Which NIKON, and Zeisss Otus . . . ?

[BelaMolnar]

<p> It is not the Otus, <strong>(one of the web site, I can't mentioning here, testing the Zeiss-Otus, so called super lens, super expensive, many image atached to it, and they ended up using a Nikon Df. . . . WHY?!)</strong> it is, why, they, had picked the "<strong>Nikon Df"</strong> for using this camera, checking this "lens". Readd the article on the web.<br>

I'm shooting with this camera, since it shown up in the store, in the main-time, I using the D3s and the D4 for most of my works, occasionally, any Nikon film cameras I own, if I shoot film. The interesting thing is, lately, I using more and more the <strong>Df</strong>, because it is get slightly better quality of images, noise, low light situation, high ISO, freedom of tripod use, the bulk of the camera, NOT the weight, ( <em>How ever I like to haw a proper optional battery pack, for better handling using bigger lenses, -even if it's not build with battery compartment or buttons, styled for this camera, not that ugly, ugly Chines made plastic garbage</em>) and not for the last, the very good bright view-finder, delighted to use all my excellent manual prime lenses. If they, NIKON, can build a camera with such a good viewfinder, why, I asking, why they can't do it on other high-end digital cameras?<br>

In this "review" they used the best camera, for the lens, and it vas a Nikon DF most of the time, not the D800, D4 or the latest D4s, or what ever.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>The D810 viewfinder is improved in clarity over the one in the D800; give it a try and see what you think.</p>

<p>Some of the light is diverted through the main mirror to the AF module. Since the Multi-CAM 4800 used in the Df covers a smaller area of the frame and is rated less sensitive than the various Multi-CAM 3500 modules used in e.g. D4s, D810, D750, it is likely that the Df viewfinder gets more light thus improving the viewing experience. So in that case the designers had to choose between optimal viewfinder experience and how much light to use for AF.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Well, all Zeiss ZF lenses are manual focus. Therefore, the capability of the AF system on the body doesn't matter.</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>From what one gathers, the D810 should be the body of choice to assess a lens optically. Use anything else and the body compromises the test.</p>

<p>I can see <em><strong>why</strong></em> they used the Df, 'cos it's users have very deep pockets and are more likely to buy zeiss lenses.</p>

<p>Money or speed is obviously not an issue.....although why you'd want to put an ultra-high res lens on a so-so body baffles me.</p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

The D810 is definitely the best Nikon body to see pure optical quality but I'd use the live view scree to focus with and not

the viewfinder. Likewise the Sony A7r.

 

And given my druthers I'd choose the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art HDM lens over the OTUS.

[mike_halliwell]

<p>The Zeiss is an 'old' lens now, almost a year now.. here's the take from Lenstip.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The summary couldn't have been more unanimous. Among all 1.4/50 class lenses, available on the market, only the Zeiss Otus is good enough to compete with the Sigma, tested here - it fares better in the frame center but a bit worse on the edge. If you additionally take into account the fact that the Sigma is over four times cheaper than the Otus it’s hard not to be impressed.<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm with Ellis. The Sigma can be got for well under £600 now.</p>

[Two23]

<p>I'm puzzled by the test too. I've just completed a Nikon system change with the goal of having the best available so I can make enlargements bigger than 20x30. After about a month's research (DxO, Lens Rentals, Photozone, etc.) I ended up with: D800e, Nikon 24mm PC-E, Sigmas 35mm & 50mm f1.4 ART, Nikon 85mm f1.8G, and I already had a Nikon 80-400mm AFS (which is at least quite decent.) I passed on the 24mp Df partly because I didn't see it as a good value, partly because its AF system is consumer level, and partly because its 24mp sensor just didn't test as well on DxO as the D800e. Of course, none of this sharpness/performance means much if you aren't using a tripod. </p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[raczoliver]

<p>24 mp Df? Did I miss an announcement?</p>

<p>The viewfinder is the only reason I still find the Df somewhat attractive. I wonder how the D810 and D750 compare.</p>

[Two23]

<p>I confused it with the D600. Now I'm even more confused why they'd test a lens with a 16mp camera, unless they were looking for lenses for that specific one.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Having guessed the site to look at on the second attempt... I'm not sure that web-sized images tell us much anyway. If anything, I'm more bothered that half the images are shot at f/11, hiding a lot of aberrations, or converted to black and white, hiding the question of LoCA - the thing I'm really trying to get a handle on with the Otus (and the Art Sigma). From other images, while both are clearly more corrected than the average normal lens, neither seem to be perfect at avoiding colour fringes in the way that I expect my 200 f/2 to be, and at least some images have shown slightly busy bokeh from both lenses - but that may have been the result of over-sharpening in software. I'm probably being overly-paranoid, but before putting down £700 on a Sigma or - especially - £3100 on a Zeiss, I'd want to be convinced.</p>

[dan_south]

<p>By the way, it's not Zeisss</p>

<p>It's Zei$$$</p>

<p> </p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Dan: They're German. It's Z€iss. (Incidentally, I notice Photozone have reviewed the Sigma 50mm A, and not been overly impressed by the LoCA handling. Sigh. I keep hoping...)</p>