[frank]

http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=ob...est_ob=416


I wonder, given the non-impressive resolution at the edge of a FF sensor, if this lens is good for lanscape photography.

[felix]

Well it's decent at f/8, but not great. I guess the new 18-35 is actually a better deal for landscape photography (or even the Voigtländer 20mm -> 52mm filters!).

[borisbg]

I think they should've gone with F4 and create a better performance lens at similar or lower price. I don't get the F1.8 for this lens.

[JJ_SO]

Fast lenses are not designed ed as landscape lenses in first place, I think. Their purpose is indoor, event, street photography and the like - and for that f/4 is just too slow.

 

If you ever try a fast wide angle, borisbg, you might get the point, especially if the shortest distance are 20 cm. And compared to the 24/1.4 it's really a bargain.

[Brightcolours]

The image samples show a softness at the borders, only partly due to CA. With the CA corrected, the images should respond well to a good sharpening technique in post processing, so it should do reasonably well for wide angle "landscape" shots.

See this photo at f5.6, it is not the greatest but it will sharpen up well:
http://pliki.optyczne.pl/nik20/nik20_fot06.JPG
Here at f8:
http://pliki.optyczne.pl/nik20/nik20_fot09.JPG

As stated above, the Voigtlander 20mm f3.5 SL II N wil do well too, it is pretty sharp stopped down and at landscape distances. The Voigtlander performs better than tests have you believe, due to its astigmatism at close (MTF testing) distances.

[Rover]

There's no point in creating a slow prime (unless it's designed specially for compactness like the Voigtlanders). And this new Nikkor looks like it's a good deal better than either the Sigma 20/1.8 or the Voigtlander that is 2 stops slower and not a great performer away from center until stopped well down. Oh, and it's MF. If I had been shooting Nikon I would've considered this 20/1.8 unit. Stop down to f/5.6 and you're golden (and the Voigtlander never reaches that level, even at f/11).

[Brightcolours]

There's no point in creating a slow prime (unless it's designed specially for compactness like the Voigtlanders). And this new Nikkor looks like it's a good deal better than either the Sigma 20/1.8 or the Voigtlander that is 2 stops slower and not a great performer away from center until stopped well down. Oh, and it's MF. If I had been shooting Nikon I would've considered this 20/1.8 unit.

Read what I wrote about the Voigtlander concerning MTF test distance....

[dave9t5]

As stated above, the Voigtlander 20mm f3.5 SL II N wil do well too, it is pretty sharp stopped down and at landscape distances. The Voigtlander performs better than tests have you believe, due to its astigmatism at close (MTF testing) distances.

What's the source for this? 

 

I've had Voigtländer SLII 40, 58 and SL90, all outstanding color, contrast and sharpness (very low CA).  The 20 was not an interesting FL for me on Pentax APSc, and the more interesting SLII 28 was never offered in PK mount, alas so never tried the wider lenses.  I also have the Cosina-made Zeiss 25/2.8 which is also outstanding...another lens that does not test well but produces great results.

[Brightcolours]

I am the source. Testing distance of the 20mm lens will be 20mm x 51 = 1020mm, and at close focus distance astigmatism is very visible. At landscape distances the lens performs pretty good sharpness wise.

[dave9t5]

I am the source. Testing distance of the 20mm lens will be 20mm x 51 = 1020mm, and at close focus distance astigmatism is very visible. At landscape distances the lens performs pretty good sharpness wise.

Ah, thanks for the information.