The Dream Machine

Glen78 · May 7, 2017

I have long had my eye on the 58 f/1.4G. I have owned the 50 f/1.8G for a while and though there is nothing specifically to complain about that lens, especially given the very low price, its rendering always seemed a bit sterile to me and I never used it very much except where I really needed a wide aperture. The other 50mm options did not really seem to do much better either, maybe improving on resolution or aperture but not substantially improving the quality of the images. On the surface the 58 f/1.4G seems to be the least recommendable lens in Nikon's lineup. Its price is quite ridiculous for a lens in this focal length and given there are at least 6 other Nikkor options in current production alone around this focal length, plus 3rd party options, it's hard to justify. For me though, the one thing that pushed me over the edge is of all the sample images on Nikon's website I like the 58 f/1.4G images the best. I am actually quite surprised at the mediocrity of many of the sample images Nikon provides but the 58 f/1.4G really had some great images (I am sure a lot of credit goes to the photographer too) and I felt this lens has a special character that I would appreciate.

Build Quality: 3 stars (design flaw causes cosmetic damage below the lens cap)

This lens overall has the same solid build as the rest of the f/1.4G lineup but with one critical design issue that I know others have experienced as well. The plastic ring just below the lens cap seems to be easily damaged and mine is already showing signs of wear. I have never experienced this with any other lens, some of which I have used over 5 years. I am quite positive this is issue is not specific to me and I know others have reported it is as well. The other issue common with all the f/1.4G is that the hood is quite unacceptable for a lens of this price. To be fair the 58 f/1.4G hood seems slightly better than the 24, 35, and 85 but for the cost of this lens we should be getting something like the high quality locking hoods that are supplied with the new f/2.8E zooms.

Features and AF: 4 stars

This lens has all the latest Nikon innovations with the exception of the Flourine coating which Nikon did not start using until after this lens was released. No VR of course but I frankly would not want VR in this kind of lens as it would add elements and compromise some of the rendering characteristics that give this lens distinction. The AF speed is acceptable but certainly slow if you are used to the AF in Nikon's higher end zoom lenses. On my copy the AF was pretty accurate with no AF fine tune although the resolution wide open is such that it is a bit hard to judge.

Image Quality: 4 stars (5 star rendering, 3 star resolution)

Let's start with the bad, the resolution of this lens wide open is quite poor. Unlike the 24, 35, and 85 f/1.4G that are quite acceptable for most any purpose wide open, at least in the center, I cannot say that about the 58 f/1.4G. With this lens you really need to take resolution into consideration and how it will impact your image at your final intended output size when shooting wide open. Even f/2 does not fully fix this and I would say this lens at f/2 is still slightly behind the other f/1.4G lenses at f/1.4. Luckily by f/2.8 the resolution of this lens improves to what I would consider excellent. So if you are buying this lens for resolution wide open I am afraid you will be disappointed. The reason to buy this lens is its rendering quality. I would say in the out of focus transition zones this lens renders as good as any lens I have ever used. The background and specular highlights are also quite excellent although the longer primes like the 85 f/1.4G are slightly better. The effect can be best described as "dreamy" and sometimes the lack of resolution wide open can actually reinforce this to give images a unique look. I personally love the rendering of this lens and bought it specifically because of this. I do think this lens pushes the resolution - rendering balance as far as I would ever want to go though and the 24, 35, and 85 f/1.4G make these compromises in a more balanced way having excellent rendering while still maintaining acceptable resolution wide open.

Value: 2 stars

I am not going to pull any punches here, this lens is a rip-off at $1600 new. And due to the build issue I described above used copies are likely to have significant cosmetic damage below the lens cap. I definitely do not recommend buying this lens unless all your other needs are met and you really want the type of rendering this lens delivers.

Overall: 4 stars

Following my ratings so far it is hard to imagine how I could give this lens a 4 star rating. The reason is quite simply this, if you told me that I needed to bring my camera for an undisclosed purpose and could only bring one prime lens this is the lens I would bring. I simply love shooting with this lens. I love this focal length on FX as it is very versatile and I love the rendering this lens provides. If I am worried about resolution I will simply shoot it at f/2.8 where this lens sings while still delivering beautiful OOF rendering. If I want a more dreamy look and don't mind the drop in resolution then I can shoot it wide open. Despite its clear lack of value if anything ever happened to this lens I would certainly buy another one.

Andre Yew · May 10, 2017

Marianne Oelund said:
No, it's fairly average for a decent 50-58mm lens. It's comparable to the Sigma 50/1.4 Art and much better than the Nikon AI 50/1.8, the AF-S 50/1.4G or the Voigtlander 58/1.4. Of the seven prime lenses I own in the 50-58mm range, the only one that's noticeably better than the 58G in this respect, is the new Milvus 50/1.4.

I think we have different standards and criteria for LoCA. The 58G is unusable for shooting backlit specular point sources like water droplets. Neither of the Milvus 1.4 lenses are great in this respect either. There may be other use cases where their LoCA is better disguised, but for what I do, it's terrible. The Tamron 85, Zeiss 2/135 APO, and 55 Otus are significantly better in LoCA performance for my photos. Even the old Contax/Yashica Zeiss 85/2.8 MMJ is better though not as good as those three lenses. The 58G's performance is in the same category as the old Nikon 85/1.8D.

Here's a full-size, max quality JPEG with default LR settings except for a Huelight color profile that shows the LoCA performance of the 58G. f/2.8, 1/4000, ISO 64:

Loading…

www.dropbox.com

Marianne Oelund said:
Marianne Oelund said:

The AF is slow and indecisive,

Click to expand...

If it's indecisive, blame the camera body. That has nothing to do with the lens.

I have plenty of lenses which are "indecisive" on the D800E, but they behave much better on the D5.

It's slower and more indecisive on both my D810 and D500 than other lenses I've used, including 3rd party lenses such as the Tamron 85 and the Sigma 50-100. I can also hold the AF-on button in single-point AF-C on a relatively high contrast target and hear the lens's motor chatter back and forth as it struggles to find focus.

Marianne Oelund said:
Which doesn't exist. Lenses cannot have non-linear tonal response.

What is actually happening, is SA veiling flare is blending the highlight details together and spreading out the finest ones, robbing them of their central-peak intensity. This gives the appearance of loss of highlight tonal range or contrast, but it's actually much the same process as defocusing the lens.

I would call flare a non-linear response, but the end result of whether it's SA veiling (even at f/11 which is where I observed it) or something else, the visual impression is one of highlight compression.

Dmderb · May 10, 2017

While the LoCA of this lens is not its strongest aspect, I have never had problems with its autofocus on my D750 compared to other fast primes.

I have never noticed any issues with highlight tonalities but I must confess that I have never paid much attention and neither do I have the Otus to compare.

Andre, I feel that your comments are sincere and perhaps to some extent correct but are they highly relevant for this specific lens which is primarily a people/bokeh oriented instrument?

Art Jacks · May 10, 2017

Firstly I am pleased to read some positive comments regarding the 58, I bought mine in early 2014 and endured some ridicule when contributing to threads regarding the ' characteristics ' of the lens, I have used it extensively and the results have not disappointed. I do not use the lens cap, a Nikon NC filter was fitted before I left the shop, that together with the lens hood provides enough protection either on the camera or when stored in a soft lens pouch.

Andre Yew · May 12, 2017

Dima Sh said:
While the LoCA of this lens is not its strongest aspect, I have never had problems with its autofocus on my D750 compared to other fast primes.

I have never noticed any issues with highlight tonalities but I must confess that I have never paid much attention and neither do I have the Otus to compare.

Andre, I feel that your comments are sincere and perhaps to some extent correct but are they highly relevant for this specific lens which is primarily a people/bokeh oriented instrument?

I think people ought to evaluate lenses for themselves, and use comments they find on the net whether it's from people with high expertise like anotherMike or Marianne, or hobbyists like us, as a starting point. Laying out the envelope of performance of a lens is a fine thing to do, but one shouldn't fall into the trap of fanboyism (and I'm not calling you one either!) by only speaking positively of a lens.

As I mentioned, some of the 58G's character can be used artfully. When I first tried it out for landscape (on a lark as I bought it for people photos), I hated it and thought it was completely unsuitable, but after calming down and thinking about it, I realized it could be used for dreamy, painterly landscapes where perhaps you don't want every single detail rendered in sharp relief. So what may have been viewed as a negative turned out to be a unique strength. I offer this as a humble example of the kind of thing the 58G is great at:

https://flic.kr/p/LwMphR

Too often, photographers fall into the trap of pigeonholing lenses based on what they've heard, like "Only short teles should be used for portraits" or "Portraits need to be shot wide open" and so on. But for an activity that's supposed to be creative, we photographers can often be really myopic and set in our ways.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andreyew/

anotherMike · May 12, 2017

FWIW, while I've used the term highlight compression, I'm not sure I like the term any longer and have tried to shy away from it.

I totally get what Andre is saying, and I've seen a lot of lenses whose definition and delineation in the highlight region is somewhat murky. I am not sure it's predominantly SA, since I see it at *any* aperture and SA (AFAIK) goes away fairly quickly as we stop the lens down. Stopped down my understanding is the predominant remaining aberrations are field curvature, lateral color, and astigmatism, and I am not sure how they would cause this; perhaps lateral color is, or astigmatism? IDK. This is a reason I have moved on to other brands besides Nikon in my kit; I never have this issue with Zeiss or Sigma Art glass, so they must be doing something different across a large part of their lineup, but as for the 'what', I have no earthly clue. Interestingly, the new Nikon 105/1.4E is remarkably free of it, which might be one reason I like the lens as much as i do.

For sure, in this case I don't know the cause, but I surely see it, and in a lot of lenses, not just one or two. So I'm out of my league on this one....

-m

Dmderb · May 12, 2017

Andre, thank you for your thoughtful and mature response.

My point was simply that if one buys a Porsche 911, saying that the ride is a bit harsh and that the boot is small and in the wrong place - would be consistent with the facts, but perhaps a bit redundant. Of course one could say that the 58 1.4G is just a lens and adding additional color could always be helpful so that people could form a complete picture. And I guess I would agree.

But just to set the record straight regarding the facts (and avoiding the fanboyism

), I think the CA of the 58mm is similar to other 1.4G lenses at open apertures (and that means not great) and the autofocus is also pretty much on par with this group of lenses (but much slower than the 2.8Gs zooms). I also found the sharpenss of this lens at f/8 pretty decent on my D750 and would have no problems shooting landscapes with it.

The two truly differentiating aspects of this lens, in my opinion, are relative unsharpness and aberrations at open apertures (f/1.4 - 1.8) and wonderful bokeh/out of focus rendering at f/1.4 - 2.8.

Dima

Marianne Oelund · May 12, 2017

Andre Yew said:
Marianne Oelund said:

No, it's fairly average for a decent 50-58mm lens. It's comparable to the Sigma 50/1.4 Art and much better than the Nikon AI 50/1.8, the AF-S 50/1.4G or the Voigtlander 58/1.4. Of the seven prime lenses I own in the 50-58mm range, the only one that's noticeably better than the 58G in this respect, is the new Milvus 50/1.4.

Click to expand...

I think we have different standards and criteria for LoCA. The 58G is unusable for shooting backlit specular point sources like water droplets.

That's a special case. First, it occurs at longer distances, and secondly, it involves extremely high energy densities, especially when sunlight is the source. It's difficult to reproduce this in a controlled setting, but I did make some attempt at it.

Turns out the primary distinction is between lenses in the 50-58mm range, and longer focal lengths from 85mm and up. The longer lenses generally fare much better. Within its group, the 58G performs much as I described.

Andre Yew said:
Neither of the Milvus 1.4 lenses are great in this respect either.

The Milvus 85 certainly is. The Milvus 50/1.4 isn't quite as good as the 85, but I would classify it as very good; at least it doesn't produce purple fringes (they're warm pink instead).

Andre Yew said:
There may be other use cases where their LoCA is better disguised, but for what I do, it's terrible. The Tamron 85, Zeiss 2/135 APO, and 55 Otus are significantly better in LoCA performance for my photos. Even the old Contax/Yashica Zeiss 85/2.8 MMJ is better though not as good as those three lenses.

Seems you need to work with the longer focal lengths. There certainly aren't many options near 50mm that you would find free of the issue.

Andre Yew said:
The 58G's performance is in the same category as the old Nikon 85/1.8D.

The 58G is a little better, and overall it certainly isn't in the worst category - perhaps second-worst.

Andre Yew said:
Here's a full-size, max quality JPEG with default LR settings except for a Huelight color profile that shows the LoCA performance of the 58G. f/2.8, 1/4000, ISO 64:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rss2damyfo3e0xm/58g-loca.jpg?dl=0

Good PF example, but you need to compare to other 50mm-class lenses, and the comparison needs to be carefully controlled. In the field, you have no idea what the highlight intensities are: A highlight one stop beyond saturation can look the same in the image, as one that is 10 stops beyond saturation, but the attendant CA will certainly look different in those two cases.

Here are some longer-distance examples I produced in a controlled setting where the over-saturation ratios are kept in the same ballpark (about 8-9 stops above sensor saturation):

Even the Zeiss 135/2 "APO" Sonnar throws a little purple into the perimeter.

Andre Yew said:
Andre Yew said:

Andre Yew said:

The AF is slow and indecisive,

Click to expand...

If it's indecisive, blame the camera body. That has nothing to do with the lens.

I have plenty of lenses which are "indecisive" on the D800E, but they behave much better on the D5.

Click to expand...

It's slower and more indecisive on both my D810 and D500 than other lenses I've used, including 3rd party lenses such as the Tamron 85 and the Sigma 50-100. I can also hold the AF-on button in single-point AF-C on a relatively high contrast target and hear the lens's motor chatter back and forth as it struggles to find focus.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any lenses that won't do this on my D800E. The 58G behaves very similarly to the 85/1.4G, for example.

Andre Yew said:
Andre Yew said:

Which doesn't exist. Lenses cannot have non-linear tonal response.

What is actually happening, is SA veiling flare is blending the highlight details together and spreading out the finest ones, robbing them of their central-peak intensity. This gives the appearance of loss of highlight tonal range or contrast, but it's actually much the same process as defocusing the lens.

Click to expand...

I would call flare a non-linear response, but the end result of whether it's SA veiling (even at f/11 which is where I observed it) or something else, the visual impression is one of highlight compression.

If the flare point-spread function is represented by F(), then it obeys

F(X1 + X2) = F(X1) + F(X2) and F(k*X) = k*F(X) which are the linearity conditions.

Where non-linearities arise, is at the sensor, and in processing such as the camera JPEG engine or raw processor. The latter especially, can cause all sorts of tonality issues. I do not in the least trust any raw converters to treat images from different lenses equally and consistently. In fact, I have some experiments coming up, to investigate that.

--
Source credit: Prov 2:6
- Marianne

Art Jacks · May 12, 2017

This is not intended as a ' work of art ' but as an example of why I am satisfied with the images this lens produces. My wife was off to work and suggested I try to capture the last remaining rose in our front garden. I selected f2.5 to allow for old persons wobble hand held at the minimum focus distance, had there been more time I would have attempted a better composition but as usual she was running tight for time for me to drive her to work.

CAT Productions · May 13, 2017

Looks like the Sigma 135 Art shows the best performance in your test, Marianne?

Marianne Oelund · May 13, 2017

CAT Productions said:
Looks like the Sigma 135 Art shows the best performance in your test, Marianne?

At long distance, yes it's excellent (but so is the Samyang 135, which I didn't show).

However, the Sigma suffers at close distance . Seems Sigma have so far solved only half of their LoCA problem.

Andre Yew · May 16, 2017

Dima Sh said:
But just to set the record straight regarding the facts (and avoiding the fanboyism ), I think the CA of the 58mm is similar to other 1.4G lenses at open apertures (and that means not great) and the autofocus is also pretty much on par with this group of lenses (but much slower than the 2.8Gs zooms). I also found the sharpenss of this lens at f/8 pretty decent on my D750 and would have no problems shooting landscapes with it.

If you haven't had a chance to try the 105E, you might be very surprised and pleased with it. It is by far the best f/1.4 lens Nikon makes with respect to technical quality: the LoCA is well-controlled, the focus, while slow, is more assured than the 58, and it's also very sharp over a wider range of apertures. And it has a very pleasing rendering quality too.

Its only downsides are that it's huge and expensive. I can only hope that Nikon sprinkles a little bit of whatever magic dust they used on the 105E on mark 2 versions of the current 1.4 lenses. If they had a 24/1.4E with the same qualities, I'd line up for it.

Dmderb · May 16, 2017

Andre Yew said:
Dima Sh said:

But just to set the record straight regarding the facts (and avoiding the fanboyism ), I think the CA of the 58mm is similar to other 1.4G lenses at open apertures (and that means not great) and the autofocus is also pretty much on par with this group of lenses (but much slower than the 2.8Gs zooms). I also found the sharpenss of this lens at f/8 pretty decent on my D750 and would have no problems shooting landscapes with it.

Click to expand...

If you haven't had a chance to try the 105E, you might be very surprised and pleased with it. It is by far the best f/1.4 lens Nikon makes with respect to technical quality: the LoCA is well-controlled, the focus, while slow, is more assured than the 58, and it's also very sharp over a wider range of apertures. And it has a very pleasing rendering quality too.

Its only downsides are that it's huge and expensive. I can only hope that Nikon sprinkles a little bit of whatever magic dust they used on the 105E on mark 2 versions of the current 1.4 lenses. If they had a 24/1.4E with the same qualities, I'd line up for it.

Marianne Oelund · May 16, 2017

Andre Yew said:
If you haven't had a chance to try the 105E, you might be very surprised and pleased with it. It is by far the best f/1.4 lens Nikon makes with respect to technical quality: the LoCA is well-controlled, the focus, while slow, is more assured than the 58,

Quite a few have complained about AF speed with this lens and other Nikon AF-S f/1.4 models, but then I've seen some folks using it for BIF .

I haven't tried that yet, but might do some SIF (Skaters in Flight).

YRUNVS · May 16, 2017

Marianne Oelund said:
Andre Yew said:

If you haven't had a chance to try the 105E, you might be very surprised and pleased with it. It is by far the best f/1.4 lens Nikon makes with respect to technical quality: the LoCA is well-controlled, the focus, while slow, is more assured than the 58,

Click to expand...

Quite a few have complained about AF speed with this lens and other Nikon AF-S f/1.4 models, but then I've seen some folks using it for BIF .

I haven't tried that yet, but might do some SIF (Skaters in Flight).

MartynD2oo · May 17, 2017

Fair review, I really like this lens, here are some sample from a recent wedding...

--
Martyn

https://500px.com/martynwilkes

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

Search

The Dream Machine

Glen78

Senior Member

Andre Yew

Senior Member

Loading…

Dmderb

Forum Enthusiast

Art Jacks

Senior Member

Andre Yew

Senior Member

anotherMike

Forum Pro

Dmderb

Forum Enthusiast

Marianne Oelund

Veteran Member

Art Jacks

Senior Member

CAT Productions

Senior Member

Marianne Oelund

Veteran Member

Andre Yew

Senior Member

Dmderb

Forum Enthusiast

Marianne Oelund

Veteran Member

YRUNVS

Senior Member

MartynD2oo

Senior Member

Log into Facebook

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts