Its Official! New Nikkor AF-S 24 mm f/1.4 and Nikkor AF-S 16-35 mm f/4.0G ED VR Re
- Thread starter Shutterlance
- Start date
If only the extreme corners are soft at f4, the lens should perform very well stopped down. Most don't shoot landscapes wide open.
The fool proof way of judging a lens is by using it the way you intended, not looking at some chart.....
read http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/eyes-vs-numbers.shtml
quite enlightening to all pixel peepers, even if the article deals mainly with medium format gears.
Here is an article on how to interprete MTF.
http://diglloyd.com/articles/UnderstandingOptics/understanding-MTF.html
MTF charts are used by manufacturers probably because it is somewhat standardised and it's fairly easy to provide some numbers and graphs to show to the public the "performance" of a lens.
They provide some information, but if you understand the limitations of MTF charts, you'll know why you shouldn't rely solely on them to determine the performance of a lens.
For example, the problem with MTF chart testing of a wide-angle lens such as this - MTF testing just tests close focus ability - you'd need a bloody huge test chart to be able to test mid to far focus ability especially for a wide-angle (probably impossible to do). Also, MTF tests for flat field which the lens might not be.
Cheesecake
Senior Member
to be exact it's US$1,259.95 @ Amazon which not much different from those already been reported earlier
interesteing Amazon had it as listed as $1,510.00 but cancelled it... was it really at 1,510? since other website, if i remember correctly listed it as US$1,259.95
pricing ploy? hmm...
it's hard decicion isn't it... such a big ticket item...
but lens - good ones are worth investing...
maybe just wait a little longer to see real world review before buying...
meantime... save, save, save if $$$ not available yet...
maybe after CNY u get enough $$$ from APs or playing some game of chance? haha
someone on Dpreview forum said:
"Just buy the Nikon 24-70 and get it over with. 16-35 is not as useful if you're going to be doing a lot of people pics with a FF camera. If you were using two cameras then maybe you could buy both."
what do you guys think? agree? disagree?
"Just buy the Nikon 24-70 and get it over with. 16-35 is not as useful if you're going to be doing a lot of people pics with a FF camera. If you were using two cameras then maybe you could buy both."
what do you guys think? agree? disagree?
I agree with the 2 camera setup. The perspective of a wide angle is too good to miss. While the 24-70 is nice n wide at 24, the 17/16 can do a tad more that gives it a special edge.
it depends what post is the guy replying to.
if just by this reply alone.
no one would agree, they are totally different focal lengths
Guys....Gentlemen.... there would always be New gears and Newer Gears..and there would always be that never ending debates on which is the best, its flaws etc. but at the end of the day..many would still use the gear...regardless of its flaw or price..Nikon website is usually on the high side..when it hits the shops.price would be speculatively lower than as stated in the sites.. we often compare what lens we use..but we have to take 5 steps back and ask ourself..izzit the gear what camera....what lens we use..that makes a photographer..or izzit our art and how distinct is our art that makes us stand out...
Cheers...happy lunar new years
Cheers...happy lunar new years
Similar threads
