Lenses that out-resolve the D7000

[chanh_nguyen1]

<p>Are these up to snuff for the D7000?<br>

1. 80-400 mm VR (if yes, woohoo! I can have a poor man super tele zoom by cropping)<br>

2. 18-200 mm VR I (not hopeful, likely to be permanently attached to D200)<br>

3. 35-70 mm f2.8 AFD<br>

4. 12-24 mm f4.0<br>

5. 85 1.4D and 70-200 VR I (if not, I will cry and keep my promise that the D200 would be my last camera)</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>You really won't have to worry about any of them. You will finally notice how superior the 85/1.4 and 70-200/2.8 are over the rest of the lenses that you have.</p>

<p>The only one's you may not be too thrilled with are the 80-400 and 18-200. It does not mean that you have to stop using them though. Even more particular attention to technique can help.</p>

<p> </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>You really don't need to worry about lenses that "out-resolve" your camera.</p>

<p>What you might need to worry about is whether some lenses <em>fail</em> to be as good as the sensors.<br>

A list of those would be helpful, I suppose.</p>

[tommyinca]

<p>My 2 cents. DPREVIEW meansures about 65 line pairs per mm for the D7000. All the lens you listed should be able to do that at least in the center and at some zoom focal length and some f-stop. Your 85/1.4 (mileage may vary) should be able to aces center & corner arround f2-f2.8 give or take. IMHO, if you want a lens that can aces everything, check out the micro Nikkor 60/2.8 AF-S.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>Almost any lens on sale today will be good to excellent in the centre of the image field, but in practise most people want a lens to be sharp out to the edges and into the corners of the picture. Unfortunately there are a great many lenses out there that don't deliver satisfactory edge and corner sharpness, and again unfortunately performance is almost directly related to price and inversely related to zoom ratio and focal length. So as stated above the 5:1 zoom ratio 80-400mm isn't going to thrill you with its optical performance, and nor is the 18-200mm with its 11:1 zoom ratio.</p>

<p>But if you already have those lenses (and it sounds as if you have) then why not simply try them out on the D7000 and see if you find them satisfactory?</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p><em>5. 85 1.4D and 70-200 VR I (if not, I will cry and keep my promise that the D200 would be my last camera)</em></p>

<p>At or near optimum apertures (f/4-f/5.6 typical), these lenses certainly fill D7000 files with detail, assuming correct focus. Correctly focused images from even more modest lenses (like the 70-300VR) are clearly better on D7000 than D200. So what you should ask is this: "does the D7000 significantly improve image quality over the D200 with the following lenses: (your list)?" And the answer is "yes, with every one of them, assuming good technique, fast enough shutter speeds, optimal aperture, and correct focus". Even when you have a situation where lens A gives sharper images than lens B on D200, the images from lens B will be more detailed on the D7000 than they were on D200. The difference due to the newer sensor is likely to be greater on the sharper lens (A), but nevertheless it is there even with lens B.</p>

<p>Nikon's public excuse for not giving high pixel density on many of their cameras is that it would reduce the SNR, which to some extent is correct. But the real reason is not anything as noble as optimizing SNR. It is that they want to sell you lots of upgrades, one or two cameras every 2-3 years, with a slightly increased pixel density every time. This way they will get the maximum profit.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Chanh,<br>

Just out of curiosity: would you <strong>not </strong>buy a D7000 if the answer to your question would have been a resounding "no, none of them outresolves the D7000 sensor"?<br>

Which brings on the next question: what do you actually expect to see when the lenses fail to outresolve the sensor? So, in real world photos, how do you think this shows as a real issue?</p>

<p>And this is all just neglecting the much better High ISO performance of the D7000, the better AF module, bigger LCD screen, double memory card slots and some more. As Joe said above, just get the D7000, test your lenses. Odds are it puts a big smile on your face.</p>

[chanh_nguyen1]

<p>Thank you for your answers. The 18-200mm is probably my weakest lens, optically, but I like its convenience a lot. My guess is that the 18-200/D7000 combo won't offer better IQ in good light than my current 18-200/D200. (I always hand hold this lens, and my sharpest real life picture printed at 8x10 was taken with a D100!)<br>

I find the 80-400 mm to be very sharp (more than enough for me and my D200) when I use it with care for stationary things. It has poorer handling and slow AF, though. My hope is that I can get better resolution with the 80-400mm/D7000, but may have to rent a D7k to find out.<br>

Better AF and lower noise at higher ISO are the main reasons I am thinking of upgrading to a D7000. These advantages are of course lens-independent. But it would be a little disappointing to me if all the extra pixels won't give me more resolution because of lens limitations. I hate to pay for extras that I can't use or have to spend even more to use them :-) I still have a slight regret buying the Sigma 50 mm f1.4. It is rather soft wide open compared to my old, second hand Nikkor 85 mm f1.4 D lens, the only other 1.4 lens I have. My wallet tells me it is not a fair comparison, and I have heard that the old lens is pretty good. But still, I end up stopping down the Sigma whenever I use it and always wonder if I should have got a much cheaper 1.8 lens.</p>

 

[evilsivan]

Don't worry bout it and

enjoy your new camera. The

better lenses are better

lenses on any camera.

[chanh_nguyen1]

<p>Wouter, I think I probably would. The high ISO noise of the D200 has been bothering me though less now with LR3. Ilkka's response makes me think I will upgrade soon.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Chanh, what Ilkka explained was exactly the reason why I asked "<em>what do you actually expect to see when the lenses fail to outresolve the sensor</em>"; we posted our responses at the same time, though so I never saw Ilkka's response before I posted :-).<br>

If you want better high ISO results, and better AF, the D7000 will sure make you happy, I think.</p>

[m_tt_donuts]

<p>I would like to know what you're taking pictures of... are you taking pictures of newspapers hung on telephone poles down the street, MTF charts, and church steeples? Those don't typically win photo contests :) None of the ones mentioned will likely perform any better if you're hand holding them. I have this vision in my mind of someone setting this all up on a tripod and taking a picture of a newspaper down the street... finding there's a slight improvement and then walking around taking pictures hand-held...</p>

<p>I would get the D7000 in a heartbeat if you can afford it there are so many things about the D200 which I find incredibly annoying. D200 has no Live View, I find myself taking many shots down very low (but the ground is dew or mud) and hoping for the best. Rinse and repeat until I get something close, wishing I had live view. I hate the fact the D200 doesn't have focus adjustment, my F1.4 50mm focuses about 1/2" behind what I focus on and it has ruined so many excellent pictures... as I take a close-up of a toad and find the eyes that I focused on are out of focus but oh the middle of his back is nice and sharp! I have to focus, backup 1/2" and hope for the best and at F1.4 even 1/8" makes a lot of difference. Rinse and repeat. No dust cleaning. And most annoying, I don't know if your D200 has it but mine has the issue it randomly sets off my flashes (both the SB600 and SB800). Sometimes it'll trigger them 5+ times in quick succession without me wanting it to causing people to say what the (@#&(#! I took pictures at a christening, and didn't use my flash for fear right in the middle my flashes would start triggering as if possessed and startle the baby or upset the priest. So, I ended up taking pictures at 1600 ISO which to me 800 ISO is about as good as I can get from a D200 and still be happy... 1600 is beyond the D200's ability and many came out blurry from movement, or noisy and me processing the pictures to remove noise just wishing I had a different camera.</p>

<p>I've already saved up and ready for the new full frame D700 replacement whenever Nikon releases it... the earthquake in Japan slowed that down. In the meantime I can't wait to be done with the D200 and move on. My $0.02, D7000 takes care of ALL the issues of the D200 and takes movies. I certainly would be very happy with a D7000 and be done with the D200 :) </p>