Please evaluate my Nikon lens selection for 35mm adapters—are there sharper ones?

[Stephen Pruitt]

Hi all. . .

I'm sort of in a quandry. I purchased an M2 and a six ultra fast Nikon lenses. Now, however, since I'm switched to the Brevis, lens speed is a less serious consideration. What I'm looking for is SHARP.

While my Nikons are all very quick, I'm not sure that quick is that same as sharp. I'd love your comments on if any of these lenses could be replaced with sharper Nikon counterparts.

Here's what I've got:

Nikon AIS 28mm F2.0
Nikon AIS 35mm F1.4
Nikon AIS 50mm F1.2
Nikon AIS 85mm F1.4
Nikon AIS 135mm F2.0
Nikon AIS 180mm F2.8

Again, I am particularly concerned about sharpness. I am not at all convinced that my 50mm F1.2 is nearly as sharp as it could be. Perhaps the F1.4 or F1.8 are sharper?

Anyway, I'm very grateful for your help.

Stephen

[puredrifting]

Most still Nikon heads agree that the 50mm 1.2 doesn't come into it's own unless you are using it at an f2.0 or 2.8. Kind of makes buying it not a good deal, huh?

85mm 1.4 is a killer lens knowns as "the cream machine" because of it's beautiful bokeh.

180mm 2.8 is often regarded as one of Nikon's sharpest teles and it's relatively cheap. It competes with the big, expensive lenses in terms of sharpness, if not in focal length.

35mm 1.4? Wow, bet that one is a monster as far as weight and size. I don't know much about it, let us know what you think once you use it.

You have some nice glass and I bet you sunk some money into all of these?

Dan

[Leo Versola]

FWIW, I find the 50mm 1.8 to be an excellent and very sharp lens; especially given the price; a number of reviews claim it's sharper than the 1.2 and 1.4 versions...

Personally, I'd love to try out some of the Zeiss Planar lenses....

[Stephen Pruitt]

Thanks for the tips gentlemen. I'm looking at the 85 f1.4 right now with the Brevis using my new CL3L. . . and, wow. . . I think it looks great!

I'm definitely going to sell my 50mm f1.2 and pick up either a 1.4 or a 1.8. I might go with the 1.4 just so that I'll have three lenses in a row at f1.4.

Are there any 24ish lenses that you folks like?

Thanks so much.

I'm putting that 1.2 up on Ebay tomorrow.

And, yes, I bought the fastest, cleanest lenses I could find. Silly me. I don't what I paid for them all, but it's got to be close to $3000. My thinking was that since I've ordered the RED to shoot a film (I'm the co-writer/director. . . not the DP, thank God!), and since I plan to use the Nikon mount on the RED, I might as well get the best ones I could find.

But that f1.2 has got to go!

Stephen

[TimurCivan]

sounds like you have a dream set. :) enjoy.

[Leo Versola]

Yes, I was focused (no pun intended) on your 50mm lens in particular but really, you've got quite a nice palette of primes... Now let's stop spending time splitting hairs and get to looking at some of your RED footage :-)

Leo

[Lenilenapi]

My 50mm 1.4 is quite good as is a 50mm 1.8 I have used. Someone on these boards has complained about his Nikkor 50mm1.8 but theya re al supposed to be good lenses.

The 35mm 1.4 is not large at all - very nice lens. I have a 24mm f2 and thinks its very nice.

If you do a lot of searvhing on the web you will find the general consensus for all these lenses. Therre are a couple of sites with very good reviews.

[Dennis Wood]

Jeeps, and I was pretty happy with this 35mm f2.0 Canon FD lens I just picked up :-) A 35mm f1.4 sounds very nice. We have quite a few lenses here for testing and I believe it's safe to say that as the focal length increases, edge sharpness does too. It's very obvious on the Canon FD 85mm f1.8 and 135mm f2.8 lenses, and makes sense if you consider a few ray diagrams. Finding a lens that is relatively CA free, and sharp wide open is a rare thing indeed.

[TimurCivan]

i have that F2.0 35mm S.S.C. FD... its AMAZING. by far my favorite lens. its bokeh is so beautiful.

[Tim Naylor]

That's a great set you have there. I own the 85 1.4 and it's all that. The 35mm 1.4 also gets raves. Just keep in mind most of these lenses don't perform really well until you're a stop or more above it's minimum.

Tim Naylor DP
www.timnaylor.com

[taormina]

I have the Nikon 50mm F 1.2 and it seems sharp to me...

A quote from a review:


http://www.kenrockwell.com/Images/gif/ritz.gif (http://www.ritzcamera.com/p/?location=KRRC01&tmreturn=true)
http://www.kenrockwell.com/Images/gif/adorama_120x130.gif (http://www.adorama.com/Refby.tpl?refby=rflAID021866)
I personally buy from Ritz (http://www.ritzcamera.com/p/?location=KRRC01&tmreturn=true), Adorama (http://www.adorama.com/Refby.tpl?refby=rflAID021866) and Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect-home/kenrockwellcom). I can't vouch for any other ads (http://kenrockwell.com/about.htm#ads).



Nikon 50mm f/1.2 © 2007 KenRockwell.com
http://www.kenrockwell.com/Images/gif/donate.gif (http://www.kenrockwell.com/donate.htm)
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/images1/50mm-f12/50mm-f12-KEN_5109.jpg (http://www.adorama.com/Refby.tpl?refby=rflAID021866&sku=NK5012)
Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-s. enlarge (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/images1/50mm-f12/50mm-f12-KEN_5109-950.jpg)
I bought mine brand-spanking-new at Adorama (http://www.adorama.com/Refby.tpl?refby=rflAID021866&sku=NK5012). You also can try Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00009R95Y/?tag=kenrockwellcom). It helps me keep adding to this site when you get yours from these links, too.
October 2007
More Nikon Reviews (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/index.htm)

Introduction
Top (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50mm-f12.htm#top) Specs (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50mm-f12.htm#spex) Performance (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50mm-f12.htm#perf) Recommendations (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50mm-f12.htm#rex)
Nikon still does make them like they used to! Not that many Americans buy them, but Nikon still makes manual focus lenses, including this 50mm f/1.2.
This is Nikon's fastest lens currently in production. As a manual focus AI-s lens it works perfectly with every manual focus SLR made since 1959, and also works, with varying degrees of convenience, on all Nikon digital and AF SLRs.
For most people, including myself, I suggest the latest 50mm f/1.4 AF (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/5014af.htm) instead for use with modern cameras. The optics are indistinguishable from each other for normal photography, the AF lens is plasticy and made in China, but the ability to autofocus and use all the exposure modes on digital cameras without hassle, as well as a much lower price, make it the obvious choice.
The photographic reason to get a Nikon 50mm f/1.2 is because it's the sharpest Nikon 50mm lens in production when used at f/2. It's only a half-stop faster than f/1.4, so I wouldn't worry about wide-open speed. The f/1.2 performs about the same as the f/1.4 lenses when used at f/1.4, also no big deal.
At f/2, this f/1.2 lens is operating at almost peak sharpness and has no focus shift. The f/1.4 lenses (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-comparison/index.htm) used at f/2 haven't yet reached their peak sharpness, and they oddly also have a slight focus shift which makes them just a little less sharp than this f/1.2 lens when both are used at f/2.

[ifownlee41nite@mac.com]

Personally, I'd love to try out some of the Zeiss Planar lenses....

I just got my hands on a Zeiss 85mm 1.4. The glass is so clean. I was looking for a nikon 85mm when I stumbled upon it.

Anyone have any feed back on this lens.

[Stephen Pruitt]

Well, I just sold my Nikon 50mm f1.2 and bought a Nikon 50mm f1.4 on ebay on the same day. That was quick work! I'm now thinking about a 105mm f1.8. I've seen a GREAT and very technical review on that lens.

BTW, I'm sure everyone has already seen this site, but this guy seems to me to have the most authoritative lens review site on the web:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html#rating

He loves that Nikon 50mm f1.8. . . I'll probably buy one of those, too, as it is quite an inexpensive lens.

Thanks very much, guys.

Oh, and, by the way, my RED won't be here for several more months. Alas. . .

Stephen

[puredrifting]

Hi Adam:

As you can see. even Ken Rockwell says that the 1.2 is at its sharpest at f2.0. So what is the point of buying a 1.2 when you can get a 1.4 or 1.8 so much cheaper?

The 1.2 seems like a waste unless you like to shoot wide open regardless of sharpness. Also the 1.2 wide open has about .5" of depth pf field at 5' so it's kind of tough to use on moving subjects.

Dan

[yia]

So....Stephan how is the brevis compare to the M2............ as far as picture sharpness and easy to use........

[taormina]

Because it's the SHARPEST NIKON LENS IN PRODUCTION at f2. That's why. And Stephen just sold it 'cause it wasn't sharp enough. It was a bonehead move on his part - no offense. He had THE BEST LENS and dumped it.

And when you light on all your films anyways, Like I do - F2 is nothing at all.

What do you guys think we're shooting here, Zeiss Digiprimes? Those lenses are designed to get max sharpness wide open. Ours aren't.

[Stephen Pruitt]

Actually, Taomira, it was not sufficiently sharp at f2.0 I could not get an acceptably sharp picture out of it at all. Once I ran into this website, I knew why:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html#rating

That lens is NOT sharp. And I'm glad it's now gone. And you wanna see sharp at f2? That would be my Nikon 85mm at f1.4. Wide open that thing is just amazing. MUCH, MUCH sharper than the 50mm f1.2 at ANY aperture.

As for the M2 versus the Brevis, I'm by no means an expert, but I sold the M2 and just bought a few new accessories for the Brevis. That sort of says it all.

Stephen

[puredrifting]

There is a lot of copy to copy variance in consumer lenses as compared to cinema lenses. It's totally possible that Adam's copy looks really good and that Stephen's was crap. That's why lens reviews from anyone should always be taken with a grain of salt ;-)

Dan

[taormina]

Just to settle this I tested my 50mm f1.2 Nikon and it was sharp as could be. Manufacturing differences is all I can chalk this up to.

[Stephen Pruitt]

Hi Tao. . .

I refuse to accept that you are able to get true edge-to-edge sharpness with that lens. Have you tacked up a piece of newspaper on the way and tried to read the text all of the way across? I could read the text at the edges, but it was nowhere near as sharp as in the center.

Now, with my 85mm f1.4, the sharpness was virtually edge-to-edge. I mean, amazingly sharp.

Anyway, I'm glad you were happy with the 1.2. I wasn't. And several other folks have noted the same phenomenon I did.

Stephen

[taormina]

What can I say - it's sharp. Did you even read the review at the top of this page? How many ways can it be said that it's sharp? Whatever, man - not trying to bust your balls on this issue. Maybe you had a bad lens.

[arno]

Someone tested the Contax Zeis Planars (50mm 1/1.4 or 1.7 - the 28mm 2.8) + c/y > eos ring?

Arno