[nandadevieast]

Hi,



Its only now that i have been able to look at the the complete scope of this website and i must say, its a great source of information.

I especially like the technology section.



I was reading the lens reviews and noticed that old pro lenses like Nikon 180 2.8 and 135 F2 had been tested on D200 and the resolution figures were nice, but some of the new consumer lenses are outperforming them or are equally good. The newer pro lenses are in a different league completely.



Though photozone has not tested many old lenses on D7000 or D3X, it will be safe to assume that the results will be much less spectacular compared to the results obtained on a D200?



In other words, are these old pro grade lenses from 1990 are not good enough from today's standpoint? Will a 135 F2 still be a 'highly recommended lens on FX or a D7k?



Do you plan to test at least some of these, especially, 135 F2, on a FF body or a higher resolution crop body?



(When i say resolution figures, i mean the height of bars on those bar charts...sorry if these tests are camera independent and i am reading them wrongly).



Thanks and regards,

nandadevieast

[Guest]

The lenses will produce better images on a newer body, I would not be worrying about that. The image will not degrade.



The mtf of a body-lens system is the mtf of the body X mtf of the lens. If either goes up, the end result will go up as well.

[edge]

I don't think you can cross sensor size platforms for PZ ratings.

For example, the Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 VR (1st gen) got 4.5 stars and a Highly Recommended status on the DX (D200) platform, but got 3.5 stars on FX without the HR status.

[Plochmann]

Good enough for what? Not as sharp and light rays are lined up parallel for digital sensors; but the look of them can be quit pleasant. I still haven't warmed up to some of my newer lenses, they just have a artificial look to me.

[PuxaVida]

[quote name='Plochmann' timestamp='1329982993' post='16081']

Good enough for what?

...

[/quote]



I agree... that's the issue you need to think of... In general, I would be very careful before buying an old UWA lens for the FF bodies... OTOH, 180mm or 135mm lenses you mentioned in your example should not have a problem with that regard. Surely the new tecnhologies regarding lens coatings or grinding are wellcome. But I don't think it justifies that we can leave the good oldies on dusty shelves... Examples: I use a 135mm CZJ on my D700. It does only MF and has no automatic aperture... But thanks to LV, the sharpness and bokeh is very satisfactory... Or the Nikon AiS 28mm... Yes it's a WA (but not a UWA), and it works quite good for close ups and landscapes...



The question is, good enough for what <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />....



Serkan

[nandadevieast]

Good enough for resolving D7K OR D3x sensors...

[Studor13]

I think you can be reassured that a lot of old Nikkors will be just fine.



Here's one with the 50-135mm f/3.5 on a D300.

[IanCD]

[quote name='nandadevieast' timestamp='1330012542' post='16096']

Good enough for resolving D7K OR D3x sensors...

[/quote]



A pattern seems to have emerged that the high res and, particularly, the high pixel density, on e.g. D7000 is more challenging and some lenses 'struggle' with this.



Noted for several lenses (e.g. [url="http://forum.photozone.de/index.php?/topic/1383-next-pz-lens-test-report-nikkor-af-18-35mm-f35-45d-ed/"]here[/url]) and there's been some discussion of this, eg. [url="http://forum.photozone.de/index.php?/topic/1038-next-pz-lens-test-report-nikkor-af-s-dx-18-55mm-f35-56g-vr-dx/"]this thread[/url]

[wim]

[quote name='IanCD' timestamp='1330038320' post='16106']

A bit of a pattern seems to have emerged that the high res and, particularly, the high pixel density, on e.g. D7000 is more challenging and some lenses 'struggle' with this...

[/quote]

That's actually internet myth. Any lenses which weren't the greatest in the film era, won't improve with digital, most of the time, even if we get more resolution from those on digital compared to colour negative film (basically because we get more resolution from digital in the first place).



The "problem" with digital really is that we can now pixelpeep to our hearts contents and see the faults we never complained too loudly about. B&W film in principle still has more resolution, if only just.



Kind regards, Wim

[IanCD]

[quote name='wim' timestamp='1330040454' post='16109']

That's actually internet myth. Any lenses which weren't the greatest in the film era, won't improve with digital, most of the time, even if we get more resolution from those on digital compared to colour negative film (basically because we get more resolution from digital in the first place).



The "problem" with digital really is that we can now pixelpeep to our hearts contents and see the faults we never complained too loudly about. B&W film in principle still has more resolution, if only just.



Kind regards, Wim

[/quote]



Hi Wim,

I didn't think I was indicating that any lenses do 'improve with digital'...? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



In the threads I linked to (there were others but it took me a while just to find those two..!) do you consider the talk of lenses 'struggling' with the higher-res / higher pixel density on D7000 is erroneous / misinterpretation of the results?