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!

Nikon D800 First Blush

ustein

Contributing Editor
DxO brings their scores down to one number. That is not really helpful. I e.g. would use it mostly between f/5.6-8. If you read their detailed measurements then it looks a lot better. If you expect top performance at f/1.8 then it may look much worse.
 
DxO brings their scores down to one number. That is not really helpful. I e.g. would use it mostly between f/5.6-8. If you read their detailed measurements then it looks a lot better. If you expect top performance at f/1.8 then it may look much worse.
I wasn't just looking at the number, but at the overall review. What's interesting is that among reviewers that do a systematic job, some of them find the 1.8g to be significantly better (by most sharpness measures) than the 1.8d, and some of them (like DXO) find it to be significantly worse.

Glancing through some reviews now, the negative ones seem to be in the minority, but their existence is interesting. It seems like a lot to explain with sample variation (especially for such a simple lens), and makes me wonder if there's been some tweak in the design or manufacturing since the g was introduced.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Okay I need to go shoot this new lens more the 24 1.4 G but it does work great on the D800 so that is the good news and like many lens reviews on it I think maybe actually better in the corners. At 1.4 yes it does have that veiling look and the detail is pretty good but when you hit F2 it lights up a lot. Very nice in the center with still nice creamy bokeh. At like 6.7 or F8 on the same focal plane the corners are very good and F9 excellent so pretty excited about it. Nice punch to the files . Overall a very very nice lens on the D800 I'm keeping it but I do want to get better images to back my words. Not that you folks don't trust me but makes me feel better. Lol
Guy,

Glad you're quite impressed with the 24mm f1.4 G. It's a lens when used in place of the 14-24mm f2.8 lens, offers equally impressive performance with a some tradeoffs when compared to the zoom

As I mentioned in a previous post, by f2, the 24mm f1.4 sides/corners sharpen up to the point where they are almost a match for the zoom and beyond f2, can certainly compare to it (the zoom). What you loose in zoom versitility, is a bit better linear performance and a faster lens that can do well even wide open if one is careful what they shoot at this aperture, especially into the corners.

With the 35mm f1.4 G and one of the new 85mm's, a exceptionally fast and impressive performing kit is achieved.

Very nice portrait...straight forward yet effective and when you first said it was taken with the 85mm f1.4 G, I thought "that's not the 85mm f1.4 G I know"..but once I saw your your explanation regarding post processing, it all made sense.

Dave (D&A)
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks Dave yes the 85 is one sharp lens and at F10 way to sharp for a portrait but it's all about control as you know and WHY we shoot raw. So far I have been pretty dang impressed with the D800 and these new G lenses which I never shot before and a big kudos to Nikon. I mean I hated 35mm for a long time and why I went MF but coming back was a risk on my end and I had a good feeling on the D800. I won that guessing game. Only thing left on my agenda is getting this into C1 a program thats been with me a long time. Honestly this means nothing until you have your workflow and you know precisely what your raw converter can do.

Admittedly you all saw me stumble around here a little getting ACR to work better. This is all good it really is and hopeful some lessons learned here for folks. I don't quit until it's perfect. I hope this thread has really shown what this Nikon can do. I'm impressed and that says a lot but still some work to be done. Again thanks to all of our great members that put time in here to help us all.
 

ustein

Contributing Editor
Got the 50mm 1.8G and it works fine for me.

This shot would not have been possible with any zoom or even the 1.4 because I shot through a fence. The camera feels much lighter with it too.

 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
It's the face distortion thing for me -- and why I jump to the 20 if I feel there is clipping issue. Did this back in M film days -- my regular combo was a 35 lux and 21 Elmarit. Then when the 28 Cron came out (the old 28 Elmar was not great) I was all over it and my 35 Lux saw a lot less use, but I still used the 21 when I needed to get in close.
Quoting myself here for context only. I took delivery of my 35/1.4 the other day and while I've only done some informal testing, my initial reaction was extremely positive. Given I do not do exacting street or reportage work anymore and I lean more toward travel, with this 35 for general low-light and the 20, I don't think I'll be needing the 28 anytime soon. Wants are another story though :ROTFL:
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Lars,

Next time you are down in my area bring your kit and we'll go shoot! (Been too long since we've done that anyway!)

Jack
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Very quick reprocessing of these 2 images in Capture One 6.4 in the next couple days I will going back and looking at this compared to ACR but so far it looks really good. I like the red better already and I'm half asleep. LOL



 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks I will try that portrait today as well. It does look cleaner have to say just from the one example here. It also looked more detailed but again have to compare.
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
I must be a C1 junkie or something. That test shot you just posted Guy is the first sample image from the D800 where I actually thought: "whoa!". With no criticism intended to others (all of which were probably processed in ACR) I am now officially impressed.

Thanks!
Tim
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Lol I'm a certified C1 junkie and not afraid to admit it either. The only real bias I have in all of this gear stuff. This is it
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Thanks, Guy!

All the colors I recognize look great. I still can't get used to what passes for vegetation out there.:ROTFL:

--Matt
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
well this is interesting and I say C1 for sure . Less red in the skin tones which has been a Nikon/Canon battle forever.

First one is C1 than ACR all I did was WB and get exposure to match. No airbrushing



 

D&A

Well-known member
Guy, a quick look does shows skin tones looking more natural and most definitely less red in the C1 adjusted file...as seen in the image size posted, yet it does look like the center forehead hot spot is a bit overblown resulting in less detail? The resulting adjusment (exposure) of each file looks different too (with C1 being brighter), judging by the sports jacket and hair. Is this due to increased DR or simply exposure adjustment of the file? Am I noticing this correctly? How does it look on your monitor with the full size file?

Now after going back to both posted images for a second look, the C1 skin tones are preferable in my opinion but it's just barely boarding on being a smigin too yellow. Close call. Unfortunately I'm at a different location than normal and the monitor I'm looking at hasn't been calibrated in quite some time...so I'll have to defer to your observations/comments. The posted C1 outdoor shots though look exceptionally good and I think C1 did a better job of representing some of the colors, especially the reds!

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:
Top