Looking for lenses with character for Nikon D850

[epforever]

I just recently changed over to the D850 from a Canon 5DII (I didn't have much invested in Canon glass, and the D850 is just such a leap in camera). My main workhorse continues to be an H5D-50, but I use 35mm whenever I need to crank up the ISO or when I just want to mix things up.

I'd love some suggestions of great lenses with character and 3D-ness, i.e., with that special something. AF is nice, but MF is fine too. Opinions online tend to be all over the map, and I feel that things are a bit more thoughtful and grounded here in the forum.

A few notes / questions:

- I tend to shoot between 24mm and 105mm, with the bulk of shooting at 28mm, 35mm and 50mm.

- First purchase is probably a normal prime. Has anyone tried both the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ZF.2 and the Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 SL II? Opinions on the former seem to be mixed but generally glowing; opinions on the latter seem to be more universally glowing.

- Bokeh is nice, but it's not my dominant criterium.

- When I rented a Zeiss 35mm for shooting video, I could see a difference (vs. my Canon lenses) right through the viewfinder. It was quite eye-opening. (I love the Zeiss on my analog Hassy, and I've never quite replicated that experience in 35mm.)

thank you,
ethan

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I just recently changed over to the D850 from a Canon 5DII (I didn't have much invested in Canon glass, and the D850 is just such a leap in camera). My main workhorse continues to be an H5D-50, but I use 35mm whenever I need to crank up the ISO or when I just want to mix things up.

I'd love some suggestions of great lenses with character and 3D-ness, i.e., with that special something. AF is nice, but MF is fine too. Opinions online tend to be all over the map, and I feel that things are a bit more thoughtful and grounded here in the forum.

A few notes / questions:

- I tend to shoot between 24mm and 105mm, with the bulk of shooting at 28mm, 35mm and 50mm.

- First purchase is probably a normal prime. Has anyone tried both the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ZF.2 and the Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 SL II? Opinions on the former seem to be mixed but generally glowing; opinions on the latter seem to be more universally glowing.

- Bokeh is nice, but it's not my dominant criterium.

- When I rented a Zeiss 35mm for shooting video, I could see a difference (vs. my Canon lenses) right through the viewfinder. It was quite eye-opening. (I love the Zeiss on my analog Hassy, and I've never quite replicated that experience in 35mm.)

thank you,
ethan

I had the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ZF for a while and compared it to the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 and much preferred the Nikkor, which was the lens I ended up with. The Nikkor is sharper across the frame and has loads of character. Bokeh can be untidy at times, but over all it's a very good lens.

 

[Jeffg53]

I spent a lot of time trying to answer the same question when I abandoned my H4D 40 and bought a D800. My answer was a mix of Zeiss (Otus 55, and 135) and adapted Leica R lenses. I have the 28-90, 50 Cron, 19, 100 macro, and 180 APO Telyt with Leitax mounts. I'm happy with the solution and have now moved on to a D850 which has seen very little use so far.

 

[glenerrolrd]

To clarify your request ..I believe you are looking for what most would describe as “Best in Class” criteria . When we speak to character its often points to lenses that have a nice smooth bokeh . Of course all lenses have character and most of the zeiss,leica and nikon lenses are plenty sharp in the middle although with differences wide open and in edge sharpness.

The Zeiss OTUS is a great reference point ....it has great sharpness edge to edge even wide open ,contrast is balanced and creates a smooth pattern of tones and color saturation and lack of color casts (yellow for example) is excellent . It is however a beast to work with due to its size and weight .

Manual focus verse AF is another keep issue ...with the D800/810/850 and manual focus you will fight for accurate manual focus . The viewfinder/screen just isn t up to say a modern EVF . With that said the advantage of using Zeiss and Leica R manual focus lenses may justify the struggle . Depends on what you shoot and the technique you use . With higher ISO performance you can get away with smaller F stops and let DOF cover small focus errors . But if you are looking for available light window portraits wide open....you better have good eyes.

In the range you are speaking to ...28/35/50 .....I went with the Nikon 28/1.4 D AF (look it up on the Nikon website ) . Copy variances exist but my lens is a favorite . Its seems to have a clarity of color transmission and micro contrast to produce superb files . This lenses seems to have signature or look all its own . There is nothing really wrong with the nikon 35/1.4 or the 50/1.4 but they are not special like the 28 . The newer 28/1.4 Nikon ,the new Zeiss 25/1.4 and 35/1.4 seem to be well liked ....but I have not used them . The 28/1.4 OTUS is a beast due to weight .

My guess is that you will like the snap (contrast) and color saturation of the newer Zeiss 25/1.4 and 35/1.4 and if you can handle manual focus ..these will be hard to beat . See the Zeiss website for blog post on manual focus technique . See diglloyd for tests of these lenses in his Zeiss section. (pay site ).

 

[Paul2660]

Nothing against non Nikon glass, but if you are looking here are few Nikon lenses I have used on the 850.

1. 24-70 VR, quickly became my standard lens on the D850. The VR is handy and the lens is sharp throughout the zoom range. It does have a very nasty flare issue when shooting directly into the sun or a bit off to the side. But when compared to the previous version, this lens is amazing.

2. The 14-24, still a great lens, at least mine is. I was happy to find that I can still get sharp corners at 14mm. Mine is a bit soft at 22mm to 24mm in the corners, but I don't tend to use it there. Also has a nasty corner flare, unique to this lens which will show up in the opposite corner of the light.

3. 70-200 VR Vr 2. Probably the best zoom I have shot, coming from Canon or Nikon. This lens is very impressive. Still does great work with the 1.4 TC.

4. 105mm 1.4. Love the lens, it's a bit large, but still has a very unique look to the images. I am one user that would have preferred to see VR on this lens especially at the price point.

5. 19mm PC-E. Nikon's only really wide perspective lens, (24mm is still sold by I never found it to work well). The 19mm on center is as sharp as any Zeiss I have used. It's very impressive. However it is plagued by the issue that all retro focus wides tend to have, the issue where objects to the edge become shorter and fatter. Issue is really only barely noticeable with the lens on center, but past 5mm of shift, it's very very noticeable. The 19mm I have also really can't hold a sharp edge past 6mm of shift on the D850. You can make micro focus adjustments which help but the edges still suffer. Also from 8mm out, you will see a bit of vignetting on the opposite side of your shift. LR seems to handle this well. Last time I checked C1 still has no lens profile for this lens. It's a very expensive lens and I had hoped that it would hold up on the edges better at 10mm of shift. Again this just may be my lens. Also it's not filter friendly, and there is no hood, which is surprising to me. Lee does make an adapter to use their SW-150 system on it however which works well.

Paul Caldwell

 

[Jack]

A short list of my favorites. To me, these lenses offer as close to Leica Mandler designs (my all time favorites) that I can find. Caveat, many are discontinued and getting harder to find.

Nikkor 18/2.8 AF-D -- difficult to use, not the sharpest tool wide open, but glorious when properly applied, sweet zone is f4 & f5.6 and mid-range subject distances, with f8 offering more normal rendering. Note that this lens has a lot of field curvature as well, so one of the tricks I employ with it is when setting the AF fine tune, I set the center to hit the far end of the f4 DOF at 10-12 feet (roughly 200x focal). This gives you a broader usable DoF across the frame.

Nikkor 28/1.4 AF-D ASPH (old style) -- a gem at any aperture, magic at 1.4 through 4, price about the same as the new version.

Nikkor 50/1.4G -- new lens, great rendering and relative bargain price.

Nikkor 58/1.4G -- newer design, a little soft at 1.4, but very nice drawing at 2.0 through 4, a great "head and shoulders" portrait option -- however, I personally prefer the 50 or 85 focals overall to the 58.

Nikkor 85/1.4G -- newer lens, stunning at all apertures, but magic at 1.4 through 4.

Nikkor 105/2 AF-DC -- older lens, awesome "old world" rendering with DC control set to 0; a tad soft at f2, but marvelous from 2.5 up.

Nikkor 105/1.4G -- If I didn't have the 85/1.4 and didn't love the 105/2DC I have, this would be my goto portrait tele.

Nikkor 180/2.8 AF-D -- crinkle-finish version. Very good wide open down, and another bargain.

Non-AF lenses:

Nikkor 50/1.2 -- glorious wide open, and in fact the only reason to own and use it is for f1.2 -- at f1.4 up it is nearly identical to the 50/1.4G.

Petzval 85mm -- stunning turn of the last century look, hard to use with lantern wheel focus and water stops, but results are magical when employed properly.

Hassleblad FE 110/2 -- nicest portrait lens I ever used, but the 85/1.4G and 105/1.4G are so close, one stop faster still and AF.

 

[epforever]

Great responses so far. Thank you. Keep them coming.

A few questions and notes:

For anyone who can chime in:
The accuracy of MF vs AF does concern me. I've used an old MF 45mm/2.8 pancake lens on the D850, and thus far the focus-confirmation dot seems to be quite accurate. Is this not the case with other MF lenses? Is the focusing throw where the dot indicates sharp focus just too long for perfect accuracy?

Jeff Grant:
Do the Leica R lenses have a long focus throw, the way the Zeiss lenses do? I'm going to be shooting some video as well.

Roger Dunham:
- Yes, I suppose I'm looking for best in class. But the Otuses are beyond budget at this point. And in my experience, as you know, not all "best" lenses have "character." I have Canon's EF 100mm/2.8 USM macro lens, and while it's razor-sharp, I find it nothing special at all for portraits (I predominantly shoot people).
- Regarding MF vs AF, yes, accuracy of MF is something that concerns me.

Paul Caldwell:
- The one lens I've gotten is the 24-70 non-VR, and I'm very happy with it. Once I fine-tuned the camera for it, it's sharp and snappy throughout the focal range.
- I know the 70-200 VR II is supposed to be great. Do you think it's so good that, if I had it, there's no need for longer primes (e.g., 105mm, 135mm)? (Apart from the size/portability factor.) It sounds like you would still encourage getting the 105/1.4

Jack Flescher:
- Have you ever compared that Nikkor 50mm 1.4G to, say, the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 ZF.2? If you think they're comparable in terms of image quality, character, special-ness, etc., it would be nice to have AF.
- Great point about the Hasselblad 110/2. I have it. I just bought an adapter to mount it on the Nikon.

 

[Jack]

I find the focus confirm dot quite excellent for MF lenses. BUT, the fact is that newer Nikon AF is so good, I've basically sold off all of my MF lenses save for a few special purpose ones simply because of the great AF lenses available. I know this comment will irritate those that love Zeiss lenses, but frankly I have yet to see one that was enough superior to anything I mentioned above to make their MF worth the extra hassle -- again, for my needs only and respect YMMV.

Great responses so far. Thank you. Keep them coming.

A few questions and notes:

For anyone who can chime in:
The accuracy of MF vs AF does concern me. I've used an old MF 45mm/2.8 pancake lens on the D850, and thus far the focus-confirmation dot seems to be quite accurate. Is this not the case with other MF lenses? Is the focusing throw where the dot indicates sharp focus just too long for perfect accuracy?

Jeff Grant:
Do the Leica R lenses have a long focus throw, the way the Zeiss lenses do? I'm going to be shooting some video as well.

Roger Dunham:
- Yes, I suppose I'm looking for best in class. But the Otuses are beyond budget at this point. And in my experience, as you know, not all "best" lenses have "character." I have Canon's EF 100mm/2.8 USM macro lens, and while it's razor-sharp, I find it nothing special at all for portraits (I predominantly shoot people).
- Regarding MF vs AF, yes, accuracy of MF is something that concerns me.

Paul Caldwell:
- The one lens I've gotten is the 24-70 non-VR, and I'm very happy with it. Once I fine-tuned the camera for it, it's sharp and snappy throughout the focal range.
- I know the 70-200 VR II is supposed to be great. Do you think it's so good that, if I had it, there's no need for longer primes (e.g., 105mm, 135mm)? (Apart from the size/portability factor.) It sounds like you would still encourage getting the 105/1.4

Jack Flescher:
- Have you ever compared that Nikkor 50mm 1.4G to, say, the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 ZF.2? If you think they're comparable in terms of image quality, character, special-ness, etc., it would be nice to have AF.
- Great point about the Hasselblad 110/2. I have it. I just bought an adapter to mount it on the Nikon.

 

[DougDolde]

Pretty good lens reviews here

http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff

 

[Frankly]

I've had several Zeiss Milvus manual focus lenses that work very well and are clearly out resolving equivalents. I don't think you can go wrong with them if you can manual focus. Of course the Otus is superior, I rented the 50mm, but it is not a comfortable lens to walk around with (heavy!) and it has quirks too. (Most bothersome to me was the insane open-to-the-elements DOF ring. $5k and you can't weather seal it?)

Favorites are:

Nikon 28/1.4e beautiful lens, great bokeh and resolution, I do not like the focal length so much but I really like the lens and it is useful even if I crop, so it remains my best wide angle.

Zeiss 35/2 Milvus (or ZF2) compact yet better resolution than any 35 Nikkor. Yet I sold it to get an AF lens to use in my water housing.

Zeiss 50/1.4 Milvus best all-around 50mm yet. I've had all of the other 50mms, the 1.2s, etc.

Nikon 105/1.4e good AF, best bokeh of the 85-105-135 range including Zeiss, Sigma (owned all the 85/1.4s but the Otus)

Zeiss 135/2 heavy but Otus quality, too heavy for handheld use. The Sigma 135/1.8 was close and has AF but also required a +20 focus adjustment.

Any modern fast Nikon telephoto prime will be great, I love my older AFS-II 300/2.8. I'd love to get the 200/2 or the 400.

I also have a Nikon 35/1.8g (good for knocking around and in the water housing, not too expensive) and had the Nikon 85/1.8g (it's sharp) and they are excellent but kind of cheaply built.

All of the older Nikon AIS have been slightly off, not quite sharp, OK for portraits and online but not even close to modern glass (except telephotos are usually fine). Pity because their build quality can be nice. Similar but less extreme differences from the middle generation AF-D lenses, which are just ugly feeling lenses with terrible manual focusing (most of them at least).

I've also had the pancake VC lenses, 20mm and 40mm. Sharp and nice touch but wire bokeh like most of their Leica-M versions. They just can't get that last 10% right but obviously for twice the money they can build you a Zeiss version that has none of their problems, lol.

Sigmas can be OK but I don't like that they often require maximum focus adjustment. I'm not going to buy a Tamron, sorry.

When Nikon tries they can knock it out of the park but too often their older lenses are mediocre.

Usually the older longer focal length lenses are pretty good, I had a $100 Nikon 300/4.5 AI that was just as sharp as anything and wish I still owned it.

I have a much longer list as the very last entry on my website's blog, but it's way back there! (and NSFW)

Just my two cents.

 

[epforever]

I've had several Zeiss Milvus manual focus lenses that work very well and are clearly out resolving equivalents. I don't think you can go wrong with them if you can manual focus.

Favorites are:

Nikon 28/1.4e beautiful lens, great bokeh and resolution
Zeiss 35/2 Milvus (or ZF2) compact yet better resolution than any 35 Nikkor
Zeiss 50/1.4 best all-around 50mm
Nikon 105/1.4e good AF, best bokeh of the 85-105-135 range including Zeiss, Sigma
Zeiss 135/2 heavy but Otus quality
Any modern fast Nikon telephoto prime will be great....

I also have a Nikon 35/1.8g and had the Nikon 85/1.8g (it's sharp) and they are excellent but kinda cheaply built.

All of the older Nikon AIS have been slightly off, not quite sharp, OK for portraits and online but not even close to modern glass (except telephotos are usually fine).

Sigmas can be OK but I don't like that they often require maximum focus adjustment. I'm not going to buy a Tamron, sorry.

When Nikon tries they can knock it out of the park but too often their older lenses are mediocre.

Just my two cents.

Great -- thanks for this.

For the Zeiss 50/1.4, do you mean the Milvus or the Planar ZF.2? Planar is about half the price, and I'd pick it up in a heartbeat if not for what I've read about it being soft at wider apertures and it not being up to the normal Zeiss standards.

 

[Jack]

To the OP -- do want character, ie a "look," or clinically sharp corner to corner lenses? Two different things much of the time...

 

[DougDolde]

I started out with a ZF.2 28mm. On the recommendations of Ming Thein and Diglloyd who both said if they could only own one lens that would be it.

Next lens a ZF.2 85mm just to have a short telephoto and it's a good lens, and f1.4 to boot not that I would ever change the aperture from f/8.

Coming Friday a ZF.2 21mm bought on review by Ming Thein and the website Nikon / Nikkor Full Format Lens Tests / Reviews

Not much experience yet with the latter two but love the 28mm

 

[epforever]

To the OP -- do want character, ie a "look," or clinically sharp corner to corner lenses? Two different things much of the time...

Yep, I know they can be quite different. Ideally I'd like both, of course, and I've seen this in the Zeiss 35mm I rented a while back. And in my Hasselblad lenses, both V and H, for the most part. I know that lenses like the Sigma Art lenses deliver fantastic sharpness, but I've heard that they can be a bit clinical. I'm most interested in character, in that rich look, and I'd like for the lenses to be usable wide open or close to it. Your post mentioning all those Nikkor AF lenses was helpful. Hopefully I can actually try out a few before buying.

I suppose what I'm looking for is just to hear people's recommendation on the stand-out lenses available for Nikon. I've shot medium format all my career, so I'm just not as intimately familiar with the endless range of what's available.

 

[Frankly]

Great -- thanks for this.

For the Zeiss 50/1.4, do you mean the Milvus or the Planar ZF.2? Planar is about half the price, and I'd pick it up in a heartbeat if not for what I've read about it being soft at wider apertures and it not being up to the normal Zeiss standards.

opps, sorry, the Milvus is the one I like. Here are two different shots with the same Zeiss 50/1.4 Milvus for Nikon.

 

[epforever]

opps, sorry, the Milvus is the one I like. Here are two different shots with the same Zeiss 50/1.4 Milvus for Nikon.

Thanks for the clarification. Great images, both of those. There's something slightly off / odd about each, which I love. Especially the expression / moment in the first.

 

[Jeffg53]

Great responses so far. Thank you. Keep them coming.


Jeff Grant:
Do the Leica R lenses have a long focus throw, the way the Zeiss lenses do? I'm going to be shooting some video as well.

The lenses have a longish focus throw, as you would expect. I can't remember my old V lenses, and had to go and try them to answer your question. A few years back, you couldn't give the Leica R lenses away but then video guys discovered them and started buying them up.

 

[Thorkil]

..a beautiful lens, still in production, costed 910 US-dollar in Denmark including 25% tax, taken with another beautiful lens, the nikkor 28/1.4D, at iso 1.800 1/500 f1.4, on a Df
no pp.

thorkil

 

[Paul2660]

Great responses so far. Thank you. Keep them coming.

A few questions and notes:

For anyone who can chime in:
The accuracy of MF vs AF does concern me. I've used an old MF 45mm/2.8 pancake lens on the D850, and thus far the focus-confirmation dot seems to be quite accurate. Is this not the case with other MF lenses? Is the focusing throw where the dot indicates sharp focus just too long for perfect accuracy?

Jeff Grant:
Do the Leica R lenses have a long focus throw, the way the Zeiss lenses do? I'm going to be shooting some video as well.

Roger Dunham:
- Yes, I suppose I'm looking for best in class. But the Otuses are beyond budget at this point. And in my experience, as you know, not all "best" lenses have "character." I have Canon's EF 100mm/2.8 USM macro lens, and while it's razor-sharp, I find it nothing special at all for portraits (I predominantly shoot people).
- Regarding MF vs AF, yes, accuracy of MF is something that concerns me.

Paul Caldwell:
- The one lens I've gotten is the 24-70 non-VR, and I'm very happy with it. Once I fine-tuned the camera for it, it's sharp and snappy throughout the focal range.
- I know the 70-200 VR II is supposed to be great. Do you think it's so good that, if I had it, there's no need for longer primes (e.g., 105mm, 135mm)? (Apart from the size/portability factor.) It sounds like you would still encourage getting the 105/1.4

Jack Flescher:
- Have you ever compared that Nikkor 50mm 1.4G to, say, the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 ZF.2? If you think they're comparable in terms of image quality, character, special-ness, etc., it would be nice to have AF.
- Great point about the Hasselblad 110/2. I have it. I just bought an adapter to mount it on the Nikon.

The new version of the 70-200 is probably one of the best single zooms I have used. I agree with Jack on the AF/MF with Nikon. One thing I hated on Phase One, DF, DF+ and Now XF is the AF. Sorry for me it's just not what I am looking for, both in accuracy and the fact that you so limited with a single point. The AF on the newer Nikon bodies is excellent, I rarely use MF, unless shooting very wide.

Nikon has slowly refreshed all of their main line zooms and many of the their primes. I have been very impressed with all of their newer optics.

Adding in the the full ES on the D850, and the touch to fire the shutter on the LCD, you have an excellent system.

Paul Caldwell

 

[Shashin]

If I were getting a 35mm Nikon, my choice for a lens with character would be the Nikkor 45mm Tilt/Shift (two image panorama using the shift).

Of course. if you want real character...