Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 51

Thread: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Well after a few months of shooting, its becoming pretty obvious the trinity isn't cutting it any longer.

    The 24-70 has quite bad soft corners and fairly crappy Bokeh, The 70-200 needs different microfocus at each end and ordinary Bokeh.

    Zoom functions seem more of a distraction these days than an advantage.

    14-24 seems OK

    Question is, what primes to replace the 2 with, keeping in mind I want bitingly sharp lenses, AF and strong corner performance?

    Would love a 200 F2 but cant float that kind of money....

    Suggestions?

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    523
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    What system?

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    North Sweden
    Posts
    1,401
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Hi

    I went with a mixture of Zeiss and Nikkor primes, I have the Zeiss 21 and 135 f2 and the Nikkor 85 f1.8 and the 200 f2, I have some others but these are all extremely sharp on a D800. Depends if you need af, I'm not bothered for what I shoot.

    Mat

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by turtle View Post
    What system?
    F mount

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Already have a 50 1.8 (would like a 1.4 though)

    I am thinking Sigma 35 1.4, Nikon 85 1.4 (what is the LOCA like on the 1.4? the 1.8 was rubbish) Need something around 135mm with AF and good corners, and a 200mm solution...

    What has the sample variation on the Sigma 35 been like ?? How consistent are they? Worth buying on line or too risky?

  6. #6
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    I think you have made the most important decision ….can you accept manual focus for some or all of your lenses . The most obvious manual focus option would be the Zeiss Zf.2 lenses . The OTUS 55/1.4 could be the very best lens available for the FF format . The 135/2 is a close second . The wide angles are superb ….15/2.8,21/2.8 ,25/2 are top of their classes . The older Zeiss formulas are less well corrected for aberrations but they can be excellent depending on the intended use .

    The converted Leica R lenses are also in a different league (much better) and have exceptional character ….but it takes some effort to build a set of R lenses for Nikon .

    In the Nikon lenses ….I have stuck with the 24/35/58/85 ….1.4 lenses . Individually you might find a better alternative(like the Sigma) ….but as a group these have a consistency in character (bokeh for example ) . You need to establish your post processing to optimize the results as these have slightly lower contrast than the zeiss lenses and not quite the character of the Leica R lenses.

    As always the best fit is often based on the intended usage . I do street,travel,sports and family in that order …so only limited landscape and no real studio work . My next lens will be the Nikon 28/1.4 AF which should be on the way to me .

    If your 24-70/2.8 isn t sharp wide open you have a bad copy ..very common . Nikkors have a 5 year warranty and Nikon repaired my copy after I insisted it was far worse than my friends 24-70/2.8 . I was amazed at the improvement . The size and handling are pretty bad ..but I was really happy about the IQ once it was corrected .
    Roger Dunham
    http://rogerdunham.com/
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #7
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    The Sigma 35mm 1.4 was the best med/wide lens I've ever owned. I sold my Zeiss 21mm for it! The 85mm 1.4 G is also outstanding, just watch for CA at 1.4 in high contrast situations. I really loved the Zeiss 18mm too, much more then the Zf.2 21mmf2.8. Yes, they're manual, but hyperfocal for good results. Also, the hard infinity stops on the Zf.2 lenses are handy when shooting stars. Sigma also has a new 120-300mm that's supposed to be really good for a zoom.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Thanks for the replies. The 24-70 is sharp in the centre, but the corners not so much. I would really prefer an af solution. While I do a lot of landscapes and can take my time. Many times I am lazy and can't be bothered with using live view and a tripod.

    Leia R's have interested me but I find they are pretty sought after and not cheap. Most Zeiss are pretty expensive for what you get being MF.

    I can see the 85 1.4 Nikon happening. Nikon 35 not so much. any other Suggestions?

  9. #9
    Senior Member BSEH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    290
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    IMHO, If the deal is no MF, then with the 85 1.4G, 70-200 f/4G and 200 f/2 you at the end station. In the short end you don't find better AF nikon lenses then the 14-24 you have.

    New line is Sony ILCE A7(r)... That made me reconsider MF lenses

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,296
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    +1 for A7R
    With best regards, K-H.

  11. #11
    Senior Member JohnBrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Since you have the WA covered with the 14-24, I recommend and use: Zeiss 50 Makro, Nikon 85 1.4G and 105 2.5 Ai. If you're used to shooting @ 200 on the long end, you may want to supplement with a 180 2.8.
    Good luck with your choices.

  12. #12
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Also, remember that mixing different lens formulas (different companies), and you won't get a uniform aesthetic if displaying photos in a gallery or publication. I generally try to stay with one companies "look" for uniformity that's more pleasing when viewed together.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #13
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by BSEH View Post
    IMHO, If the deal is no MF, then with the 85 1.4G, 70-200 f/4G and 200 f/2 you at the end station. In the short end you don't find better AF nikon lenses then the 14-24 you have.

    New line is Sony ILCE A7(r)... That made me reconsider MF lenses
    I understand the choice for MF.

    BUT - for AF there need to be first much more options for Sony FE mount before I even consider this system.

    BTW - I cannot complain about the 2.8/70-200 VRII, but rather am not so impressed by my 1.4/85 G.

    Obviously different tastes.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    North Sweden
    Posts
    1,401
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Tektrader View Post
    I would really prefer an af solution. While I do a lot of landscapes and can take my time. Many times I am lazy and can't be bothered with using live view and a tripod.
    Just my opinion but if you're not using best practices with these lenses then you aren't doing them justice, spending on primes isn't necessarily going to get you sharper shots if you aren't going to use good technique, i.e tripod, MLU and live view. Obviously I'm not suggesting that this is the only way to take photographs, just that it can go a long way to getting sharper images.

    Mat
    http://matrichardson.com/
    Workshops for 2018! http://www.matrichardson.com/workshops
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #15
    Senior Member BSEH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    290
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    I understand the choice for MF.

    BUT - for AF there need to be first much more options for Sony FE mount before I even consider this system.
    Agree on there is need for more options in AF before Sony is a equal competitor to Nikon. But right now you get Zeiss glass with AF, thats not possible with Nikon.

    And Mf on Nikon is a pain, if you have so bad eyes as i have (old man syndrom) ... and with A7 it so easy.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Costa Rica, central america
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Tektrader View Post
    Well after a few months of shooting, its becoming pretty obvious the trinity isn't cutting it any longer.

    The 24-70 has quite bad soft corners and fairly crappy Bokeh, The 70-200 needs different microfocus at each end and ordinary Bokeh.

    Zoom functions seem more of a distraction these days than an advantage.

    14-24 seems OK

    Question is, what primes to replace the 2 with, keeping in mind I want bitingly sharp lenses, AF and strong corner performance?

    Would love a 200 F2 but cant float that kind of money....

    Suggestions?

    I have no inside information, but from the quality of the new 120-300 f2.8 from sigma I will wait, if possible, until they introduce an Art version of the 70-200.

    At this moment the tamron is competitive with the Nikon at much lower price but it may not cut if for you.

    I hope Sigma introduces a 70-200 with good design and exotic glass.
    If you are resolute to leave the zoom, what about used ?

    Best regards,

    J Duncan

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by mjr View Post
    Just my opinion but if you're not using best practices with these lenses then you aren't doing them justice, spending on primes isn't necessarily going to get you sharper shots if you aren't going to use good technique, i.e tripod, MLU and live view. Obviously I'm not suggesting that this is the only way to take photographs, just that it can go a long way to getting sharper images.

    Mat
    I am hearing you on this...... recently I bought into wide format printing and have re-examined a lot of my older shots that looked perfectly acceptable before...... I started printing them BIG.

    Agree manual focus can make you slow down and improve your technique, In fact my best shots where made this way using live view and in fact doing this is where I can see the limitations of the lenses. At 53, my eye sight is not getting any better so if I can remove that and use the live view focus points then that's a better solution.

    BUT the 80% of the time I am not taking serious shots is why I would like to retain AF. Now if the D800 had focus peaking, That would be a different ball of wax......

    I wont abandon Nikon for Sony especially now they invented yet another lens mount.... I always speculated that the Nikon aliasing filter NOT being ALL THAT NEUTRAL on the D800e and have been waiting for someone to entirely pull the filters out of the camera and replace it with a glass cover. I suspect the A7r PQ advantage would disappear if that was done.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    259
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    I am curious at what f/stop do you prefer to work? I have both the d800e and d700 and from 55mm up to 300mm all of my primes are bitingly sharp center to edge, but I rarely work wide open.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by jsf View Post
    I am curious at what f/stop do you prefer to work? I have both the d800e and d700 and from 55mm up to 300mm all of my primes are bitingly sharp center to edge, but I rarely work wide open.
    Typically between F3.5 and F8, sometimes as high as F13. It does improve the edge performance somewhat but there are still issues with field curvature and edge focus on the zooms. The 70-200 is the best in this regard.

    The 14-24 works perfectly so don't see a need to change that.

    I have fallen back to using the 50 1.8 when I want focus uniformity but I am finding it a bit long. Maybe I should be looking at the 45mm T/S for landscape work and just keep the zooms for general use??

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    27
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    From what I've seen, there are three ways of understanding what you've said:

    (1) You want to have lenses that will allow for more technical quality in ("BIG") prints than what your 24-70 and 70-200 provide when used without serious care for technique ("80% of the time"). That's not going to happen: when you throw technique out the window, luck will make more difference in image quality than any lens upgrade. Your technical demands exceed what can be obtained through casual shooting. But I think you know that, so, moving on...

    (2) I think what you're looking for are two different kits: one for serious shooting, when you intend to make large prints, and one for casual shooting, when you're just trying to capture the moment. I don't know about current used Nikon lens pricing, but you could probably sell your two fast zooms for a single f/4 moderate-wide to moderate-telephoto, to meet your casual needs, plus two manual primes that have pleasant rendering wide open and technical merit through the wazoo when stopped down. As far as which primes to pick, there are many between 24mm and 200mm, so you'd have to decide where your interests lie. If you don't know off hand, I'd say: Leica R 50/2, 90/2, and 180/3.4, pick two. But then, I'm partial to the R system, which is/because that's what I shoot. If you know what focal ranges you're looking at, the good people of the forum can be more helpful.

    (3) Lastly, it might be that your current lenses have particular aberrations that bother you. (Personally, while I love Pentax kit, the axial chromatic aberrations that permeate their lenses drove me away.) If that's the case, show us examples of what you dislike so we can help you put a name to it and point you in a direction that you might find more pleasing.

    Cheers,
    Jon
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by JonPB View Post
    You want to have lenses that will allow for more technical quality in ("BIG") prints than what your 24-70 and 70-200 provide when used without serious care for technique ("80% of the time"). That's not going to happen: when you throw technique out the window, luck will make more difference in image quality than any lens upgrade. Your technical demands exceed what can be obtained through casual shooting. But I think you know that, so, moving on...

    Cheers,
    Jon
    Thanks for the considered reply Jon. You are pretty right MOSTLY...

    But I don't expect to receive top end Technical Quality when used carelessly. But I was hoping to replace the zooms with lenses that when used carefully can really deliver. But can be lazily used when ultimate quality and big prints are not a driving factor.

    I didn't really want to have 2 kits. A lazy mans one and an excellent one for when I am after ultimate quality.

    I am beginning to think maybe it would be enough to buy a Nikkor 45mm T/S lens for most serious landscape work and just keep the rest. IMO 50mm is too narrow a focal length for most landscapes. Maybe 45mm is a better choice.

    BTW, If I could buy some reasonable priced Leica R lenses I would entertain buying a few...... Are those Leitax conversion kits good enough and do they have Nikon meter coupling chips for Leica lenses now?

  22. #22
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    I almost didn't reply to this, but here goes:

    First, kudos for publicly admitting the holy trio isn't adequate . The issue almost every shooter realizes after a time, is that perfect resolution, perfect optical performance, and even perfect framing (a-la zoom) don't count for as much in overall image quality as 'character.' So most of us start to build a few different set of lenses; one for convenience (usually zooms and almost always AF), one for superior optical performance (and very often these are manual focus) and one for a certain look/character/drawing/rendering, whichever you want to call it -- and REGARDLESS of who made it or articulations it takes to set aperture or focus, we'll figure out a way to mount it to our camera body of choice so we can use it .

    Some "bitingly sharp" suggestions: the 85/1.4G stopped down to f2.8 or higher; the 105's are all excellent from f2.8 up, the 1.8, 2.5 or 2.0 DC with DC zeroed; the ZF 135 may be the single sharpest lens I have ever seen used on a digital camera period but it is MF only; the 200/2 is a very close second if not a tie with the ZF135 for optical performance and is AF. Ironically, at the shorter end, I've found the 28/1.4 to be outstanding when stopped down past f2.8, though not quite in the league of the 85/1.4G; and finally the Sigma 35/1.4 is excellent and on par with the 85/1.4G. The difficult arena is the 50's -- currently, the best lens I've used in this range is the 50/1.2 manual focus stopped down to f2.8 up. I have yet to find any 50mm AF lens that hits the level of the 85/1.4G.

    Good luck in building your own stable, it will likely be a journey with no final destination.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  23. #23
    Senior Member vieri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Ginesio, Italy
    Posts
    983
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    In my experience, and for my use (landscape work, often well stopped down) the holy trinity is less and less adequate on the D800E moving from tele to WA. The best is still the 70-200 VR II, then comes the 24-70 and last the 14-24, which IMHO doesn't quite cut it on the D800E.

    I have been experimenting with the Zeiss 18mm, which I found VERY sharp all over the frame past f4-f5.6 but which has some other problems troubling it (vignetting and profile-needing distortion) to replace the 14-24, and will try the 15mm as well.

    As far as f1.4 prime Nikkors, I have them all (except the new 58mm), I have tested them all with my usual methodology (see MY BLOG for reviews of some lenses) and in my experience the 24 f1.4 is simply amazing on the D800E, while the 35 f1.4 much less so (it shows a very strange field curvature, images are just not perfectly sharp at any aperture 2/3 off the center to become real sharp again at the sides/corners); the 50 f1.4 is definitely very very good, and the 85 f1.4 is pretty amazing.

    The three tilt-shift: the 85 is amazing, the 45 less so but perfectly usable on the D800E and the 24 is the weakest (weak sides / corners). If you use movements, the 85 is amazing whatever you do, the 45 up to half way the movements, the 24 loses a lot.

    The DCs: the 105 is very good, the 135 pretty amazing.

    The Sigma 35mm f1.4: I got a real bad copy and sent it back, didn't bother with trying a second one but might reconsider it seeing everyone is so happy about it. I have it in Sigma mount for my SD1 Merrill and it's simply amazing, however it's an APS-C sized sensor so that should be taken into account.

    The Zeiss: I have only the 18mm, but am getting the 35mm f2 soon, which is probably better than the f1.4 for landscape work.

    The Leica R: I had the 50mm f1.4, 80mm f1.4 and 180mm f2.8, all amazing lenses.

    Hope this helps you in your never ending quest for the ultimate kit! (No such thing, sadly: but in the end, the search is always more interesting than the result...)
    Vieri Bottazzini
    Leica Ambassador | Formatt-Hitech Ambassador | ABIPP EP
    VIERI BOTTAZZINI PHOTOGRAPHER | VIERI BOTTAZZINI WORKSHOPS | VIERI BOTTAZZINI FINE ART

  24. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Thanks for all the replies,

    Seems I see the Nikkor 45 T/S in my future. I will probably swap the Nikkor 50 F1.8 for a 50 F1.4 and save some cash for the Nikkor 85 F1.4 (actually had the 85 F1.8 but it was total rubbish and sent it back) The thing that irks me about the Nikkor 85's is the crazy amount of LOCA they all seem to have. Don't get why for the money they want it couldn't have been APO in design.

    I have seen varying opinions of the 105 DC. I am not sure if that is really good enough for landscape but I expect if very good for portraits. I suspect soft corners. All the older D lenses seemed to suffer that.

    Other alternative is 28 or 35mm manual focus Zeiss or equivalent in Leica R and skip the T/S lens.

    How difficult is the Leica conversion to get full metering ? Any particular LeicaR 35mm lens I should be looking for? They seem to have plenty of versions.

    Vieri, given the choice would you buy a 35mm Leica R or the 45mm Nikkor T/S for landscape?

  25. #25
    Senior Member ryc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Or-Y-Gun
    Posts
    548
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Zeiss! 15mm, 21mm, 55mm, and 135

    Everyone else will tell you why. I will just tell you these are all you need and you will never look back.

    Otus



    50mm AFS G




    Otus



    50 AFS G


  26. #26
    Senior Member vieri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Ginesio, Italy
    Posts
    983
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Well, I never tried a Leica R 35mm on the D800E or on any Nikon camera for that matter, but I suspect the Cron (f2) should be very good. The 45mm is a very good lens, but for landscapes I suggest you take it easy on the tilt-shift If you go past half-way the movements, you'll start seeing softness in the sides & corners.

    I had the 105 DC and found it great for portraits, less so for landscape (soft corners/sides on the D800E), while the 135 is a more "all round" lens: great for portraits, but very very good for landscapes as well.

    Converting Leica R lenses using the Leitax solutions is very very easy if you are just a bit handy, no superhuman skills required for most lenses; Leitax website has all the infos you need, and will tell you which kit to get for what lens, and which lenses are more difficult than others to adapt.
    Vieri Bottazzini
    Leica Ambassador | Formatt-Hitech Ambassador | ABIPP EP
    VIERI BOTTAZZINI PHOTOGRAPHER | VIERI BOTTAZZINI WORKSHOPS | VIERI BOTTAZZINI FINE ART

  27. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    The Otus is nice..... real nice, might be a bit out of my price range though..

    The 85mm f1.8 I sent back had horrendous LOCA.

    Doesn't look like the f1.4 is that much better......

    Ok, got to start looking for a Leica R. 35mm. After listening to you guys, it looks like this will be the way to go for one lens solution for landscape shots. Maybe later an 85 t/s for stitched panos.

  28. #28
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,790
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    R 35 Summilux needs radical filing of the rear to fit....

    See here:


    Summilux 35/1.4 Leitax


    Bob

  29. #29
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    If you plan on using Leica R glass ..you should do you homework on each lens . The 35/1.4 for example has too much field curvature for landscape ..its a superb lens for street,travel,reportage and general available light work . Its best attribute is the wonderful bokeh … a smooth roll off from focus to out of focus areas . The 35/1.4 requires major filing of the rear housing …I had DAG do my lens and it took two tries to get it right .

    I am pretty sure both the 28/2.8 and the 35/2 also have substantial field curvature which screws up your desired edge sharpness on some images . The 19/2.8 is the best all around Leica R wide angle …

    Each of your wide angle alternatives will have strengths and weaknesses ..start saving for the OTUS line ..they are the only lenses I ve seen that except for size seem perfect .

  30. #30
    Member AreBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Highlands, Scotland
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Roger,

    Each of your wide angle alternatives will have strengths and weaknesses ..start saving for the OTUS line ..they are the only lenses I ve seen that except for size seem perfect .
    Some photographers have experienced problems when shooting the Otus in cold climes. Refer here (post 7 onward) for details.

    Not good if definitely an issue.

  31. #31
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Your original post states that the "trinity isn't cutting it any longer". So when did it actually cut it? I'm not being smug, but lenses don't generally degrade performance as you shoot. Perhaps as most photographers do, a desire to improve technique sometimes equates to better lenses. You've stated the AF is a must, so your choices are limited a bit. Look at DXO's lens ratings or LensRentals for some objective reviews. With landscape and MF lenses, that's part of the joy of being contemplative with your art. Prime lenses have fewer elements, and 1.4's can have CA when shooting with high contrast, but landscape is usually stopped down for more DOF. Leica R's are overpriced and do require special skills as Roger has stated. If AF is a must I would seriously consider the 24mm 1.4, 85mm1.4, and the 200 f/2 or even the 200mm f/4 macro. If you need the quick range of a zoom or need just one or two lenses for travel, then personally, I think you have a great setup as is.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #32
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by AreBee View Post
    Roger,



    Some photographers have experienced problems when shooting the Otus in cold climes. Refer here (post 7 onward) for details.

    Not good if definitely an issue.
    Not being much of a landscape photographer and living in Florida half the year I will probably not test much for this . But a good point for those considering buying into the line of lenses .
    Roger Dunham
    http://rogerdunham.com/
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  33. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by johnnygoesdigital View Post
    Your original post states that the "trinity isn't cutting it any longer". So when did it actually cut it? I'm not being smug, but lenses don't generally degrade performance as you shoot. Perhaps as most photographers do, a desire to improve technique sometimes equates to better lenses. You've stated the AF is a must, so your choices are limited a bit. Look at DXO's lens ratings or LensRentals for some objective reviews. With landscape and MF lenses, that's part of the joy of being contemplative with your art. Prime lenses have fewer elements, and 1.4's can have CA when shooting with high contrast, but landscape is usually stopped down for more DOF. Leica R's are overpriced and do require special skills as Roger has stated. If AF is a must I would seriously consider the 24mm 1.4, 85mm1.4, and the 200 f/2 or even the 200mm f/4 macro. If you need the quick range of a zoom or need just one or two lenses for travel, then personally, I think you have a great setup as is.

    Happened as soon as I started printing large and could see the whole picture properly. Yes the loca on most 1.4's is an issue. So the search for edge sharpness start.

    Any opinions on voightlander wides?

  34. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    27
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    I don't know how well the electronics work with a Leitax adapted lens on Nikon, but the mechanics are solid.

    The rest of this assumes that you're going to keep your Nikon zooms for casual shooting, that you're willing to work with a manual lens the rest of the time, and that you're looking for a moderately wide angle between 24mm and 50mm. As such, you'll probably be using a tripod and stopping down the lens. If that's the case, I'm not sure I can recommend Leica. All of the older wide lenses, including all of the 35's, have soft corners by modern standards, and the modern wides--the 19, 28, and 21-35--are all expensive. The R system is where I put my money because of their holistic performance. If I knew I wouldn't be using a lens wide open, though, I think I'd go for a different route.

    The MTF graph at photodo.com for the Zeiss C/Y 35-70/3.4 at f/8 is very, very good. At 35mm and f/8 it outperforms the Leica R 28/2.8, which is among the best 28mm lenses, as well as the 21-35, up to the extreme corners where the 35-70/3.4 is a bit softer but remains competitive. Resolution is flat across the frame until it drops off steeply, though, which may not be preferable to the more consistent performance of the Leicas. The Zeiss doesn't show the focal plane waviness or astigmatism of the Leicas, though, and has comparable vignetting and distortion. It costs about a third of either of the Leicas and also performs equally well from 35mm to 70mm. It just doesn't deliver the same exceptional results at wider apertures and it uses a one-touch zoom/focus mechanism, so it isn't as popular and costs less.

    If the Zeiss 35-70 is in the running, the Leica 35-70/4 should also be. It has better corners though is slightly worse through most of the frame and it has more astigmatism. It costs more, but that's for wide-open performance, where it takes the Zeiss for a walk, and two-touch operation.

    Note that these zooms came about when zoom lens design was starting to be well understood, and these zooms take advantage of the extra lens elements used in zooming to correct for near-edge performance, which is how they can be better there than most every prime in existence. Nikon and Canon have focused on fast or wide-range zooms (which have to deal with far more aberration than slower or narrower-range lenses), and consumer zooms (where price is more important than optical quality). If Nikon came out with an expensive, slow aperture, and narrow range zoom, that's probably exactly what you'd want to buy. But they haven't, which is why I suggest these Leica and Zeiss zooms for consideration.

    That said, the Zeiss 35mm f/2 comes in ZF mount, so the metering and exif data should work like with a Nikon lens, appears to be at least as good as the 35-70/3.4, and slots between that lens and the Leica 28/2.8 in price. The Sigma 35/1.4 is reportedly excellent, and autofocuses to boot, but I don't have any reliable MTF graphs to analyze for it and the large maximum aperture makes me hesitant about it. I don't know anything about the T/S lens, though its larger image circle bodes well for corner performance. As these lenses can be bought new, they can also probably be rented for thorough testing against your workflow.

    While I've used a few of these lenses, most of my thoughts here come from looking at MTF qraphs. They're most useful for predicting how in-focus images will look but they still don't tell the whole story, so, of course, look at sample images before buying.

    Anyhow--that's my ranting for today about good wide lenses for stopped down work. Let us know what you decide on and how it works out after a few prints!

    Cheers,
    Jon

  35. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Doug from East TN
    Posts
    482
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    The 45 T/S is scary sharp on the D800E. I no longer have a D800E right now, but the 45 was among my best lenses mounted on it.

    People kept throwing Zeiss options at you when you were saying AF.

    Get the 24mm 1.4G, the 85 1.4G, and the 45 T/S, and use your feet. A 135 2.0 DC is a nice option on the tele that doesn't get a lot of love these days. The Zeiss 135 would be tons sharper (but not AF), but if you want character, the 135DC has it.

    Doug

  36. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Is there any optical difference between the old 45 t/s and the new one?

    The old one is z fair bit cheaper

  37. #37
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    The main listed difference is electronic aperture control. But IIRC, the old version may not matrix meter with newer bodies?
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  38. #38
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    I stopped using the 2.8/14-24 and 2.8/24-70 already years ago, as I was not really happy with the IQ I got combined with the heft and weight of these lenses.

    The only one I still use and love is the 2.8/70-200 VRII.
    Life is an ever changing journey
    http://photography.tomsu.eu/
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/peter_...tography/sets/
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  39. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Costa Rica, central america
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Tektrader View Post
    Well after a few months of shooting, its becoming pretty obvious the trinity isn't cutting it any longer.

    The 24-70 has quite bad soft corners and fairly crappy Bokeh, The 70-200 needs different microfocus at each end and ordinary Bokeh.

    Zoom functions seem more of a distraction these days than an advantage.

    14-24 seems OK

    Question is, what primes to replace the 2 with, keeping in mind I want bitingly sharp lenses, AF and strong corner performance?

    Would love a 200 F2 but cant float that kind of money....

    Suggestions?
    A new art prime from Sigma :

    50mm F1.4 DG HSM | Art - Standard Prime Lenses - SigmaPhoto.com

    Not tested yet, but the formula looks good.
    Best regards,

    J. Duncan

  40. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Doug from East TN
    Posts
    482
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    When you say old 45 T/S, I am not sure what you are talking about. I only remembered an 85 in the old PC lens, which I owned long ago, but there was a old old 28 I believe. Then they came with the new 24/45/85 TS lenses. But I don't eat sleep and breath lenses nowadays. My 45 is about 3 years old. I bought it new Dec 2010 I think, that's when the first shot was made with it. So it was the "new version" batch. Unless they have made changes in the last 3 years, mine is current.

    It would be highly unlikely for another new version to have come out in 3-5 years. I think the last version was about 5-6 years old total, is that right? I had a 24 TS before my 45 for a year or so I got used. I miss the 24, but love the 45.

  41. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Jack was pretty right, I did a bit of digging and the older Nikkor PC micro 45mm F2.8 T/S used stop down metering. The new one the Nikkor PC-E 45 F2.8 T/S has electronic aperture control so it can electronically meter exposure wide open then stops down on shooting automatically.

    I did actually have one of the old AIs 28mm PC F3.5 lenses. It was pretty good stopped down to F5.6 and I have to say that focal length is a pretty nice place to be. Maybe I shouldn't have sold it.

    The interesting part about the T/S lenses I would think is that if the new version has aperture control, how can you effectively look at the depth of field as you tilt seeing the lens is wide open? That must be really hard in live view when there isn't much light and the screen shows a stopped down image.

  42. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by jduncan View Post
    A new art prime from Sigma :

    50mm F1.4 DG HSM | Art - Standard Prime Lenses - SigmaPhoto.com

    Not tested yet, but the formula looks good.
    Best regards,

    J. Duncan
    Wonder if there will be quality issues same as the 35mm Art lens has ?? Looks like a good way to go providing the price isn't OTUS like. What matters to me is the amount of LOCA in the design and uniformity of sharpness across the frame.

  43. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Tektrader View Post
    Jack was pretty right, I did a bit of digging and the older Nikkor PC micro 45mm F2.8 T/S used stop down metering. The new one the Nikkor PC-E 45 F2.8 T/S has electronic aperture control so it can electronically meter exposure wide open then stops down on shooting automatically.
    There has never been a PC45 that used stop down metering. There only has been a 28mm PC, a 35mm PC and the 85PC (made by Nikon that is). The 85 looks the most like the current line of PC lenses and used stop down metering. I loved using the PC85 with my Digiflex II.

  44. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Happy to be corrected. I must have been thinking of the 85mm t/s

    Thanks.....

  45. #45
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    I'm starting to understand the limitations of this thread Deviating from the original question is nothing new, but if MF is now an option then I wouldn't be concerned about sample variations of a particular lens. Looking at MTF charts gives an idea in a controlled setting, but actually shooting under changing variables a landscape photographer might encounter, such as weather, and ambient light, is where you'll determine the functionality of a brand. Rent several lenses from LensRentals and I think they apply the rental cost to a purchase with certain lenses. There's some really good gear available to today's photographer, but knowing the limitations and trade off's are perhaps only limited by the photographers creativity. I lost interest after you wrote..." While I do a lot of landscapes and can take my time. Many times I am lazy and can't be bothered with using live view and a tripod." If your printing big as you say then anyone considering a print purchase from you would appreciate the time and effort you gave your art....imo
    Last edited by johnnygoesdigital; 8th January 2014 at 09:16.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #46
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Have to agree Johnny, but then sometimes threads do change directions as the OP sees replies and gets steered in a new direction that really helps achieve their goal.

    Example is he originally stated he definitely wanted AF: "Question is, what primes to replace the 2 with, keeping in mind I want bitingly sharp lenses, AF and strong corner performance?" He then repeats this with: "BUT the 80% of the time I am not taking serious shots is why I would like to retain AF." And then a few more threads down the 45 PCE was on his radar. Not an AF lens, but a great performer for landscape, his desired goal. I, and I suspect several others, never mentioned any MF lenses because he was so adamant originally about wanting AF. Fortunately for him, others ignored it and made the suggestions. It's why we have these discussion boards
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  47. #47
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Explanation....

    It became obvious there is no AF lenses that I can buy that can achieve ALL the pre-requisites.

    So that leaves me with retaining the kit I have for general shooting, and buying 2 or 3 new lenses to accomplish my printing/landscape goals hence the interest in the T/S lenses. Purpose built high quality lenses which seem to one of the few choices sharp across the frame due to large image circle.

    Unless there are others with flat focus field that I should know about MF or NOT.
    Last edited by Tektrader; 8th January 2014 at 12:17.

  48. #48
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Tektrader View Post
    Explanation....

    It became obvious there is no AF lenses that I can buy that can achieve ALL the pre-requisites.

    So that leaves me with retaining the kit I have for general shooting, and buying 2 or 3 new lenses to accomplish my printing/landscape goals

    I'll re-quote my own post from above to reiterate the point I made in it:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    So most of us start to build a few different set of lenses; one for convenience (usually zooms and almost always AF), one for superior optical performance (and very often these are manual focus) and one for a certain look/character/drawing/rendering, whichever you want to call it -- and REGARDLESS of who made it or articulations it takes to set aperture or focus, we'll figure out a way to mount it to our camera body of choice so we can use it .

    Good luck in building your own stable, it will likely be a journey with no final destination.

    Cheers,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  49. #49
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    I am currently shooting the new Zeiss Otus 55 on both my D800e and A7R sony. It doesn't get any better. Eleanor

    Ps...I might add that beginning of February I will be shooting with this set up at high altitude in cold and snow of Colorado so will see how the lens does under these conditions.

  50. #50
    Member AreBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Highlands, Scotland
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: I started to see the limtations of the trinity

    Eleanor,

    I am currently shooting the new Zeiss Otus 55 on both my D800e and A7R sony...beginning of February I will be shooting with this set up at high altitude in cold and snow of Colorado so will see how the lens does under these conditions.
    Please can you let us know your findings, whether here at GetDPI or in Bernard's thread on LuLa that you previously posted in?

    Many thanks,
    Rob
    www.robbuckle.co.uk
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •