Mar 31 2015, 10:13 AM
QUOTE(jchue73 @ Mar 31 2015, 01:48 AM)
Saying that it performs less sharp and saying it does not exist are 2 different things. 
After all this is a Nikon thread and saying that that lens does not exist is giving misinformation to Nikon users.
Yeah, wide open it may not be as good as Canon's but with the D800 / D810 sensor, it levels the playing field a bit.
But making the sensor platform the same, the Canon's 135mm is indeed better according to http://www.lenscore.org/. But then again Nikon's 135mm is very close in performance to Canon's fantastic EF 100mm f/2.8L macro lens and better than Nikon's own AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II. That's good enough for me.
Best 135mm f/2 for the Nikon is the one from Zeiss APO Sonnar ZF.2 manual lens.
Thanks for the link. Interesting and I may not fully agree with the reviewer as I own 3 of those lenses albeit the older AF-D lens for the 85mm f/1.4 and not the new AF-S version. I find that amongst all 3 lenses, the 200mm f/2.0 VR is the most stunning and mind blowing images that can be produced. It blew the socks out of me the first time I shot with it. Superb performance wide open and devoid of any chroma imperfections. Surprised that the reviewer did not find it stunning and complained lack of contrast at f/2.0. Perhaps something not right with the reviewed lens. Focus lock is tremendously fast on this chubby monster. The best from anything I've personally used. Need to be careful with the DoF because it's so thin wide open.
The same cannot be said for the AF 135mm f/2.0 DC wide open. It's known to be soft wide open. Yes, older lenses do tend to perform that way. It's not always about how sharp the lenses performs wide open but also how the lens renders the background bokeh. Case in point is how a lot of people are disappointed that the new AF-S 58mm f/1.4 performs at wide open while others praise how beautiful and smooth the image is rendered from it. That's a different discussion altogether. Anyway, a recent discovery about the use of the 135mm f/2.0 DC lens claims that the lens gets sharper when the DC ring is clicked and positioned at F2 (which I have personally discovered) and sharper still if it's at an intermediate setting in between the neutral and F2 setting (this I have just read and I have not personally tested yet) at wide open f/2.0. Stopping it down a little to 2.2 or 2.5 or even to 2.8 yields very nice results unlike what is reported by the reviewer of having experiencing it soft at f/4.
Anyway, the same too regarding the AF-D 85mm f/1.4 that I have. Not as biting sharp as the newer AF-S sibling wide open but sharpens very nicely when stopped down a little. The way bokeh is rendered is most instances differ slightly than the newer AF-S lens. I know wide open the newer AF-S version is biting sharp but like what I mentioned earlier above, it's a matter of preference where some people may like the way the AF-D lens renders bokeh while some say the AF-S is better etc. Some even say the Sigma is better yet.
One thing that I dislike about both the screw driven 135mm f/2.0 and 85mm f/1.4 lenses are that their focus acquisition are a little slow. Well, at least some AF is better than just MF from the Zeiss.
p/s: Incidentally, that 135mm f/2.0 picture posted earlier was shot by a 200mm f/2.0.
im also quite amazed at the 200 f2.0 too. heavy and hard to handle but results are stunning. but my wishlist is still the 135 f/2.0 After all this is a Nikon thread and saying that that lens does not exist is giving misinformation to Nikon users.Yeah, wide open it may not be as good as Canon's but with the D800 / D810 sensor, it levels the playing field a bit.
But making the sensor platform the same, the Canon's 135mm is indeed better according to http://www.lenscore.org/. But then again Nikon's 135mm is very close in performance to Canon's fantastic EF 100mm f/2.8L macro lens and better than Nikon's own AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II. That's good enough for me.
Best 135mm f/2 for the Nikon is the one from Zeiss APO Sonnar ZF.2 manual lens.
Thanks for the link. Interesting and I may not fully agree with the reviewer as I own 3 of those lenses albeit the older AF-D lens for the 85mm f/1.4 and not the new AF-S version. I find that amongst all 3 lenses, the 200mm f/2.0 VR is the most stunning and mind blowing images that can be produced. It blew the socks out of me the first time I shot with it. Superb performance wide open and devoid of any chroma imperfections. Surprised that the reviewer did not find it stunning and complained lack of contrast at f/2.0. Perhaps something not right with the reviewed lens. Focus lock is tremendously fast on this chubby monster. The best from anything I've personally used. Need to be careful with the DoF because it's so thin wide open.
The same cannot be said for the AF 135mm f/2.0 DC wide open. It's known to be soft wide open. Yes, older lenses do tend to perform that way. It's not always about how sharp the lenses performs wide open but also how the lens renders the background bokeh. Case in point is how a lot of people are disappointed that the new AF-S 58mm f/1.4 performs at wide open while others praise how beautiful and smooth the image is rendered from it. That's a different discussion altogether. Anyway, a recent discovery about the use of the 135mm f/2.0 DC lens claims that the lens gets sharper when the DC ring is clicked and positioned at F2 (which I have personally discovered) and sharper still if it's at an intermediate setting in between the neutral and F2 setting (this I have just read and I have not personally tested yet) at wide open f/2.0. Stopping it down a little to 2.2 or 2.5 or even to 2.8 yields very nice results unlike what is reported by the reviewer of having experiencing it soft at f/4.
Anyway, the same too regarding the AF-D 85mm f/1.4 that I have. Not as biting sharp as the newer AF-S sibling wide open but sharpens very nicely when stopped down a little. The way bokeh is rendered is most instances differ slightly than the newer AF-S lens. I know wide open the newer AF-S version is biting sharp but like what I mentioned earlier above, it's a matter of preference where some people may like the way the AF-D lens renders bokeh while some say the AF-S is better etc. Some even say the Sigma is better yet.
One thing that I dislike about both the screw driven 135mm f/2.0 and 85mm f/1.4 lenses are that their focus acquisition are a little slow. Well, at least some AF is better than just MF from the Zeiss.
p/s: Incidentally, that 135mm f/2.0 picture posted earlier was shot by a 200mm f/2.0.
Quote
0.0218sec
0.20
6 queries
GZIP Disabled