Product Review: Nikkor 50mm 1.2 AIS

Let's start this one with a fact: image quality comes from:

1. The photographer / Scene / Light
2. The lens
3. ... (other stuff)...
4. The camera body (the sensor mostly for digital)

With this absolute truth in mind, and knowing that you can't buy point 1, the first thing you should spend your money on is a great classic lens. The Nikon 50mm f/1.2 AIS is one of them.

It wil allow you that kind of result...

The Nikon 50mm f/1.2 is a manual focus only tank-like built premium prime lens (it costs 650$ in the States, up to 800€ on the old continent). It is know online as the "king of bokeh", which is to be honest a very well deserved title. 

I works with a D7000 or anything above for digital, and anything from and after the 70ies for film. I use it with a Nikon FE, F5 and D80. 

Keep in mind that with a D80, you get no metering, so you have to guesstimate light. I personally use it on the FE mostly so I don't really care.

Specifications

• 9 blades diagram
• 52mm diameter glass
• Minimum focus distance 50cm
• 350 grams
• 50mm or 76 on a DX.

Results

Sweeet. If you shoot non moving subjects in 35mm and own a Nikon, that is the one lens you should own.

Sharpness: I can use it with a D80 at F1.2 & iso 400 and get a result that I would exhibit. From F2.0,  and up, it keeps getting better and better. It outperforms my 85mm 1.8 and 35 F2 FX lenses

Blur / Bokeh: see for yourselves, terrific.

Built quality: Nikon from the past, as good as it gets, full metal.

Pros 

• As mentioned before, performance according to standard measurement is just rock solid. It just doesn't get better with 35mm. Only Zeiss and Leica are a match, for a lot more money when it comes to the later.
• This plus a 100$ Nikon FE2 and you have a nice machine, simple to operate for a true photographer. With a D700 you have a winning cocktail for 35mm digital when it comes to shooting steady subjects.
• The bokeh can get close to what you'll obtain with a medium format 6x7 camera at 2.8. Not the same, but close enough to tempt you to shoot 35mm.
• IF YOU LIKE IT: wide open it adds a bit of vignetting (see examples below)

Cons

• No autofocus, and you'll need to change the screen on your D7000 or D700 to focus manually. On an older FE, such screens are built in, on more recent camera it'll cake you a bit of screw driving. 
• At 1.2, it can be tricky to manually focus, especially on DX.
• Sort of expensive for 35mm gear (yet cheap against bad quality zooms)
• IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT: wide open it adds a bit of vignetting

And because samples are worth a thousand words, see for yourselves. No need to take pictures of newspapers, that's retarded, every lens is sharp in the right conditions. Let's start with a bit of corner sharpness.

Nikon D80 ISO 200, 1/160s, f5.6, consider the crop factor

And now what this lens is famous for, it's superb bokeh:

With an old D80, 1/50s, ISO 400 (on a D80 it's like ISO1600 on a D7000), bad office light at 6pm, wide open @ F1.2.

Courtesy of that guy on Flickr, D700 1/5000s, ISO 200, F1.2

With a D7000, courtesy of that guy.

With a D700, courtesy of LEFTY

Nikon FE, Superia 200 (shit film, grain at 200 ???WTF) here at f2.8. Don't they look like a Law and Order commercial?

Nikon FE, Superia 200, f2.0

I kept this shot to show there is a tiny bit of distortion (I was 2 feet away from the door). This is full frame. 

 My friend Yann (and a bit of Sofia's finger)

1/10s very low light, ISO 200, F1.2. On Superia cheap film: still sharp, beautiful blur. 

Lens review: Nikon 85mm f1.8D

Booya !

Christmas is getting closer! And since you received your Nikon first DSLR last year, you've been using that kit zoom lens a lot and came to the financially painful conclusion that yes, you do need an other lens.

So you do a quick check on Amazon or else, to realize that stepping up means two possible options:

1. Spending $1200 in a premium zoom lens. Ouch. 
2. Spending $300 to $ 600 in a prime lens, but you loose of course, the zoom range. 

Well you already have a zoom lens (do I assume right?) for versatility so here is why you should consider a prime:

• It excels and outperform zoom lenses at the given focal length because quite logically, it is optimized for it. 
• By outperform I mean that they are sharper and significantly faster (sample shots following to illustrate. A prime lens should be by default a f1.8, and more expensive version should be f1.4 or f1.2. An expensive zoom lens will be at best f2.8.

It leaves us with one question: since you can only have one fix focal length, which one to pick?

Well I've reviewed the multi purpose one already (35mm), so today we'll see one of the 2 best choices in the Nikon lineup for portrait: the 85mm f1.8.

The second one would be the nikon 105mm f2 but I won't review that since the all point is to get you a cheaper lens than a premium zoom, and this one's not exactly cheap.

Once again, I don't do laboratory like reviews, since picture are to be seen with human eyes, not spectrometers, but I'll still give some insights regarding the technical abilities of the lens.

- Resolution:

It is rock solid as you'd expect from a Nikon prime of this price range. The purpose of such a lens is to get very narrow depth of field and isolate you subject, and it does is fantastically well. It's main strength in this domain is the ability to remain a top performer at or close to f1.8. Unlike the 50mmf1.8 (a cheaper yet good product, to be reviewed soon) that start dropping in performance under f2.8, this baby will give you a premium results wide open. 

- Bokeh:

This is highly subjective, people like there bokeh in different ways. I personaly like a "painters" bokeh, as far as possible from a mechanical feel. I will compare it to the Mamiya Sekor 110mm f2.8, my personal portrait lens reference. It is of course not as soft as the MF format Mamiya (let's not compare apples and oranges) but it clearly is among the top lenses you can find for a DSLR. It doesn't have to be ashamed compared to the medium format lens, which is a true compliment to the Nikon lens. It is a great bokeh, when shooting a feminin portrait where I want softness, it works great (see examples below).

- Built quality:
It corresponds to its price range and to Nikon standards, i.e. it's very good. It's a plastic / metal lens, I've used mine quite extensively, took a sand storm once, and it still works just fine even after taking the extremely brutal motor of the F5 autofocus.

- Other:
Nearly no chromatic aberrations, vignetting is well controlled, no weakness whatsoever, distortion is not noticeable.

Recommendations:
If you have Nikon and shoot portraits, and are under a budget constraint, this is the one lens you must have. You'll never need to replace it and it'll probably do the next 15 years easily if you take good care of it.

Sample shots :

Courtesy of photozone.de

 Nikon F5, bright daylight, f5.6

Nikon F5, bright daylight, f5.6

I needed one taken with a digital camera too, courtesy of http://www.pbase.com/chinwai/student

Lens review : Mamiya Sekor 110mm F2.8

This is quite a niche product I'll review today : a Mamiya RZ medium format film body. Normally at that stage I lost 95% of you. However this is why you should keep reading a little farther:

• It is the best you can get for portrait and studio.
• It is the cheapest used >$1500 new, but a mint one can be found for $300 online without risk.
• If you're a growing amateur looking for the next level in photography (which should be medium format film, I'll explain why in an other post), this should be in your top 5 potential target product.
• You won't find reviews of MF lenses on most of the classic photography sites because well, digital sells so no one gives a damn.

Ok back to the lens. This is the standard lens sold with the Mamiya RZ, a studio photography reference. It's a bulky tank-like camera, but a wonderful machine for artists and portrait lovers. 

It is equivalent to a 55mm lens on a 35mm camera. 

I'll be very straight forward : this is the most exceptional portrait lens I have ever used so far. I could talk about sharpness (unreal), I could talk about the bokeh (sublime), and I will, but there is a subjective dimension to all appreciation, the image feel you get, and this lens perform terrific when it comes to that. See for yourselves (scanned at 2400 DPI with an Epson V700, I had to reduce the files since they are >20MO, 48MP equivalent !):

6pm window light at F2.8 1/60S

Let's be a little more analytical now. The most impressive part is the ability to perform the best at F2.8. It doesn't get soft at all, it remains as sharp as the sharpest thing you've seen, but the out of focus areas are smooth, soft, beautiful. For intimate images with that reserved feel, this is the one lens you need.

This is solid built, full metal, mine's quite old and nothing's shaky.

Some people mention a dust infiltration problem with that lens. I don't doubt it can happen, but I don't suffer from it, even though I took a sand storm with it. Be aware just in case you buy it used, servicing costs around $150.

I never review with charts, graphs etc. I trust my eyes and compare images. I don't give a damn if the whatever distortion is 3.4% or 3.5%. Anyway if you're a pixel junky you wouldn't be looking at film products :) The images should speak for themselves.

Pros : astonishing in low light at F2.8, crazy sharp, outperforming Leica 35mm lenses, cost the same price new but so easy to find for $300 used. Goes a classic MF body that cost $4000 new, but can be find used, in mint condition, for $600.

Cons: I believe it can suffer from dust infiltration in some cases (haven't had the problem myself). Hard to get serviced. 

Recommendation:

If you have a Mamiya RZ, I bet you already have it. So if you're looking for your first MF gear, this gets interesting. Legendary Mamiyas like the 6 or 7II are aiming at landscape. They just don't have such a lens. The RZ is a studio classic, fantastic camera. If you like shooting studio portrait, or portraits in a set up stage (tripod, make up artist, and tons of stuff along with any photoshoot), this lens justifies buying the Mamiya RZ67. However you might want to consider these alternatives:

- Pentax 67II body has built him metering and large aperture great portrait lenses too. It's more pricey and not better, just a little (really a little) more versatile.

- Rolleiflex TLR: Great lenses, but this is in a totally different price range, but a results that is no better, if not, in my opinion, inferior. 

If you get a Mamiya RZ system with that, for proper portrait photoshoot, you will never be disappointed, and often be wooowed by your own shots :)

Lens review: Nikon 35mm F2 FX

Good (afternoon / morning / evening) dear reader !


Today a review of the nikon 35mm F2 FX, and my reasons why to choose this one over the Nikon 35mm F1.8 DX.

This is a $350 prime lens aiming at users who want a very versatile lens, for landscape, life /street scenes and portrait. This is the typical focal length for photojournalism with a prime, along with 50mm.

This is an FX lens, ideal for your D700 or D3 Nikon bodies.

1/ Why not 50mm instead?

50mm is a little less versatile : for streets and landscapes, it is a tad too long. If you are looking at portraits in low light with still some flexibility, the 50mm F1.4 will be a better match. For travel, this 35mm is better, especially on an FX body.

Also remember that on a DX camera (explanations here for DX/ FX formats) a 50mm is actually a 75mm. So not good a general purpose lens at all. Most DSLRs are DX, so once again the 35mm is a better call (it would be a 53mm on a DX).

2/ The lens itself

Long story short, this lens is great value for the money. Built quality is what you'd expect from Nikon. Plastic and metal, smooth focus ring, a tier 1 built quality regarding this reasonable price tag.

Unlike the F1.8 DX version, this one has no built in AF motor : so entry level DSLRs won't have AF with that lens (A D40 for example, or D60). However I would not recommend an entry level DSLR anyway: you're better off buying a used one, mid range. Therefore it should not be a problem.

It takes 52mm filters. It's a rather light and small lens for those willing to travel light.

3/ Performance

Resolution is excellent even wide open (with softer corners at F2 but that's pretty normal). Chromatic aberrations are very moderate. This is one of the only 2 lenses I use with my nikon gear: the second on is the 85mm F1.8, fantastic for portraits. 

It will outperform any zoom lens when it comes to resolution and sharpness (prime lenses are optimized for one focal length). It is perfectly usable at F2 when the cheaper 50mmF1.8 needs to be stopped at 2.8, under which it gets fairly soft. 

Photography is a hobby that costs a lot, but in the middle, you got some products that have an amazing value for the money : multi purpose, small & light, affordable and great image quality. This 35mm is a "can't go wrong" lens, and I'm about to say a must have since nothing else, for that type of photography, will get you any better results on a Nikon, and the few that are close to it cost $1200 and above.

4/ Why not the Nikon 35mm F1.8 DX ???

This is also a good lens, but only made to work on entry level DSLR (i.e it has an AF motor). The F1.8 instead of F2 is a trick, it is just not has good and needs to be stopped at 2.2 at least to stay in the high performance area. 

It is expectable if you consider the price difference : nearly 2 times cheaper with built in motor...optics good be as good but it's unlikely.

Finally, it would not work on an FX. Ok, I know, most of us can't afford an FX camera body, but keep this in mind : buy a good lens and you'll keep it forever. Camera bodies...you will change them, upgrade. The day you can afford an FX (or all cameras become FX), it would be too bad having to also change that 35mm lens.

However, if you're on a budget constraint, the F1.8 DX version it a great choice, and will beat any kit lens (that usually are crap anyway).

5/ Picture samples:

Click on it for full size version, most of them are scanned negatives !!! So you'd have much better resolution on a DSLR.

On a Nikon D80, cropped. Iso 100, F8, 1/160s. 

On a nikon F5 (film), neopan acros, F3.5.

On a nikon F5 (film), Portra VC400, F2.8

On a nikon F5 (film), Tri-X 400, F...damnit can't remember, F2 or F2.8.

On a nikon F5 (film), neopan acros. 

On a nikon F5.