Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon D800E - ideal lens for Landscape work?  (Read 5647 times)
HSakols
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 387


« Reply #20 on: September 15, 2013, 08:13:54 AM »
ReplyReply

I doubt one will see any difference between something like the 16-35 at 20 and the Zeiss 21 regardless of what DxO says.  But I really don't know.  I'm still using my Nikon 20mm AFD and yes I'm sure it is less sharp at the edges but what is the real world difference in the print especially stopped down.  I'm just playing devil's advocate. I'd love the Zeiss if I had deep pockets.
Logged
jerome_m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 656


« Reply #21 on: September 15, 2013, 08:53:39 AM »
ReplyReply

I doubt one will see any difference between something like the 16-35 at 20 and the Zeiss 21 regardless of what DxO says.  But I really don't know.  I'm still using my Nikon 20mm AFD and yes I'm sure it is less sharp at the edges but what is the real world difference in the print especially stopped down.  I'm just playing devil's advocate. I'd love the Zeiss if I had deep pockets.

A quick look at the o.p. website shows that his biggest prints are 16"x20" (about A2 size). Now, I really wonder if the differences between the H28D + Hasselblad 50mpix and a D600 (not D800!) + 20mm f/2.8D would indeed show on this kind of prints. I have printed larger than A2 with 24 mpix and older lenses.

I should simply try and find out, probably.
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7888


WWW
« Reply #22 on: September 15, 2013, 09:41:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, that is a good suggestion.

Best regards
Erik




In addition to words & opinions, evaluate the actual lens and images taken with that lens by using a service from a rental shop such as LensRentals.com.
Logged

Lust4Life
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 430


WWW
« Reply #23 on: September 15, 2013, 10:46:29 AM »
ReplyReply

A quick look at the o.p. website shows that his biggest prints are 16"x20" (about A2 size). Now, I really wonder if the differences between the H28D + Hasselblad 50mpix and a D600 (not D800!) + 20mm f/2.8D would indeed show on this kind of prints. I have printed larger than A2 with 24 mpix and older lenses.

I should simply try and find out, probably.

Since moving to Chapel Hill from Naples, FL I have sold the Epson 4800 and now use a Canon iPF6400.  Reprinting some of my images with 24" roll paper.  Finding they look great from those taken with the Hassie digital BUT none of the files from the Canon 5DMkII that I tested a couple of years ago can come close to the Hassie files, even those taken back when I was using the 30MP Hassie system.  Now, I've not taken enough images with the Nikon D800E yet to have one worth burning up 24" paper.

But the reality is, I'm now forced to the SLR format with two lenses and a wife to haul the tripod.  Actually, that's not bad.
With the funds recovered from the sale of the Hassie gear, I can afford to buy ANY lenses to mate up to the D800E.  I just want to purchase the best for my needs.

Makes sense to me.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2013, 10:48:29 AM by Lust4Life » Logged

mjrichardson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 164


WWW
« Reply #24 on: September 15, 2013, 01:20:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi

Interesting discussion, I recently bought the Nikon and have found it great for the type of images I make. I'm enjoying shooting landscapes with lots of different lenses, not necessarily just wides, that said, I have a Zeiss 21 and it's fantastic, the images are richer from that lens and as has been mentioned, the Lightroom profile does an excellent job. I've also been amazed at the 50 1.8 for landscapes, it costs nothing and is fantastic! I'm also shooting landscapes with the Zeiss 135 f2 and find it superb too, with these 3 lenses I know I get a different field of view but still excellent images.

Enjoy your new system, it'll be lighter for sure!

Mat
Logged

JohnBrew
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 758


WWW
« Reply #25 on: September 15, 2013, 03:30:45 PM »
ReplyReply

"BUT I just checked at Dxomark.com and they are not very fond of the 21!
That's concerning to me!!"

Too bad you're so wrapped up in DXO. I've never purchased a lens based on DXO results. I think Photozone (www.photozone.de) reviews are much closer to what you encounter in the field and they have enough charts and graphs to satisfy all the technical geeks questions.
Logged

jerome_m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 656


« Reply #26 on: September 15, 2013, 03:32:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Since moving to Chapel Hill from Naples, FL I have sold the Epson 4800 and now use a Canon iPF6400.  Reprinting some of my images with 24" roll paper.  Finding they look great from those taken with the Hassie digital BUT none of the files from the Canon 5DMkII that I tested a couple of years ago can come close to the Hassie files, even those taken back when I was using the 30MP Hassie system.  Now, I've not taken enough images with the Nikon D800E yet to have one worth burning up 24" paper.

I can use an iPF6350. Almost as good as the new iPF6400. I could try to see what happens when I print the same picture taken with the HCD28 and a Nikon 14-24. Or I could rent a Zeiss 21mm, but don't hold your breath.

More seriously: we can discuss these things for ages, but considering that you are coming from an HCD28 on a 50 mpix Hasselblad, the only lens that could satisfy you is the Zeiss 21mm. The HCD28 is good, really good. Don't let people who have not tried the HCD28 talk you into buying lenses, they don't know.
Logged
Lust4Life
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 430


WWW
« Reply #27 on: September 15, 2013, 04:39:06 PM »
ReplyReply

I can use an iPF6350. Almost as good as the new iPF6400. I could try to see what happens when I print the same picture taken with the HCD28 and a Nikon 14-24. Or I could rent a Zeiss 21mm, but don't hold your breath.

More seriously: we can discuss these things for ages, but considering that you are coming from an HCD28 on a 50 mpix Hasselblad, the only lens that could satisfy you is the Zeiss 21mm. The HCD28 is good, really good. Don't let people who have not tried the HCD28 talk you into buying lenses, they don't know.

I agree, with HCD28 is outstanding!
Thus, I'm probably order the Zeiss 21 tomorrow.
Still defining the best lens between 21 and 85.
Logged

HSakols
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 387


« Reply #28 on: September 15, 2013, 04:59:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Here is a sample with the Nikon 20mm AFD shot at f16.  Meadow details in Tuolumne Meadows with Unicorn Peak in the background. 


Logged
shadowblade
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #29 on: September 15, 2013, 08:17:16 PM »
ReplyReply

I doubt one will see any difference between something like the 16-35 at 20 and the Zeiss 21 regardless of what DxO says.  But I really don't know.  I'm still using my Nikon 20mm AFD and yes I'm sure it is less sharp at the edges but what is the real world difference in the print especially stopped down.  I'm just playing devil's advocate. I'd love the Zeiss if I had deep pockets.

I don't know about the Nikon 16-35, but I use both the Canon 16-35 and the Nikon 14-24 on a Canon body (via an adapter) and there is a huge difference between the two, particularly in terms of edge and corner sharpness. The same goes for the Zeiss 21, which is a bit sharper than the 14-24.
Logged
pluton
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 80


« Reply #30 on: September 16, 2013, 12:47:30 AM »
ReplyReply

I have both the 14-24 and the ZF 21, and for pure image quality at that FL, I'd pick the ZF every time.  The 14-24 is excellent, but lower contrast in the details.
A good 28mm and a good 35mm would both compliment the ZF21 nicely. There are many to choose from...
Logged
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 786


WWW
« Reply #31 on: September 16, 2013, 11:11:10 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree, with HCD28 is outstanding!
Thus, I'm probably order the Zeiss 21 tomorrow.
Still defining the best lens between 21 and 85.

probably the new Zeiss 55mm  1.4 Distagon- it is coming in a few months ( and it weighs 1 KG !)
Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
Lust4Life
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 430


WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 16, 2013, 11:15:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Just returned the Nikkor PC-E 24 and ordered the Zeiss 21!

Should have it by the end of the week and run tests this weekend.

Thanks for input on the wide side....... now for the rest.
Logged

Lust4Life
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 430


WWW
« Reply #33 on: September 16, 2013, 11:16:42 AM »
ReplyReply

probably the new Zeiss 55mm  1.4 Distagon- it is coming in a few months ( and it weighs 1 KG !)

Do you have an actual time frame on the 55?
Assume it's manual focus only???
Logged

NancyP
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1051


« Reply #34 on: September 16, 2013, 12:02:30 PM »
ReplyReply

I have the Zeiss Distagon 21mm f/2.8 on a lowly Canon 6D, and I must say that this is a wonderful lens. Color, contrast, resolution - all outstanding. If you like WIDE, this fits, and it takes 82mm filters and a Lee standard system.

Holy moley - new Zeiss 55mm weighs about the same as my 400mm f/5.6 lens (also all metal construction)!
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7888


WWW
« Reply #35 on: September 16, 2013, 01:16:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Just a few small thoughts...

Much of the effort correcting a lens like the 55/1.4 is going into reducing aberrations when shooting at full aperture. If the lens is reasonably stopped down, like f/5.6 you will probably get similar performance from a well corrected lens with smaller weight.

Regarding Zeiss lenses, I would suggest that it is worth checking out Lloyd Chambers Zeiss pages: http://diglloyd.com/index-zf.html

Best regards
Erik

Do you have an actual time frame on the 55?
Assume it's manual focus only???

Logged

Lust4Life
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 430


WWW
« Reply #36 on: September 16, 2013, 01:33:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Just a few small thoughts...

Much of the effort correcting a lens like the 55/1.4 is going into reducing aberrations when shooting at full aperture. If the lens is reasonably stopped down, like f/5.6 you will probably get similar performance from a well corrected lens with smaller weight.

Regarding Zeiss lenses, I would suggest that it is worth checking out Lloyd Chambers Zeiss pages: http://diglloyd.com/index-zf.html

Best regards
Erik

Hi Erik,

At $249.00 to view his test, I'm not real excited about that.

Jack
Logged

Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1695


« Reply #37 on: September 16, 2013, 02:25:44 PM »
ReplyReply

At $249.00 to view his test, I'm not real excited about that.

For that money, you can buy one of those 55mm f3.5 Nikkors I referred to earlier. 

As sharp as any lens I've ever used, and that includes some multi-tens-of-thousands-of-dollars beauties.
Logged
jerome_m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 656


« Reply #38 on: September 16, 2013, 02:32:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for input on the wide side....... now for the rest.

50mm: Nikon 60mm f/2.8 macro (called micro actually) works very well at landscapes too. Or you can use a old 50mm f/1.8 D, they cost nothing and work very well for landscape at f/8 (link. They have a bit more distortion than the macro, but nothing serious.

85mm: the 85mm f/1.8 D works extremely well and costs about nothing link.

These lenses are cheap, but work very well. Building a standard lens or short tele is not very difficult.
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7888


WWW
« Reply #39 on: September 16, 2013, 03:21:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

It is actually 74.99 for the Zeiss pages. The Zeiss lens you bought is at 1843 at B&H. I would consider 75USD a good investment if I planned to acquire lenses for say 3000. Anyway, Lloyd's article recommends the 21/2.8.

What is good with the Diglloyd articles is that they also discuss other issues like field curvature and design choices. For instance most Zeiss lenses are not corrected for the extreme corners. The 25/2 lens may be a good example for that.

It seems that most Zeiss lenses are very good, with some exceptions. It may be that Zeiss has lesser tolerances than others.

Tim Ashley published some very good tests on his blog, for free... http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog

DxO gives much info about the lenses they have tested, good info as long as you look at the data and not the funny DxO-mark grade they deal out.

Best regards
Erik



Hi Erik,

At $249.00 to view his test, I'm not real excited about that.

Jack
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad