Nikkor 35 f1.4 and D300

Used the 35 f1.4 with my D300 earlier today. The combination is fantastic. I've also tested the D300 with

the 45 AiP f2.8 pancake lens too. It's also a really nice combo.<div></div>

45 AiP and D300<div></div>

Another one with the 35 f1.4 @f1.4<div></div>

Looks like it's a bit tough to focus, no?

No, not at all. The full size images are very well focused, and none of the exposures are over

blown nor is there any detectible CA. The bokhe is quite nice. Some of the more modern

lenses tend to give really harsh contrasty images and as a result have no character. These two

lenses I find have unique signatures. The 50 f1.2 may be a little soft wide open, though.<div></div>

Agree with Andrew. I don't see anything that looks to be in critical focus, especially in the first and third images. Would be curious to see a 100% crop of the "in focus" area. Looking to the right of his shoulder in the third image, the specular highlights have distinct bright rings - not what I'd term great bokeh. If you enjoy them though, that's really all that matters...

"Some of the more modern lenses tend to give really harsh contrasty images and as a result have no character."

 

Your color images (especially) are pretty low contrast images. Did you use lens hoods?

 

The 50/1.2 especially benefits from a long lens hood that matches the FOV on an APS-C sensor.

Brian, you'll get those"bright rings" with any fast lens, the fact that there is no color fringing

or color aberration is important. As these were problems with the D200.<div></div>

Again 35 f1.4 D300<div></div>

50 f1.2 @f1.2 with a D200 lots of CA<div></div>

Fab, your images seem to be slightly out of focus to me, even as small JPEGs. That was exactly the problem I had when I tried a Zeiss ZF 50mm/f1.4 on my D2X about a year and half ago. KatzEye should be the answer, although I don't use them since I typically don't focus manually.

here are some shots with the 28mm @ 1.4 on D200 (UNTOUCHED)

<img src="http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/Juanjo_Viagran/BS/_DSC4429-1.jpg">

 

<img src="http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/Juanjo_Viagran/BS/_DSC4419-1.jpg">

 

 

this one is a little touched.. ;)

 

<img src="http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/Juanjo_Viagran/BS/_DSC4452-1.jpg">

Juanjo, The shots from Fab have been made under adverse lighting conditions. :)

Fab, where do you see CA on that D200 shot? Even if the CA was 5 pixels wide on the original (and I've never seen anything remotely close to that), it would be less than 1 pixel wide at the size you've posted. Perhaps you don't understand what CA (or sharpness) is?

Brian, I know what sharpness is. If I want sharpness, for that I use a two photon laser

confocal microscope with Zeiss optics.<div></div>

As for CA=chromatic aberration examples with the 50 f1.2<div></div>

another ex CA<div></div>

Brian, I would never have guessed that the moon (above image) had purple fringing. Don't

misunderstand me, I think the f1.2 lens is brilliant, but I don't think it shines on the D200

body.<div></div>

one more<div></div>