3 Nikon mount lenses @ 18mm (for Guy)

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

Top left corner crops

F/3,5

F/5,6

F/8

 

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

Bottom right corner crops

F/3,5

F/5,6

F/8

 

[jonoslack]

HI Paul
Now I'm going back to my previous comment - I think your lens is not right.

Unlike your rigorous and careful preparation, this was hand held at 1/50th second and focused manually on the ground glass screen, just to see.
(so you should probably add a little camera shake into the equation, and assume that the picture is worse than the reality).

100% crop - 18mm f3.5

here's the whole photo

Greg's shot seemed to me to be what I was expecting to see, yours certainly isn't

 

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

I will have to repeat the test, just to see i didnt mess up on the manual focus.

 

[jonoslack]

HI There
incidentally, if it seems like I'm being picky about this, it isn't because I have anything against the Zeiss, quite the contrary, I'd love one, but I've bought several wide angles recently which I've been assured ARE sharp at the corners, only to find that they really aren't at all - even at quite small apertures.

I'm not trying to 'defend' the Nikon, but it's the only one out of a number of lenses I've tried on the D3/D700 which has been good enough, For lots of people corner sharpness isn't much of an issue (not because they care less, but because of the subject matter).

I do quite a lot of landscapes with just a sliver of land, and if that sliver is smudgy it really doesn't work that well! (especially if you print them out big):

D700, 14-24 at 20mm f9 ISO 200

 

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

Well Jono im uploading new images soon. I analyzed the 3 test series i did with each lens, and noticed a inconsistensy on both the lenses, wich i only can blame on my mf ability.

Thats why the content is offline for a while.

Im now redoing it and checking the focus in between every f-stop, and a couple of shots at each f-stop to get the best out of 3.

Im not defending either, im keeping both. But if had to choose the Nikkor would be the pick, simply because i need it for my comercial work.

Kindest

 

[jonoslack]

Well Jono im uploading new images soon. I analyzed the 3 test series i did with each lens, and noticed a inconsistensy on both the lenses, wich i only can blame on my mf ability.

Thats why the content is offline for a while.

Im now redoing it and checking the focus in between every f-stop, and a couple of shots at each f-stop to get the best out of 3.

Im not defending either, im keeping both. But if had to choose the Nikkor would be the pick, simply because i need it for my comercial work.

Kindest

Hi Paul
Good Luck - I hope it pans out.
I've had supper and a couple of glasses of wine.
Now I'm off to bed

 

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

Content online again.Please empty the cache of your browser

It seems that AF did a MUCH better job then me using liveview x10....

I actually foucused manually using liveview and then switched over to af, couldnt see a diffrence in the VF nor did i see the lens scale move. Still the diffrence was significant.

So i skipped mf on the Nikkor and relied on the AF. (seems that Nikon did a very good job when they had it all in for check up..)

Well i think the images speaks for them self, the substantial diffrence is gone, left is marginal diffrences depending where(for example look at the text top left of a sheet, and now compare the Zeiss logo at the lower right corner of a sheet) you look on the sheets you will find that the appearance of "sharpest" goes to one or the other.

But overall i think the nod goes to the Nikkor.

 

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

First test re-done aswell. So focus errors can now be ruled out.

 

[fotografz]

First test re-done aswell. So focus errors can now be ruled out.

IMHO this needs a in-studio test using a test target ... I find it hard to believe there would be such a huge margin of manual focus error @ f/5.6 or smaller... especially using the 10X Live View ... it also needs an electronic release with a squared up, leveled and locked down camera stand.

Like I mentioned, my test for distortion was for Guy's purposes, where f-stop is mostly irrevelant ... but for center, edge-to-edge or corner sharpness, a different type of test is warranted.

 

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

IMHO this needs a in-studio test using a test target ... I find it hard to believe there would be such a huge margin of manual focus error @ f/5.6 or smaller... especially using the 10X Live View ... it also needs an electronic release with a squared up, leveled and locked down camera stand.

Like I mentioned, my test for distortion was for Guy's purposes, where f-stop is mostly irrevelant ... but for center, edge-to-edge or corner sharpness, a different type of test is warranted.

I was refering to my first "test" test targets wouldnt make a diffrence at all. And the test was repated just in case my mf with the 14-24/2,8 had affected the end result. I used a heavy duty studio tripod , along with a Manfrotto 468 ballhead wich both are overkill for the setup, and offcourse cable release.

Offcourse i do appreaciate a lab test , and are looking forward to see some. But also find "real" world "tests" to be of value aswell. (such as a outdoor scene shot at infinity)


Kindest

 

[jonoslack]

I was refering to my first "test" test targets wouldnt make a diffrence at all. And the test was repated just in case my mf with the 14-24/2,8 had affected the end result. I used a heavy duty studio tripod , along with a Manfrotto 468 ballhead wich both are overkill for the setup, and offcourse cable release.

Offcourse i do appreaciate a lab test , and are looking forward to see some. But also find "real" world "tests" to be of value aswell. (such as a outdoor scene shot at infinity)


Kindest

HI Paul
Please don't take offence, but what worries me here is that if I hadn't chimed in we would have a set of tests which clearly showed that the Zeiss 18mm cleaned up in terms of corner performance, and that at 18mm the Nikon was absolute pants. I still think that the first tests are thoroughly unrepresentative of what I'm seeing with my 14-24.

I agree that 'real' world tests are useful, but, having been the victim of several (apparently well informed) people's lens recommendations over the last month or so, it is my fervent belief that you should be very very careful of putting test results which result in any sort of conclusion.

Putting up unrepresentative results is not good for the manufacturer of the lens, or the end user who is thinking of buying it.

Of course, we all know that the internet is full of 'unreliable evidence' and would be fools to trust things too closely, but in this case your described methodology and devastating results might easily have made people come to the incorrect, and possibly very expensive, conclusion.

Sorry to be so blunt, but that's the way I see it.

 

[Oxide Blu]

... I've had supper and a couple of glasses of wine.

Well, there's your problem right there. I found that if I drink the whole bottle everything is equally out of focus and distorted with swirling colors and eyeball abrasions and whatever ... and I swear it all looks good.

 

[jonoslack]

Well, there's your problem right there. I found that if I drink the whole bottle everything is equally out of focus and distorted with swirling colors and eyeball abrasions and whatever ... and I swear it all looks good.

:ROTFL:
Ah, but that was then . . . and this is now!

 

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

HI Paul
Please don't take offence, but what worries me here is that if I hadn't chimed in we would have a set of tests which clearly showed that the Zeiss 18mm cleaned up in terms of corner performance, and that at 18mm the Nikon was absolute pants. I still think that the first tests are thoroughly unrepresentative of what I'm seeing with my 14-24.

I agree that 'real' world tests are useful, but, having been the victim of several (apparently well informed) people's lens recommendations over the last month or so, it is my fervent belief that you should be very very careful of putting test results which result in any sort of conclusion.

Putting up unrepresentative results is not good for the manufacturer of the lens, or the end user who is thinking of buying it.

Of course, we all know that the internet is full of 'unreliable evidence' and would be fools to trust things too closely, but in this case your described methodology and devastating results might easily have made people come to the incorrect, and possibly very expensive, conclusion.

Sorry to be so blunt, but that's the way I see it.

No offence taken,you offcourse entitled to your opinion, regarding my lens being off or any test being missrepresentative.

The reason i repeated the second test had nothing to do with you chiming in, i analyzed the 3 sets of images and saw a inconsistent result both in the center and in the corner of the 14-24 primarily. Wich led me to belive my focusing was off, wich it was for the second test.

Ill trust my eyes, and my experience more then anything else, thus im not afraid nor will i stop drawing any conclusion based on them.

I couldnt care less about the manufacturer i dont work for any of them.

Ill make sure to not post any more "tests" here though. :thumbup:

Kindest

 

[jonoslack]

No offence taken,you offcourse entitled to your opinion, regarding my lens being off or any test being missrepresentative.

Well, if you had looked at this thread last night - and again this morning, you would have seen perfectly clearly that my 'opinions' were, in fact, fact. Now you've redone the tests it simply looks like I'm splitting hairs and arguing about nothing.
I'm glad you didn't take offense though

The reason i repeated the second test had nothing to do with you chiming in,

Ill trust my eyes, and my experience more then anything else, thus im not afraid nor will i stop drawing any conclusion based on them.

and nor should you, but perhaps it's worth pausing very hard before postulating those conclusions as 'facts'

I couldnt care less about the manufacturer i dont work for any of them.

Well - okay - but I don't like to see anybody being done down on the basis of unreliable evidence. However big or small the may be

Ill make sure to not post any more "tests" here though. :thumbup:

Kindest

Don't take any notice of me Paul - I'm just a geezer around here, not particularly knowledgeable and certainly not representative.

I hope you won't make any decisions on the basis of anything I say

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Morning folks . Not had my second expresso yet but let's not get to overboard . Tests are tests and always subject to questions . Reason I hate doing them sometimes. But I look at them as just part of a puzzle to making a purchase. Be it we agree or not will always come up but last thing I want around here is bad feelings between members and folks not wanting to post or worse yet leave the forum. I'm married if the day comes I agree with my wife 100 percent of the time just put a gun to my head and pull the trigger. It will never happen that I agree with her but i still love her. Let's sort of take that approach here if you will. You guy's are a big part of this place and we may not always agree and that would be boring as hell but lively debate is good. I'm not going to make any admin decisions and lock the thread or anything like that . Let's just have fun. I do appreciate the PM's too me and that is how this forum should work but let's see what the day brings. Besides it is the closing ceremonies of the Olympics and let's not kill the good mojo of the day.

 

[Vivek]

Besides it is the closing ceremonies of the Olympics and let's not kill the good mojo of the day.

:ROTFL:

How do you come up with stuff like that, Guy? :ROTFL:

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Wait till the second cup of espresso.:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

 

[jonoslack]

Olympics and let's not kill the good mojo of the day.

You'll need at least two cups to be able to watch our Boris take the wotsit from the Chinese. Probably a lot more!