|
|
08-13-2011, 10:15 AM
You have a point, Rainer, but the AF-D 18-35 is not exactly a "cheapo" lens. It's still available and currently retails for around 550 EUR/600 USD.
-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com
08-13-2011, 11:14 AM
I think that it would be interesting to take a number of shots of various subjects using this lens as well as another much higher rated lens all on the same body, same focal length, camera settings etc and see if people can pick associate the correct lens with the image. I have a feeling that most people would not be able to tell the difference with a high rate of accuracy.
08-13-2011, 11:15 AM
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1313230545' post='10726']
You have a point, Rainer, but the AF-D 18-35 is not exactly a "cheapo" lens. It's still available and currently retails for around 550 EUR/600 USD. -- Markus [/quote] To put that price into perspective: The Canon EF 17-40mm f4 L USM costs €709 in a shop where the Nikon 18-35mm costs €549.
08-13-2011, 11:24 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2011, 11:24 AM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='Bryan Conner' timestamp='1313234066' post='10727']
I think that it would be interesting to take a number of shots of various subjects using this lens as well as another much higher rated lens all on the same body, same focal length, camera settings etc and see if people can pick associate the correct lens with the image. I have a feeling that most people would not be able to tell the difference with a high rate of accuracy. [/quote] That is always the case, with no matter what lens. Unless you take care to make photos that highlight shortcomings of a certain lens. So, if you make photos that show detail in the corners and lines that show the pronounced mustache distortion, and also show the CA characteristic, you will pick a lens like this out easily. If you on the other hand make photos that focus on a central subject where the corners, edges and distortion fade into the background, you will have more difficulty telling which is which lens. It is always that way, anyway. If you stop down enough (f8-f16) all lenses are capable of making ok-good images. And most people will not be able to tell when a photo is made with a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 or with a Nikon 24-70mm f2.8. Let alone with a Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR II or a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 HSM OS.
08-13-2011, 11:56 AM
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1313177724' post='10710']
So there you have it, a 1 star lens: http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/670-nikkorafd18353545ff -- Markus [/quote] Unless you have a rating below 1 star, I think this one deserves a bit better because it's sharp in the center. The lowest rating should go to a lens that is not sharp at all.
http://flickr.com/ephankim
08-13-2011, 12:02 PM
[quote name='youpii' timestamp='1313236609' post='10732']
Unless you have a rating below 1 star, I think this one deserves a bit better because it's sharp in the center. The lowest rating should go to a lens that is not sharp at all. [/quote] Well, for even worse lenses we still have some buffer, I guess. We could use a half star or none at all. Anyway, unless we decide to review Lensbabies or Toy lenses we hopefully won't have to go that low ever. -- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com
08-13-2011, 12:16 PM
Hmmm... can we say that 1* optical score is deserved by this lens because it's sharp at the center of the frame?
I want to clarify the 1* optical score criteria, because I have the feeling that this one will be a case study and will not be forgotten easily <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />...Serkan
08-13-2011, 12:25 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2011, 12:26 PM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1313237796' post='10734']
Hmmm... can we say that 1* optical score is deserved by this lens because it's sharp at the center of the frame? I want to clarify the 1* optical score criteria, because I have the feeling that this one will be a case study and will not be forgotten easily <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />...Serkan [/quote] Come on, just look at the corner measurements, which are without precedent in the photozone test regime. That is what photozone tests, vignetting with JPEG, distortion uncorrected by software, CA as seen by the measurement software and MTF scores in center, edge, and when warranted extreme edge. And if a lens underwhelms in an area where it does not matter much, they add a score for how it performs in the field. Case in point: the very wide aperture Canon EF 50mm f1.2 L USM. Underwhelms in the measurements, but is quite a special performer. I don't think one can really argue in all fairness that with an ultra wide zoom, the corners do not really matter? Sure, one can argue that one wants to test for other criteria. And one is welcome to do so. But it is known what criteria photozone tests for.
08-13-2011, 12:35 PM
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1313238324' post='10735']
Come on, just look at the corner measurements, which are without precedent in the photozone test regime. That is what photozone tests, vignetting with JPEG, distortion uncorrected by software, CA as seen by the measurement software and MTF scores in center, edge, and when warranted extreme edge. And if a lens underwhelms in an area where it does not matter much, they add a score for how it performs in the field. Case in point: the very wide aperture Canon EF 50mm f1.2 L USM. Underwhelms in the measurements, but is quite a special performer. I don't think one can really argue in all fairness that with an ultra wide zoom, the corners do not really matter? Sure, one can argue that one wants to test for other criteria. And one is welcome to do so. But it is known what criteria photozone tests for. [/quote] I'm not judging the score and I know what edge performance or complex distortion characteristics mean for a wide angle. But you seem to be so much interested with this low performance lens, that your sense of humour is almost wiped out... Serkan
08-14-2011, 08:21 PM
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1313177724' post='10710']
So there you have it, a 1 star lens: http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/670-nikkorafd18353545ff -- Markus [/quote] Hmmmmmmmm Even if you called it DX it's too expensive Perhaps it's a clever marketing move by Nikon by keeping it in the catalogue to highlight some of the bargains like 18-55mm VR DX ? ! Probably not. Needs a good replacement - and at reasonable cost |
