tim_franklin Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 A comparison of these two lenses, by Jonathan Eastland, is in the new (31/5/06) issue of BJP. There are no firm conclusions drawn in the review, hence the quote marks in my thread title. The Zeiss lens is praised for its exceptional resolving power, which is undoubtedly superior to the old Nikkor. The article will appear on the magazine's web site - http://www.bjp-online.co.uk/ - in the next day or two, though non-subbers will probably need to take a free trial to read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 There's no doubt that the Planar will resolve more than the old Nikkor 50mm. The MTF's for both the lenses show that pretty clearly. The only issue is automation. It seems counter-intuitive to slap a lens onto a sophisticated camera body which it cannot communicate with; especially, for DSLR. Such a waste to spend all that money on a hi-tech body. Furthermore, there are more than 1 modern Nikkor zooms out there that can resolve just as well or better at 50mm with ED & aspherical elements. The Planar is not an apochromatic lens and neither does it have any aspherical elements. Not unless you have extra money & you just wanna try out Zeiss lenses, I don't see anything compelling from the practicality point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ky2 Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Why hunt elsewhere? Stay <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GQh4">on photo.net</a>. I don't care much about magazine reviews. They're too biased (afterall, Nikon pays more for advertisements than Zeiss). <br><br> Arthur, I don't take much of the marketting mumbo jumbo: ED, Aspherical, and the rest of the crap they try to feed you. The proof is in the pictures, and the Zeiss (I have it) has some serious advantages over my other 50 Nikkors. It outresolves even my previous champ, the 50/1.2 AIS, and it fits wonderfully with my D200.<br><br> The point of using an old AI/AIS lens on a "modern" DSLR, is that I can utilize my "old" glass. The only culprit is, that the D200's focus screen (and D2x, I suppose Shun can attest to that), is not suitable for pinpoint manual focusing for fast lenses. You have to add a third party solution (The Katz Eye focus screen, for example, $100-$150), and then everything seems to click into place wonderfully. It is true that the ZF's won't appeal to most DSLR users, especially the ones with D50 and D70's that cannot meter with these lenses, but I'm pretty sure these are not Zeiss's target market.<br><br> I wanted a 50 that I could use wide open. At f/1.4... No Nikkor can deliver that, not even the 50/1.2. Add to that better distortion control and 1/3 fstop clicks, and hey, these lenses are winners. Let's just hope Cosina can keep up to Zeiss quality control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oceanphysics Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 <i>Furthermore, there are more than 1 modern Nikkor zooms out there that can resolve just as well or better at 50mm with ED & aspherical elements.</i> <p> How do they perform at f/1.4? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 ED: The 16mm f/3.5 does not have any Ed. It is a superb performer. Many current Nikon zoomz have them (atleast they say so). It is not noticeable from (many of them) the images they project. Aspherical? Hmm.. that is sounds delicious. Nano coating? Would it obviate the use of a "protecting" filter? Let us see how many Nikon lenses (zoomz or non zoomz) out there with an "Apo" designation? Zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_bradtke Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Hey Vivek What about the LF Nikon lenses. I thought they made or make a 460mm APO. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterh Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Except for a few occasions I could very well do with a body a la F2 and the chip of the D200 and a display on the back. Together with the planar it might be a shame for the "high tech" for some people but I could not care less. On my D70 all I use is M or A mode. Given the choice of an F2 like body with only M or the D70 I have a clear answer. Yes it would be a bad body for action, fashion etc... cant beat a modern body with an 70-200 F2.8 AFSVREDIF_XYZ for many applications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Michael, I thought this was about lenses for 35mm cameras. Nikon used to make a variety of APO Nikkors for large format graphic copying, APO El-Nikkors for enlarging and such. They are discontinued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Williams Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 "I don't care much about magazine reviews. They're too biased (afterall, Nikon pays more for advertisements than Zeiss)." Don't judge them all by the alleged standards of certain popular publications. The BJP has an excellent reputation that goes back a century and a half, and is targeted at professionals rather than 'camera enthusiasts'. I'd be very surprised if it allowed its reviewers to be swayed by its advertisers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icuneko Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 There is much more to a lens's imaging qualites than resolution, sharpness. Color fidelity, flare resistance, distortion, curvature of field, bokeh, etc. all contribute to how one appreciates--or not--a particular lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ky2 Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Richard, if that's the case (we don't have that publication here in the States), then I'll subscribe :). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mawz Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 You might be surprised about how many D50 and D70 users might be interested in the ZF's. I certainly am, as a D50 owner who shoots almost entirely with AI glass, it will make a nice upgrade from my 50 f1.8E. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_hall1 Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Well, Nikon USA lists a 28 f2, a 35 f1.4, a 50 f1.2, a 85 f1.4, and others as manual focus lens currently in their product line. But none of these lens can be found anywhere... A google search for the Zeiss lens turns up a Malaysian company that ships worldwide and so actually not very convenient. The 50mm is about $650 and the 85mm is about $1350 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 B.Hall: Check the link Yaron provided in this thread and find the source. Have you heard of Steve Gandy? He is located in California. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkfoxman Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Ah, Ziess, Schmeiss... :) I decided not to wait and got the last remaining brand new 50mm 1.2 AIS at Adorama in NYC for $420. Great lense. Lovely portraits... Challenging for macros (with ext. ring) but if you nail the focus, the boke is to die for. It was a slum dank decision for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feli Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 >Furthermore, there are more than 1 modern Nikkor zooms out there that >can resolve just as well or better at 50mm with ED & aspherical >elements. The Planar is not an apochromatic lens and neither does it >have any aspherical elements. There isn't a zoom around that can outperform a modern high-end 50. Zoom lenses that deliver anywhere near the performance of a modern prime are far and few inbetween and those that do exist cost as much as a compact car ($6000 Leica VARIO-APO-ELMARIT-R 2,8/70-180). Don't be fooled by the terms APO, ASPH, ED etc. None of these technologies are a magic bullet or guarantee superior performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ned1 Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 If you're shooting digital I doubt the Zeiss will give you anything the Nikon 50 1.2 won't. I have one and it resolves down to the limit of the sensor on my D200. F1.2 is a little misty but it's crystal clear at F1.4. If you're shooting fine-grain film, or waiting for Nikon to come out with a 22mp, then the Zeiss makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Some zooms can compete on sharpness with the best prime lenses. However the zooms usually have lower contrast and problems with flare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebogaerts Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 "Don't be fooled by the terms APO, ASPH, ED etc. None of these technologies are a magic bullet or guarantee superior performance." I also think that all of those technologies have limited application and value on a 50mm optical design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil_swanson Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 There is another Nikon vs Zeiss review online now at www.reidreviews.com Or do a search under Sean Reid. I like his approach to reviewing cameras and lens and you may too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey_edelstein1 Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 On a digital camera it is really a 75mm view that you will see in the exposure. Now for a fast 50mm point of view you need either a Nikkor 28mm f1.4 or the Sigma 30mm f1.4 which will have 50mm field of view and f1.4 max stop, the only thing that it will not have is the shallow DOF of that a 50mm would have because we are using wide angle lenses to compensate for the crop factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Yaron, >Arthur, I don't take much of the marketting mumbo jumbo: ED, Aspherical, and the rest of the crap they try to feed you. The proof is in the pictures, and the Zeiss (I have it) has some serious advantages over my other 50 Nikkors. Just curious, what are your 50 Nikkors? Have you used any of pro lenses with ED elements? Have you used the Nikkor 28mm/1.4 Asph? Have you used any of the newer DX Nikkors with ED and Asph? I am asking all these just so I can understand where you're coming from. If ED and aspherical elements are crap to you, then I think you're missing quite a bit from what Nikon can offer. They are the hallmarks of Nikkors, including some of the finest Nikkors such as the 200VR, 300VR and the 70-200VR. ED and aspherical elements are the foundations of the modern Nikkors ; especially, the hybrid/molded asphericals. They raised the bars so that the newer breed of Nikkors can mate well with the high-res sensors. In terms of the 50mm Planar ZF, I realize that it has good resolution. But, I sincerely doubt it can match any of higher end Nikkors (with ED elements) in the area of crisp color separation. It's pure optical physics: you simply cannot focus lights of different colors on exactly the same spot without apochromatic elements. They will miss the spot and fringing will occur, little or much, depending on the design. In short, a non-apochromatic lens can never match an apochromatic lens when it comes to colors. Question: You bought a D200 so that you can put a manual lens on it which has no capabilities to talk to the body? And, how much is this 50mm Planar? Are you telling me no Nikkors can match this $500 Planar? It's a fine lens but please don't claim that it's silver bullet to replace all Nikkors? Give me a break! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Vivek, >ED: The 16mm f/3.5 does not have any Ed. It is a superb performer. It's superb performer on which Nikon camera body? Film of digital? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Vivek, Sometimes, I think you argue for the sake of arguing. :( >Let us see how many Nikon lenses (zoomz or non zoomz) out there with an "Apo" designation? Zero. ED/APO/ELD/SLD/UD are all the different vendors terminologies for apochromatic lenses and they mean the same thing: apochromatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 And apochromatic elements are used to focus lights of different colors onto the same spot instead of dispersing around a spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now