Just posted!Our lens review of the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.4G. This version replaces the AF-Nikkor 50mm F1.4D we reviewed last year, bringing entirely new optics and a built-in AF-S motor which allows autofocus on all of Nikon’s DSLRs. On its introduction Nikon hailed it as ‘redefining the standard lens concept’, so how well does it live up to these lofty claims?
Just posted! Our new lens review of Nikon’s top-end fast telezoom, the AF-S VR-Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8G ED-IF. This is the first in a series of reviews in which we’ll be comparing it with similar lenses from Canon, Sigma and Tamron, using both APS-C and 35mm full frame cameras. The 70-200mm F2.8 VR has long been a favourite of Nikon DX format shooters, but how well does it stand up on the new full-frame D3? Read on to find out.
DxOMark has recently tested the Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR, which in some markets will be sold as a ‘kit’ zoom with the latest D5300 SLR. As part of our ongoing collaboration, we’ve added the test data to our lens widget, so you can compare it with Nikon’s other current DX standard zooms. We’ve included test data on both the D7000 and D7100 – the latter should be a good indicator of its performance on the D5300. Read on for more analysis.
Only G and D lenses will transfer attention distance information to the camera , and that is helpful for flash drives, amongst other things.Nikon also made lenses together with the kind of IX. These lenses were designed for the Pronea series of cameras, which use the Advanced Photo System format film. They cannot be employed on 35mm film or digital bodies, so just ignore them unless you have a Nikon Pronea.Every once in a while, I get asked why some lenses are a lot more expensive in comparison to others. Interestingly, this question stems from both beginners and advanced photographers, but in various contexts. Beginners wish to know why pro-level lenses are a lot more costly than consumer lenses, while educated photographers wonder about what makes niche/exotic lenses from companies like Zeiss and Leica much more expensive than modern professional lenses. These are all interesting and legitimate questions, so I thought writing a couple of articles to try to answer these queries would be helpful for our subscribers. In this article, I would like to answer the very first beginner question on what makes specialist lenses expensive.The main differentiating factor between the above mentioned categories isn’t necessarily price. Features, caliber, autofocus motor, dimensions, optical attributes and price are what cumulatively divides one lens out of another. Some lenses are sold at a cheap price simply due to their age, however it doesn’t mean that they move to a different class.
Consequently, it’s often not a good idea to prevent down a lot of. One option is to use a concentrate stacking technique, in which you take a series of pictures focused at various points and then use post-processing software to unite those pictures. But, concentrate stacking only works well if your landscape is very still and not one of these things are moving, so wind and immediate changes in ambient lighting can spoil the result.By using a tilt/shift lens, so you can tilt the attention plane in this way that you could bring the whole scene in excellent focus even at large aperture values. The lens physically tilts up, down, left and right to give you complete control over depth of field. There are several potential problems with using this lens. First, it’s a manual focus lens. Secondly, it is a fixed focal length lens, which means that you will have to move around to write your shot. Third, it only correctly fits pro-level DSLRs such as Nikon D700 and Nikon D3s and has restricted movement on smaller DSLRs. And finally, it is not a simple lens to use and you will have to understand how to correctly utilize the tilt/shift capacity and compute depth of field based on the tilt place. As soon as you master this particular lens, it is not easy to find anything else which could conquer it. Needless to say, its sharpness, contrast and colors are top notch.If you’re looking for the sharpest lens Nikon has ever created, check out the Nikon 24mm f/1.4G — it is virtually perfect concerning optical performance.
Its front part form and the built-in lens hood only make it impossible to use filters. Sure, you can buy a filter holder system from Lee along with other manufacturers for this particular lens to accommodate filters, however it is not cheap and you may need to obtain a pair of big 150mm filters, so forget about using the existing filters. I really want Nikon enabled us to utilize little replaceable filters close to the lens mount, just like on telephoto lenses and this lens would have been irreplaceable.If you don’t heavily rely on various filters like that I do, then you will never be let down with this particular lens — yes, it is that good. If ability to utilize filters is essential, the only other full-frame lens from Nikon I would consider are the Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR lens (view my Nikon 16-35mm VR Inspection ). If you are a DX shot, then the Nikon 12-24mm f/4 is superb.Year after year, the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G has been my #1 used workhorse lens for landscape photography. While its performance isn’t quite as striking as on the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G, particularly in the corners in large apertures, it just has to be stopped down to f/5.6 and smaller to unveil its true performance. It has a light fast AF, amazing color rendering, extremely useful zoom range on full-frame cameras and it carries filters! But similar to this 14-24mm it also includes a couple of problems — it is bulky, heavy, expensive and does not have any VR.
So what does this mean to me and why did I bother writing an article on something we photographers should instinctively know by now? It is evident that newer lenses produce better photographs. It’s obvious but I believe we may sometimes loose just a little perspective on this’better’ scale.Take the vintage 43-86mm lens, remember that is reputed to be the’worst’ Nikon lens ever, this lens is older than many of its owners to place it into perspective, 1 year before this lens came into market audio tapes were invented. That is crazy, you would expect a lens that’s dubbed as the worst lens and made at one time before pocket calculators that it would be like shooting via an old sock! It just isn’t. Yes it is soft, yes it’s blurry at the edges, yes it flares in the highlights but it’s still useable and frankly a shot taken with this lens and displayed from the most common format of our creation i.e. our telephones, nobody would ever know.Ok thus lets fast forward almost half a century and see what Nikon is up to now. The older 28-105mm lens I’ve been using for more than ten decades and obtained literally tens of thousands of frames without incident, service or repair, how did those pictures compare? Pretty damn good in my opinion, yes its a’old’ lens but I have shot commercial tasks on it to get my entire career. It has images are in books, magazines, Adshels, posters and nearly every other printed media out there and I have never once thought’oh that’s a little soft/flat/distorted’.