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!
Unfortunately, I had just sent back my 50 f1.8G back to B&H for a replacement.
Just in general. It sold and a 1.4 is on its way. I need the 1.4 for a project where I need heavier OOF areas. I might even go for a 135 f2 DC lens instead of the Zeiss 135. I have to shoot hundreds of k-8th graders for a big national ad campaign and I need a look to them. Great gig and I want heavy OOF areas.
Unfortunately this is becoming more common with QC and I guess we have to remember the sheer volume from these OEMs. I won't buy off e-bay used and only buy used from forum members as almost always they are honest to say if its a good copy and I buy new from B&H since I know I can return. Now I do buy from KEH used if no one here has what I need (rare as a lot of gear here) but they have a good return policy. Bottom line buy with return in mind. We all feel this frustration, I have been pretty lucky given I buy a lot but I have hit some bad glass even new.Is it me, or is Nikon having some inconsistencies in their QC testing of their lenses?
I hate to talk about almost anything in a negative way, but if I do it's usually just to get the hairs of my test in frustration and loss in shipping and insurance costs due to returns.
It did start out with my 50 f/1.8G, which exhibited misalignment in the elements that cause asymmetrical distortion, imagine a rectangle in the viewfinder of a perfect lens with an imaginary vertical (or horizontal or both) center line through the middle.
Well my copy had it better on the left side when shooting a test chart, but on the right side it was heavily skewed down towards the top right corner and resulting in even more blurriness in that particular region.
Now I have just received my brand new copy of the Nikon 24-120mm f/4G VR, and does something similar, but to a lesser degree mostly in the wider region. Again being the asymmetry.
I don't know from others experience, but I hate the idea that I have to shop for a good copy of anything. I have owned Nikon gear in the past, in fact I was fairly heavily invested, before selling it all off, because I had two systems but decided to stay with my Canon system for some subjective reasons. In the past, I never felt I had to shop for items as described. In fact I great samples from Canon and Nikon. Only company I had to keep returning, and not for exchanges but for full refunds was Sigma, I now own the Canon mount Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG A1 lens, which I believe I got right in one shot! I love the lens
However, today, I am trying to buy back into Nikon, but feel somewhat challenged
The main reason I do the shots with test charts, is because anything off is instantly recognizable, instead of isolated portraiture with blurred bokeh backgrounds, believe me, I wished I never had to shoot these test images.
-Rant End-
sounds like a bad copy. mine arrived tuesday, and i wanted to see if it would need a major focus adjust (it doesn't). informally, focusing on text in a cookbook, i definitely didn't observe that.
Unfortunately, all my new Nikon gear was purchased from the big two, B&H and Adorama. It's not an issue with them, it's a Nikon QC issue, but despite that, they still require you to pay shipping and insurance for returns.
