lary_goode

<p>Don't know about micro contrast, but in terms of "snap", "Crackle" & "Pop", well this can say about. Have D800 and myself am perplexed about retaining the Nikkor 28mm F/1.8 G lens. To look at the results is to behold stunning perfection. Sharp, snappy, brilliant, rich color, no flaws, etc. Yet something is missing. Wanted an autofocus 28 but may give up on that idea. Your thoughts out there?<br> Have multiple copies of the 28mm F/2.0 AIS & the 28mm F/2.8 AIS ( 3 each, cherry picked out of dozens over the years ). And one 28mm F/1.4 AF-D. A strange lens this one is, one which at middle apetures matches the other two 28mms in sharpness, but has unique look I love. But low color saturation, always soft corners and flares like nobody's business rules this out for high end pro use. <br> As for the other two 28s, the F/2.0 was my first, but don't use it much anymore. Tremendous resolution at F/8, just barely, but if fact does surpass the F/2.8, which at makes them the sharpest Wide Angle Nikkors I've used. At F/5.6 the F/2.0 equals the F/2.8 in resolution. At F/11 the F/2.0 goes flat and dull in contrast and loses resolution compared to the F/2.8, or most Nikkors there. AT the other F/stops, the F/2.8 has much higher resolution and contrast at all distances. But use the 28mm F/2.8mm AIS for other reasons. The F/2.0 has chalky, desatured colors in the highights. And while rich, not really the word, lush color at F5.6-F8, it lacks the electric contrast of the F2.8 AIS. The Nikkor F/2.8 AIS is so snappy, with color depth easily matching Leica's finest, I'm in heaven when use this. It has deep, rich color with stunning contrast. Under low light, it is even better.<br> Now whom out there can recommend a similar autofocus wide angle?<br> PS: The 24m F/1.4 G is no match for my ancient, horribly reviewed Nikkor 24mm F/2.8 AIS, which is slightly sharper at every F Stop, but more importantly, with more contrast. Much more. Just jumps. Still not realistic and a bit soft, but that was it's look, but way more natural ( as is the color ). And without the anomorphic distortion inherent in ever G Lens Nikkor I have seen, which makes it difficult to use professionally. Still, the 24mm F/1.4 AF-S G is probably the second best modern ( G ) lens Nikkor ever made and very good, just not great. I keep it for keepsake and autofocus, as I do the other great Nikkor ( a tele ).<br> PPS: By the way, None of the 24mms are even remotely as good as a LATE SERIAL # AF-D Nikkor 24mm. If you get a good one ( I cherry picked two ). Sample variation is so bad from Nikon now, it's less than hit or miss getting a good one.<br> All the best</p> <p>As</p>

<p>Don't know about micro contrast, but in terms of "snap", "Crackle" & "Pop", well this can say about. Have D800 and myself am perplexed about retaining the Nikkor 28mm F/1.8 G lens. To look at the results is to behold stunning perfection. Sharp, snappy, brilliant, rich color, no flaws, etc. Yet something is missing. Wanted an autofocus 28 but may give up on that idea. Your thoughts out there?<br> <br /> Have multiple copies of the 28mm F/2.0 AIS & the 28mm F/2.8 AIS ( 3 each, cherry picked out of dozens over the years ). And one 28mm F/1.4 AF-D. A strange lens this one is, one which at middle apetures matches the other two 28mms in sharpness, but has unique look I love. But low color saturation, always soft corners and flares like nobody's business rules this out for high end pro use.<br> <br /> As for the other two 28s, the F/2.0 was my first, but don't use it much anymore. Tremendous resolution at F/8, just barely, but if fact does surpass the F/2.8, which at makes them the sharpest Wide Angle Nikkors I've used. At F/5.6 the F/2.0 equals the F/2.8 in resolution. At F/11 the F/2.0 goes flat and dull in contrast and loses resolution compared to the F/2.8, or most Nikkors there. AT the other F/stops, the F/2.8 has much higher resolution and contrast at all distances. But use the 28mm F/2.8mm AIS for other reasons. The F/2.0 has chalky, desatured colors in the highights. And while rich, not really the word, lush color at F5.6-F8, it lacks the electric contrast and tremendous depth of color of the F2.8 AIS. The Nikkor F/2.8 AIS is so snappy, with color depth easily matching Leica's finest, I'm in heaven when use this. It has deep, rich color with stunning contrast. Under low light, it is even better.<br> <br /> Now whom out there can recommend a similar autofocus wide angle?<br> <br /> PS: The 24m F/1.4 G is no match for my ancient, horribly reviewed Nikkor 24mm F/2.8 AIS, which is slightly sharper at every F Stop, but more importantly, with more contrast. Much more. Just jumps. Still not realistic and a bit low in exterior contrast, but that was it's look, made up for with pure color of tremendous finesse. And way more natural. And without the uncorrectable anomorphic distortion inherent in every G Lens Nikkor I have seen, which makes it difficult to use professionally, driving my very high end, high paying clients nuts. <br> Still, the 24mm F/1.4 AF-S G is probably the second best modern ( G ) lens Nikkor ever made and very good, just not great. I keep it for keepsake and autofocus, as I do the other great Nikkor ( a tele ).<br> <br /> PPS: By the way, None of the 24mms are even remotely as good as my LATE SERIAL #'d 24mm F/2.8 AF-D Nikkors. If you get a good one ( I cherry picked two ). Sample variation is so bad from Nikon now, it's less than hit or miss getting a good one.<br /> All the best</p> <p>As</p>

<p>Would like to comment on I believe Dan Browns just recent remarks.</p> <p>Your thoughts on the 50mm F1.8D are interesting. Though clearly not as sharp ( in resolution ) as the F/1.4s, let alone my 60mm F/2.8 AF-D Macros ( the finest lenses I have used IMHO ), I have this on my camera a lot. In fact more than anything else. Carrying a D800(Reg or E ) or a D4 with the thing helps handling and weight. <br> However, I use it for the image. Though not quite as finely detailed, but it is close, the lens has this snap! More contrast than the F/1.4s. Significantly. And it has a much more neutral, even ever so slightly cool color balance. the output from this lens reminds me a bit of my Leica stuff. Very snappy. Use the 1.8AF-D all the time.</p> <p>Good shooting.</p>

<p>I am regrettably contributing a response here only because I would like Nikon to continue to make the 50mm D lenses. </p> <p>I own over a dozen 50mm F/1.4 Nikkors. With at least 4 copies each that I cherry picked from very large sample sizes of the AF-D, AFS G and the AIS MF.</p> <p>The first thing you, or rather should say, is the poor quality of Nikon construction. Every one of my 50mm G lenses had some decentering issues ( as did almost all of my G lenses from 50 – 14mm). They feel like plastic and much of the lens is. Also, about half of the G lenses have their motors fail with prolonged, but not unusual use. And their have been other issues of design and manufacturing.</p> <p>Second, so many people seem to be willing to accept the new G lenses distortion. Which can never be put absolute right and has persistently irritated my clients. It is more indicative of America though than Nikon that many choose to accept such a lower standard.</p> <p>And the image itself is the most difficult part of the 50mm F1.4/G to accept. Shadows have constant color shifts and color casts. You never know what shadow or light will result in what color. A deal breaker for a high end wedding shooter and fashionista like me. Let alone the executive portrait clients whom will absolutely not pay for that kind of stuff.</p> <p>But worst of all, for me anyway, shooting for highly performed results is the lack of both color depth and color contrast and contrast in general. The colors are lighter and less saturated and, well for lack of a better term, look cheap next to the D lenses, let alone my Leica Summicrons.</p> <p>I will give the g lens a bit of a nod here…the color is slightly more brilliant, but also less accurate.</p> <p>Then there is the flare. The D lens could have problems with it. But I could not believe how much worse the 50mm F1.4 G was. So bad, that even in the store when bought my last one, the thing flared from the ceiling lights. Urgh!</p> <p>On the beach, shooting models in the sun the G is unusable. As it is for me in general now, due to the distortion and image flaws in comparison the D lens.</p> <p>One thing to note that may or may not account for others seeming to like ( not everybody ) the G lenses, the older D lenses until recently varied in sample quality. The AIS’s varied a lot. Interestingly, as the G lenses get more flawed by design, the recent ( 5-10 years ) D lenses get more consistent.</p> <p>Urge to attempt tests yourself with a D800E and on film with Velvia 50 so you came come to your own conclusions which would help keep D lenses around.</p> <p>Lary</p>