[genotypewriter]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1298443463' post='6286']

If I had to come up with a ranking (best to worst):

1. Olympus FT

2. Nikon

3. Canon

4. Olympus MFT

5. Sony

6. Panasonic

7. Tamron

8. Pentax

9. Sigma

10. Samsung

11. Tokina

[/quote]

Thanks for the list... wonder how they rank when zooms and primes quantities are separated. But then again, FT and MFT are mostly zooms so they must do a good QC job.





[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1298443463' post='6286']

Prime lenses are, of course, better centered than zooms. We've rarely seen issues with primes actually.

The biggest problem makers are ultra-wide zoom lenses (usually issues at the image sides) and high ratio zoom lenses (center centering -> contrast).

[/quote]

Yes, I agree about the complexity. Also the UWA lenses need only a little error for more things to go wrong when compared to tele lenses.



GTW

[youpii]

Is the Sigma 85/1.4 in the pipeline?

[Klaus]

[quote name='youpii' timestamp='1298510049' post='6306']

Is the Sigma 85/1.4 in the pipeline?

[/quote]



yeah

[Guest]

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1298492025' post='6303']

The gambling is the pattern <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



-- Markus

[/quote]

Do you suggest to stop gambling and start buying genuine nikon lenses only? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='Lomskij' timestamp='1298551995' post='6318']

Do you suggest to stop gambling and start buying genuine nikon lenses only? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />

[/quote]

Nikon lenses CAN be decentered too, with your luck you might just hit a very decentered one <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.



I would just get the lens that gives you what you want, and let any decentering defects be "repaired" or replaced.



The Sigma 85mm f1.4 for instance is such a lot cheaper, it is worth the try. And a 150mm f2.8 macro from Sigma is a great lens without any Nikon equivalent...



There are many SIgma lenses that behave ok too. My old 18-50mm f2.8 does not have any noticable decentering problems for instance.

[Klaus]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1298555674' post='6320']

Nikon lenses CAN be decentered too, with your luck you might just hit a very decentered one <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.



I would just get the lens that gives you what you want, and let any decentering defects be "repaired" or replaced.



The Sigma 85mm f1.4 for instance is such a lot cheaper, it is worth the try. And a 150mm f2.8 macro from Sigma is a great lens without any Nikon equivalent...



There are many SIgma lenses that behave ok too. My old 18-50mm f2.8 does not have any noticable decentering problems for instance.

[/quote]



The S85 seems to have other .... advantages ... too.

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1298556674' post='6321']

The S85 seems to have other .... advantages ... too.

[/quote]

Like... smooth bokeh? Low CA? Or?



Lenstip liked it better than the Nikon.

[mst]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1298568993' post='6325']

Like... smooth bokeh? Low CA? Or?

[/quote]



Heavy Coma. Maybe. At least that is what we currently suspect it is.



Nothing unusual with fast lenses, but the degree here is quite a bit disturbing. And completely ruins the MTF results at the border and corner spots until around f/5.6



I contacted Sigma Germany about this issue yesterday, but haven't heard back, yet.



Apart from this issue, the 85/1.4 seems to be one heck of a lens.



-- Markus

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1298572933' post='6328']

Heavy Coma. Maybe. At least that is what we currently suspect it is.



Nothing unusual with fast lenses, but the degree here is quite a bit disturbing. And completely ruins the MTF results at the border and corner spots until around f/5.6



I contacted Sigma Germany about this issue yesterday, but haven't heard back, yet.



Apart from this issue, the 85/1.4 seems to be one heck of a lens.



-- Markus

[/quote]

Well, that lenstip review did mention quite heavy coma (worse than the Zeiss and Nikon wide open). So maybe what you see is normal <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />

[mst]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1298580652' post='6334']

Well, that lenstip review did mention quite heavy coma (worse than the Zeiss and Nikon wide open). So maybe what you see is normal <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />

[/quote]



It might be normal, yes. However, I'd like to be sure. That's why I contacted Sigma.

What's puzzling is that the MTF values actually drop (!) from f/1.4 to f/2.8 and then recover again. They chart looks really strange ...



-- Markus