped format sensor should ensure I get more detail from the Tamron lens when maximum reach is required, than I would get from either the D800E with Nikkor lens at 200mm, or the D3200 with Nikkor lens at 200mm.

In other words, the 50% increase in focal length (from 200 to 300mm) should be worth more than the 10% increase in resolution that the Nikkor lens has at 200mm and F5.6 compared with the Tamron at 300mm and F8.

Regards

Logged
risedal
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


« Reply #16 on: February 05, 2013, 09:56:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Still evaluating (Actually I am reviewing it for a publication) . So far I am quite pleased. Does anyone else remeber the origianl 80-200mm f/4.5 Nikkor?
I remember wanting one when I was in high school and early college years (mid to late '70s) but then scoffing at it in the early '80s  thinking "real photographers" use the 180mm f/2.8 AI-S Nikkor. Then Arthur Meyerson(http://www.arthurmeyerson.com) took me aside and showed me the work he had been doing with one: Awesomely high end annual report covers, double truck spreads, posters and prints.

80-200/4,5 good lens, one of the best and I compared that lens with a summicron M90  1978 and the Leica people didn't  like my findings
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1860



WWW
« Reply #17 on: February 06, 2013, 01:25:56 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm surprised you find the lens sharpest at F8
Unless you are buying a super speed lens for a given focal length (like a 85mm f/1.4 or a 500 or 600mm f/4) it's pretty much a given that any lens has better resolution  when  stopped down 1 to 2 stops from wide open.  of course if you need to shoot wide open to better stop motion then better resolution of the finest detail is meaningless.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8943


« Reply #18 on: February 06, 2013, 05:58:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm surprised you find the lens sharpest at F8
Unless you are buying a super speed lens for a given focal length (like a 85mm f/1.4 or a 500 or 600mm f/4) it's pretty much a given that any lens has better resolution  when  stopped down 1 to 2 stops from wide open.  of course if you need to shoot wide open to better stop motion then better resolution of the finest detail is meaningless.

Could you be a little clearer, Ellis, please. Do you mean that super speed lenses with a maximum aperture of F1.4, for example, are at their sharpest more than 1 to 2 stops down, or less than 1 to 2 stops down?

I would expect a good, standard 50/F1.4 prime lens to be sharpest at F4, which is 3 stops down. On the other hand, I have seen Photodo MTF tests showing some lenses, such as the old Canon 400/F2.8, being sharpest at their maximum aperture. When this occurs, one usually finds that the lens is only very marginally sharper at its maximum aperture, and a cheaper lens, although less sharp at the same maximum aperture, will likely be sharper at F8 than the more expensive lens is at F8, indicating that it's possible to optimize a lens to be sharpest at a particular aperture, but difficult to optimise it to have the best resolution across all apertures up to F11.

The high quality zooms, from both Canon and Nikon, such as the 70-200/F2.8 and the 70-200/F4, all seem to be sharpest at one stop down from maximum aperture at all focal lengths, if one considers Photozone results to be reliable.

The sharpest aperture on the cheaper zooms seems to vary more according to focal length, with a strong tendency to be sharpest at F8, or even F11 when fully extended, which is why I was surprised that you found your coppy of the Nikkor 70-200/F4 to be sharpest at F8 when fully extended.

Maybe your copy of this lens just happens to be at the lower end of the QC range.  Wink
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1860



WWW
« Reply #19 on: February 06, 2013, 08:19:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Generally if you buy a super speed lens like a 50mm f/1.2 or 85mm f/1.2, 200mm f/1.8, or 400mm f/2.Cool my thinking is that lens designers are thinking that you'll likely be using it wide open a fair amount of time and they design with that in mind. You probably still better better absolute resolution with the lens down a stop or two but that isn't why you spend the extra money. You are looking for either  low light or high shutter speed or both performance as a high ranking criteria.

I like the results at http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php more than photozone.

"Maybe your copy of this lens just happens to be at the lower end of the QC range.  "

It could be. It wasn't cherry picked. I will test more and post results!
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad