The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

The big hole in Nikons lens line up

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Just curious, what's iffy about the 24-70/2.8? I have this lens and it is absolutely superb. It's as good as the 28-90 f/2.8-4.5 ASPH in my mind, only with some more distortion at the wide end.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Just curious, what's iffy about the 24-70/2.8? I have this lens and it is absolutely superb. It's as good as the 28-90 f/2.8-4.5 ASPH in my mind, only with some more distortion at the wide end.
Yeah, sure beats the crap out of the Canon version.

AFS 35/1.4G ASPH with floating element .... NOW!

Let's all e-mail Ziess and DEMAND F mount versions of the Sony AF lenses :)
 

LJL

New member
Just curious, what's iffy about the 24-70/2.8? I have this lens and it is absolutely superb. It's as good as the 28-90 f/2.8-4.5 ASPH in my mind, only with some more distortion at the wide end.
Stuart,
It may just come down to the quality of the individual copies being looked at. My Canon 24-70 f2.8 is pretty decent, and does not exhibit some of the edge smearing and distortion that I saw through one Nikon version. Maybe I am jumping the gun on this one, but I was not as impressed as I thought I would be. On a crop sensor, they both look great. On the full frame, which is primarily what I shoot the 24-70 on, things are less forgiving. The Nikon 24-70 on the D300 looked outstanding, but I was less thrilled seeing it on the D3. Again, that may just have been a variant in the batch or whatever, but it left an impression.

LJ
 

jonoslack

Active member
Ditto.

I want new primes for this camera. In the smaller camera body, I just can't deal with the 24-70/2.8 size. Plus it doesn't compete with the ZF primes. I really want a new 35, 50, & 85 that can compete with the ZF primes or come very close.

Ray
Hi Ray
I won't dispute the size, but I did do some comparisons with the two new nikon zooms (14-24 / 24-70) against the zeiss 25 f2.8, and the nikons won by such a huge margin that it wasn't even funny. . . . . . maybe it's not the case with the longer zeiss primes?

LF, if you have an 'iffy' 24-70, I suggest you get it changed - mine isn't iffy!

On the other hand, I do agree about the missing lenses - AFS fast primes, and high quality lightweight f4 zooms simply don't exist in the Nikon range . . . but it does seem to me that what one CAN say is that the Nikon fast wide zooms really are good (which is harder to say for Canon)
 

harmsr

Workshop Member
Jono,

I'm not surprised vs. the ZF 25. That was the reason that I went with the 28, which is a much better lens IMHO.

The ZF 35 is really hard to beat technically, but I was not a huge fan of the "bokeh".

The 24-70 is on par or slightly better than the 50/1.4 ZF but falls way behind when you compare it to the 50/2.0 Macro.

I really don't shoot wides. I'm much more for a wide standard, standard, and telephoto. My vision is really based on a 50 for a normal lens, while others see in 35. A 28 or 35 is wide for me, 50 is normal, and 85/90 is short telephoto. These are always my go to lenses.

On the zoom, 24 is a little wide and 70 is a little short. So, I only end up using a small section of the zoom range. Even though I agree that the 24-70 Nikon is the best zoom that I ever used, the ZF 28/2.0 and ZF 50/2.0 lenses really beat it significantly in fine details, sharpness across the frame, and micro contrast.

For example the files I have using the D3 / ZF 28/2.0 & 50/2.0 compare favorably to files from my M8 and Leica glass. However, files using the 24-70 just don't quite get there.

Once you get up to the 85/1.4 ZF vs. Nikon or the 100/2.0 ZF vs. the 105 VR Nikon, I think the differences get very small. This is what gives me hope for new AF-S lenses, reformulated optics, and "N" coatings in the 35, 50, & 85 primes that I want.

Best,

Ray
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
Ray,
I just can't focus the Zeiss 85/1.4 to save my life. Maybe I need a different focusing screen, but I just could not do it as well as say a nocti on an M8.
OTOH I tend to like wides unless birding, so the Nikon 14-24 is on my wishlist as is the Mamiya 55, and 45. Oh, and there are a few Digitar wides out there too. For Birding I use their 80-400, which I was hoping they would update to AF-S and VR-II
I for sure will rot in the seventh level.
-bob
 

harmsr

Workshop Member
Ray,
I just can't focus the Zeiss 85/1.4 to save my life. Maybe I need a different focusing screen, but I just could not do it as well as say a nocti on an M8.
OTOH I tend to like wides unless birding, so the Nikon 14-24 is on my wishlist as is the Mamiya 55, and 45. Oh, and there are a few Digitar wides out there too. For Birding I use their 80-400, which I was hoping they would update to AF-S and VR-II
I for sure will rot in the seventh level.
-bob
Bob,

I agree with you. I don't remember if it was on this thread or the D700 thread, but I made a comment about manual focus with the D3.

I can manual focus fast and accurately on the D3 up to 50mm in focal length.

The 85 & 100 ZF lenses were very hit and miss. I even did try a Brightscreen focussing screen, which helped but only for on center. As soon as I recomposed, the DOF was so narrow that I missed focus again. The Nikon 85 & 105 AF did a wonderful job of nailing focus on the D3 with its selectable AF points. I think that I also mentioned, I struggled with the ZF 85 when we were in Puerto Rico together.

I should be receiving a loaner 45 & 55 Mamiya here in a few days also, as I want to decide which one I like better for use with the P30+ back. I'll post some comparison shots in the MF forum.

Best,

Ray
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Bob,

I agree with you. I don't remember if it was on this thread or the D700 thread, but I made a comment about manual focus with the D3.

I can manual focus fast and accurately on the D3 up to 50mm in focal length.

The 85 & 100 ZF lenses were very hit and miss. I even did try a Brightscreen focussing screen, which helped but only for on center. As soon as I recomposed, the DOF was so narrow that I missed focus again. The Nikon 85 & 105 AF did a wonderful job of nailing focus on the D3 with its selectable AF points. I think that I also mentioned, I struggled with the ZF 85 when we were in Puerto Rico together.

I should be receiving a loaner 45 & 55 Mamiya here in a few days also, as I want to decide which one I like better for use with the P30+ back. I'll post some comparison shots in the MF forum.

Best,

Ray
I couldn't even focus the ZF 50/2 on the D300 let alone the 100/2 ... until I got the Brightscreen Magnifier. Huge difference. I learned that with my DMR ... couldn't nail a 85 LUX @ f/1.4 to save my live until I got one of their mags for the R9. I'm training myself to peripherally see the focus confirmation in the Nikon viewfinder so I can shoot off center without focus/recomposing. Like anything manual, it's just a matter of practice, practice, practice.

However, I don't try to fool myself with MF lenses. It's just a different way of shooting ... slower, more deliberate. it probably would be a whole other matter shooting with a manual focus Nikon ... a camera made for manual focus.
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
[snip] ... it probably would be a whole other matter shooting with a manual focus Nikon ... a camera made for manual focus.
Exactly !
They simply don't make real cameras anymore.
When I was young, now let me see when was that ... oh gosh ... :eek:
 
Top