Optical quality of MF/AF primes (Nikon)

[mfogiel]

Teus
I don't have the 50/1.4 ZF, because I have opted for the MP 50/2 ZF, however I have seen reviews, including Reid, and the Zeiss is sharper, but it is nonetheless a bit of an old design lens, as it comes from the Contax era. If you want a fast 50, you will probably enjoy more the Nikkor 50/1.2, and if you want a really good walk around lens to shoot at middle aprertures, get the 45P, it is outstanding.

 

[Monte920]

Some of you mentioned about lens wobble during focus. My AF 50mm f1.8D, and AF 24-85mm f3.5-4.5G are like that. However, so far I am not able to pick up any adverse effects on the picture quality. The pictures taken by these wobbling lenses are still perfectly sharp in focus. And the focus plane is even across the film area (I checked the slides with a projector). Please, tell me any bad things that may occur if the lenses are wobbling (except the bad mood! 😡)

 

[Teus]

thanks everybody for contributing. I'll see to gather some info about Nikon coating. As for fast glass, I guess Nikkor lens designs haven't changed much (coating neither), and fast glass is just more sensitive for flare.

Please, tell me any bad things that may occur if the lenses are wobbling (except the bad mood! 😡)

on manual focus, you feel how well a lens is built. using a crummy 70-300 f/4-5.6 is downright horrible, for example.

 

[sepiareverb]

I'd stick with the MF lenses, as build quality is so much better they will last longer. Some of the cheaper lenses are actually put together with tape, and now Nikon has moved some of the manufacturing to China, out of sight. I had a 50/1.8 AF lens I returned instantly as it was nearly all plastic and felt too flimsy to use.

 

[kaiyen]

Nikon has at least been putting in some effort with their primes of late. They first went on the high end, totally new glass (200 f2). Then they updated their long lenses. And recently the 105 and 60 macros. I would be surprised if they didn't do something with their 50 since Sigma announced theirs.

But no question they need to update their primes - the 35 f2 for certain (should be faster, too, along with updated).

 

[Teus]

slightly offtopic: 50mm is great on my Leica for portraits and events, and I use my SLR's to cover the other focal lenghts and purposes. An M could be my primary camera. I'm thinking of a 50mm f/2.5 summarit (1000 euro), or a used Summicron (latest revision 600-800 euro).

Since I rarely use my glass wide open: would the Summicron be sharper than a 50mm f/1.2 Nikkor at f/2?

 

[jonmanjiro]

Brand new this month. It's certainly not a bad lens at all but considering nikon have nothing (at least at the moment) better in a 35mm prime, the canon 35 1.4L beats the pants off it.
Similarly I had a play with the famous nikkor AF 85 1.4 a few weeks ago. It's built nicely but the AF can be a little imprecise, it's fairly soft wide open and the corners aren't sharp until about f2.8 on DX. By comparison the canon 85 1.2L II also beats the pants off it.

I'm not a canon fan boy or whatever, but I love having high quality, fast primes, and nikon have barely updated theirs since god knows when.
I'm hoping nikon bring out some new AF-S primes this year. It's one area they really need to improve.

Thanks for the reply. Maybe I need to try the modern Canon primes you mentioned 🙂 Then again, maybe not ... the last thing I need is to start investing in another system 😱

Hopefully we'll see Nikon updating their wide angle and normal primes sometime soon!

 

[jonmanjiro]

have you compared it with the ZF f/1.4?
I'm wondering if the Nikkor f/1.2, f/1.4 or the ZF gives best results at f/2-2.8. When it comes to build quality, the 1.4 AFD is no go. The ZF is modern and very pretty/solid, but quite expensive.

I used to own a Zeiss ZF 50/1.4 but sold it and kept my AIS 50/1.2 instead. There really wasn't much in it but my copy of the Zeiss was ever so slightly sharper wide open and the AIS 50/1.2 was a better performer from f2 to f4. From f2 to f4 is the range I use the most so I sold the Zeiss and kept the Nikkor.

Edited to add MTF chart found at pnet.

 

[Ade-oh]

As always on RFF, there's some real horsesh*t about lens quality. The reality is that on a 10 x 8 print, it is very unlikely that you will be able to tell the difference between any of the lenses mentioned in this thread so far. The 'Zeiss' 50mm/1.4 is made in Japan by Cosina to an ancient optical design: it's a nice enough lens but not markedly different to much less expensive alternatives, including the Nikkor 50/1.4.