Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-15-2014, 09:41 AM   #16
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,997
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
Where is the chart for bokeh?
The review has a chapter on bokeh, right here.
Guys, keep in mind the lens was rated poorly not only because of low resolution/sharpness. The review also mentions the build quality, optical faults, compared it to other lenses of similar focal length/aperture (which are mostly more compact and have better build)..
And from the sample photos.. I mean its not unusable, but for $1700? Seems much cheaper and more compact lenses can do the same, if not better. The Nikkor 58mm has 72mm filter threads! Costs 1700! That's more than a K-3 with a FA 50mm f1.4.

Edit: But yes, "bad copy" is possible, sure. We often hear this when reviews give bad results.


Last edited by Na Horuk; 02-15-2014 at 09:49 AM.
02-15-2014, 09:48 AM   #17
Pentaxian
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,976
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I'm really not. I am someone who routinely argues against these ways of analyzing lens performance, because I don't believe it tells the whole story. But I also think Lens Tip probably tested a poor copy and there are better ones out there.
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
Lens reviews rarely rank good portrait lenses highly. Their attributes are contrary to what they test for except center sharpness. However, I agree this Nikon 58/1.4 does get low marks for price/performance category ( which is probably what makes it so unlikeable). Nikon should have just restricted the aperture to f1.8 and called it a f1.8 lens since f1.4 is really not usable at all.
I've looked at the sample picture in real life, and i have to admit that they probably got a poor copy, because any of their prime lens do better. For me the lens produce very foggy image. And i don't really believe that even my Helios 44m is supposed to do better.
02-15-2014, 09:48 AM   #18
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
The review has a chapter on bokeh, right here.
Guys, keep in mind the lens was rated poorly not only because of low resolution/sharpness. The review also mentions the build quality, optical faults, compared it to other lenses of similar focal length/aperture (which are mostly more compact and have better build)..
And from the sample photos.. I mean its not unusable, but for $1700? Seems much cheaper and more compact lenses can do the same, if not better. The Nikkor 58mm has 72mm filter threads! Costs 1700! That's more than a K-3 with a FA 50mm f1.4.
Based on that bokeh page, it seems that the Otus has better specular highlights and possibly smoother bokeh than the Nikkor.
02-15-2014, 01:37 PM   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,946
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by interested_observer Quote
So, as soon as Nikon management reads the review, a brand new, cherry picked, sample will be re-aligned, tested on the optical bench, fine tuned, QC'd, very carefully double packed and delivered to FedEX for overnight shipping ...
Or even better, they could do what SamYang did with their 14mm f2.8 after Lenstip criticised their initial version of the lens - improve the design of the lens and issue an improved version, which is the current model. But Nikon is probably not as nimble (or humble) as the smaller SamYang.

02-15-2014, 02:13 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,174
QuoteOriginally posted by aurele Quote
I've looked at the sample picture in real life, and i have to admit that they probably got a poor copy, because any of their prime lens do better. For me the lens produce very foggy image. And i don't really believe that even my Helios 44m is supposed to do better.
The 58mm does okay. Here is a shot on a FF 16MP camera.






Last edited by tuco; 02-15-2014 at 02:19 PM.
02-15-2014, 02:35 PM   #21
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 573
So… it's a plastic, not so fantastic.

@Tuco, you are correct. These days it's sharp or it's crap. It really depends on what you want the lens for. There is such a thing as sharp enough, but the other qualities are more subjective and harder to assign a hard score too.

I hate big plastic lenses, so I hate this lens.
02-16-2014, 04:18 AM   #22
Pentaxian
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,976
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
The 58mm does okay. Here is a shot on a FF 16MP camera.
to me this picture is definitely better than the one in the review. at least it appear "clear" ! i maintain my idea of a bad copy so far unless i see similar review.

BTW : yes, the out of focus in really nice, quite smooth. not as harsh as the Sigma tend to be sometimes.

Why do you say "the 58mm does okay" ? You hoped for something different ?
02-28-2014, 06:01 PM   #23
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 143
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
It's a portrait lens. Very sharp in the center stopped down some and good bokeh. It fails pixel peeping lens reviews that don't measure those things. Therefore the lens is bad. Meanwhile, owners of the lens love it for those properties. Go figure.
Tuco is exactly right. I have seen images produced by this lens. They are stunning. This is a specialty lens--designed for a specific purpose. I am happy to see that Nikon has developed such a lens--a lens that is concerned with 'character' and 'drawing' as much as resolving power. However, I do think that for this price they could have given us a bit better construction.

02-28-2014, 10:59 PM   #24
Pentaxian
jeffshaddix's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 1,371
I bet it's a poor copy. Even a portrait fast prime has better center resolution than what's reported.

I like this reviewer's comments: Nikon 58mm f/1.4G Review - Page 3 of 7

The section on bokeh is good. I'd be curious how it compares to the Sigma 50/1.4 (both old and new).
03-01-2014, 07:18 AM   #25
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,184
Lenstip isn't the first review to knock this lens. DP didn't care too much for it either but they did acknowledge the superb results it gives for portraits and mentioned that professional wedding photographers would love this lens. This brings up a big problem in today's market. A good "professional" lens is expected to be brutally sharp from corner to corner and the overwhelming majority of forums and reviews are "enthusiasts" who expect a great deal of versatility from a lens and can't see the value of a lens that would only be good for portraits. Pentax used to make an 85mm "soft" lens made specifically for portraits but no longer does although the lens is still a sought after item for some. DP mentioned that the lens has characteristics of the old "soft focus" lenses when used wide open and has excellent bokeh. They also mentioned difficulty in getting it to focus and had to dial in a good deal of adjustment.
03-01-2014, 08:03 AM - 1 Like   #26
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,423
I'm in with the other guys above... I rate expensive lenses on their bokeh... not their sharpness... you can get sharpness on a cheap lens, you can't get great bokeh on a cheap lens. And sharpness in most images is vastly over-rated. Middle of the pack sharpness with great bokeh wins every time in my book, compared to razor sharp and choppy bokeh. It's just a nicer image.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
af-s, bokeh, center, f/1.4g, lens, lenses, mm, nikkor, nikon, nikon nikkor af-s, resolution, trash, zeiss
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon Germany says full frame is their focus now falconeye Pentax Full Frame 109 01-28-2014 02:08 PM
So this is fungus right? Time for the trash bin? Ryan Trevisol Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 05-19-2011 06:25 AM
For Sale - Sold: Like New Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4 SL II; Nikon Mount (US) luke0622 Sold Items 2 02-23-2011 10:06 AM
Review of new Bigma now on LensTip.com infosyn Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 05-19-2010 09:34 PM
Trash the kit lens and get a new one THAN THE SWORD Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 02-12-2008 07:04 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:01 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top