Across the Tracks: Test of Nikkor 17-35mm on D800E

--Lannie

Here is the original, resized.

--Lannie

This lens is not so great for pixel peeping, but it is fine for real world photography.

The shot was hand-held, but the shutter was at 1/5000 sec.

--Lannie

Here is the 100% crop with fairly standard post-processing.

I like it better without the post-processing.  I also think that I over-sharpened this, even though the Unsharp Mask was set at radius 0.3.

--Lannie

Hi Lannie,

A pleasant scenic view here.

Well you used this lens in its range for best optical output, from F/2.8 to F/5.6.

However, when using the Nikon D800E any stop down will result in a loss of definition since there are few Nikkor lens (none are zooms) that can keep up with the potential of the sensor.

When I shoot this zoom lens at 17mm, F/2.8 or F/4 is my limit with any camera unless I am using an older camera from 4 years back or so.

Now, as for sharpening the image. If you can not set the amount of sharpening accurately, then go to the top of Photshop menu, under EDIT, four rows down is a FADE control. This allows you to fine tune the amount of any action that you use on your image.

Best Regards my friend, Mike

Thanks, Mike.

As for f-stop, however, my own tests indicate a wide variability as to which f-stop will give me maximum resolution--not so much in the middle, but in the corners.  Very few zooms are that good in the corners without being stopped down, in my experience, especially at the wide end.

--Lannie

Hi Lannie,

While there is a range of zoom lens quality available, they all are compromised to start with. This is why I avoid zoom lens with my better cameras. The solution is simple, get a high quality fixed focal length lens.

Often, an older zoom lens will not remain properly aligned due to wear or internal issues with cams, etc. This will cause a degradation of the corner performance for that lens that has to move about many elements to obtain the focal length and focus positions. The use of the F-stop does NOT correct this, it only Masks the shortcomings of the lens due to the reduction of image quality. Why use a camera capable of producing high definition imagery with great enlaregements when the lens is limited inherently by design or by the f-stop selected that compromises performance anyways ?

Recall what I have been saying, stopping down a good lens compromises image quality. Now, if a lens is not working well wide open, then the f-stop reduces the definition of the lens to the point that most issues are not noticeable.

If you stop down a zoom lens to make the corners look better, you are far better off cropping to the limit of the best scene dynamics and shoot at a wider f-stop setting. The other option is to purchase a high quality fixed focal length lens that properly covers the 35 mm full frame format.

Last point, with the Nikon D800E, unless you are using high quality lens, your work is limited with the camera. This is nothing new. In the film days, a high quality lens with an inexpensive 35mm camera could be properly matched up by simply buying a finer grained, higher definition film to go into the camera. A lesser lens could use a less exotic film type because of its inherent limitations.

Trying to evaluate "resolution" in the field is not an easy task because of the scene characteristics. Even the same scene is going to change due to lighting factors and environmental factors hourly. Often, the choce of subjects are not optimal either for a long list of technical reasons.

Best Regards my friend, Mike

Thanks, Mike.  I appreciate your sustained commentary.  This was a used zoom that appears to be satisfactory for my purposes.  I plan to keep it, though it is definitely less than perfect--and the test was less than perfect as well.

Since all of my Nikon recent lens purchases (going back to November) have been of sub-optimal lenses (used zooms), I recognize that my observations have no scientific validity.  Given my present financial situation, however, these three f/2.8 zooms (17-35, 28-70, and 80-200) will have to be good enough for now--and they are good enough, which is not to say that better lenses are not available.  Nor is it to say that they pull all of the potential from the D800E's sensor, and I did not expect that they would.  Considering my total layout ($760 for the 80-200, $1225 for the 17-35, and $1025 for the 28-70 = $3005--less than the cost of the body), you can see that I am trying to scrape by with a less than optimal optical arsenal.  I do have my old 600 f/4 Ai-S, but I have not tried it on the D800E just yet.  I will likely use it to shoot birds and squirrels in my back yard rather than do formal tests.

So. . . my options are limited at this point, and I am trying to find out only what works more or less well on these lenses.  In spite of the fact that these lenses are not top of the line in quality or condition, the entire package is still beating my old Canon gear that I had built up around the 5D II.  Therefore I expect to stay with Nikon, not to say that I will never own or use Canons from time to time. 

All along I had wanted to buy one "notoriously" sharp Nikon prime, but that will have to wait--perhaps indefinitely.  Even with sub-optimal lenses and sub-optimal testing procedures, these tests have reassured me that going with Nikon was a good move.

I have to say that I much prefer to test lenses in the field, but for a prima facie overview, these shots down the street have given me the kind of quick practical feedback that I need.  I have never presumed that they were other than what they are.

Thanks again for all of your help.

--Lannie