Has anyone tested Nikon S lenses vs Leica L?

I am asking just for interest. I have no horse in the game as the Nikon 1.8 S primes and f4 S zooms are already more than sufficient for my needs.

However, I saw remarks about Nikon's f2.8 zooms being "best in class", and then reviewers or forum commenters compared Nikon to Canon, Sony and Panasonic. So I started wondering how wide this "class" stretches. How do Nikon's 2.8 zooms (and the f4's for that matter) stack up optically against Leica L zooms, and how do the 1.8 primes, and the new 1.2 50mm S fare against Leica's L equivalents? Especially since the Nikon 1.8 50 has been compared favourably to Zeiss primes in some reviews.

So if any such tests exist, please post a link.

Diswantsho said:

I am asking just for interest. I have no horse in the game as the Nikon 1.8 S primes and f4 S zooms are already more than sufficient for my needs.

However, I saw remarks about Nikon's f2.8 zooms being "best in class", and then reviewers or forum commenters compared Nikon to Canon, Sony and Panasonic. So I started wondering how wide this "class" stretches. How do Nikon's 2.8 zooms (and the f4's for that matter) stack up optically against Leica L zooms, and how do the 1.8 primes, and the new 1.2 50mm S fare against Leica's L equivalents? Especially since the Nikon 1.8 50 has been compared favourably to Zeiss primes in some reviews.

So if any such tests exist, please post a link.

Click to expand...

Havent seen any myself but if your talking about "class" of lens then Leica are a bit different to most, they offer variable aperture zooms and different focal lengths.

ACTUALLY I don't have the idea why the Nikon 24-70 2.8 S is claimed to be the best one among all of the mirrorless 24-70.

The test from this link actually shows that Canon is the most 'balanced' lens on most of the the aspects. There are some areas which Nikon lacks behind competition, such as vignetting, magnification ratio and harder bokeh shape, etc. The sunstar performance of Nikon is mediocre compared to Canon and Tamron as well.

https://www.mobile01.com/topicdetail.php?f=547&t=6036631 (Make sure you turn on Google Translate)

One caveat is that when this test was made, the Canon R5 was not available so it is impossible to compare the sharpness of Canon against all other lens.

Jeff_0000 said:

ACTUALLY I don't have the idea why the Nikon 24-70 2.8 S is claimed to be the best one among all of the mirrorless 24-70.

The test from this link actually shows that Canon is the most 'balanced' lens on most of the the aspects. There are some areas which Nikon lacks behind competition, such as vignetting, magnification ratio and harder bokeh shape, etc. The sunstar performance of Nikon is mediocre compared to Canon and Tamron as well.

https://www.mobile01.com/topicdetail.php?f=547&t=6036631 (Make sure you turn on Google Translate)

One caveat is that when this test was made, the Canon R5 was not available so it is impossible to compare the sharpness of Canon against all other lens.

Click to expand...

I like how you glossed over sharpness, lens coma, edge to edge performance...all of which is far better on the Nikon Z 24-70 2.8S than any other lens.

While I can't stand Tony Northrup, he did test these lenses side by side and concluded that the Nikon was indeed the best of the bunch.

To say that you can't compare sharpness is a stamen argument because you can test the Canon against the Z6 to see performance and coma, sharpness, and edge to edge clarity will be the same with the Z 24-70 coming out on top.

RF lens cannot be used on Z6. My 16-35 is an EF lens...

Putting Canon aside, Sony is the best from center to corner at wide end and Panasonic is the best at tele end in terms of sharpness. You can review the photos to check the results.

As I said Canon performs most evenly (not equal to the best), others perform great on some metrics and not so great on others. The result from this test shows that Nikon is not the best lens compared to other lenses. In fact, all of the lenses have its own flaws and strengths. I doubt the claim that Nikon 24-70 is the best one available on the market.

By the way, can you share the coma performance of all 24-70 mentioned on above? I would like to see them for myself.

Thanks.

Hey OP. You can see the comparison of Nikon 24-70 and Panasonic 24-70 on the link.

for sure nikon S has best price to weight ratio, you get more weight and size lol

Jeff_0000 said:

Hey OP. You can see the comparison of Nikon 24-70 and Panasonic 24-70 on the link.

Click to expand...

Thanks, but I asked actual tests of how Nikon now compares to Leica L. Granted, Panasonic is L mount, so you are close.

Sorry! I thought you were referring to the Panasonic one.

Jeff_0000 said:

ACTUALLY I don't have the idea why the Nikon 24-70 2.8 S is claimed to be the best one among all of the mirrorless 24-70.

The test from this link actually shows that Canon is the most 'balanced' lens on most of the the aspects. There are some areas which Nikon lacks behind competition, such as vignetting, magnification ratio and harder bokeh shape, etc. The sunstar performance of Nikon is mediocre compared to Canon and Tamron as well.

https://www.mobile01.com/topicdetail.php?f=547&t=6036631 (Make sure you turn on Google Translate)

One caveat is that when this test was made, the Canon R5 was not available so it is impossible to compare the sharpness of Canon against all other lens.

Click to expand...

Very interesting review. So far tests done for Canon 24-70/2.8 RF are all based on Canon R, not R5.