answers: 179

  1. Oleg
    02.05.2017

    The review is gorgeous, the girl is beautiful. Why are you doing this with Nikon Arkady? After all, the old man is already, 100 years old after all, a venerable age

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      02.05.2017

      Yes, I still restrained myself :) if something is not on the case - write, we will discuss.

      Reply

      • Michael
        06.06.2017

        speaking of focusing speed it would be nice to use a professional lens in a professional camera, and not with the old d90

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        06.06.2017

        Above in the comments, I showed a video where the owner took a video on the focus speed of this particular instance on TOP Nikon D5 (at the time of this writing, there seems to be nothing more “professional” out of full-size nikons). And as it turned out, the focusing speed with this lens does not depend on the camera used (all of a sudden). But I see that the people cannot measure themselves with such a course of events :)

        Reply

    • Molchanov Yuri
      03.05.2017

      I don’t want Nikon to share the fate of Minolta, Kodak, Polaroid, Yashica, Bronica, etc.
      After all, Sony could not have allowed serious photographic equipment onto the market, dropping prices. And now it’s a competitor, and even a competitor.

      Reply

      • Peter Sh.
        03.05.2017

        Come on, what's the difference? Nikon will end, we will shoot on Kenon.
        The camera is just an easel in our business.

        Reply

    • Ivan
      06.05.2017

      Is the girl beautiful?
      Well, yes, the concept of beauty is different for everyone.
      Here is the bride - beautiful!

      Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        06.05.2017

        there is no bride in the photo

        Reply

      • Ivan
        07.05.2017

        last row, left.
        well, let it be, not the bride, but the girl is very beautiful

        Reply

    • anonym
      09.05.2017

      Everything is fine, Arkady has been pushing Nikon heavily lately and often off topic. I don’t know what this is connected with, but the quality of the reviews has greatly decreased.

      Reply

  2. Oleg
    02.05.2017

    Decently more expensive than Kenonovsky 50 \ 1.2

    Reply

  3. Vladimir
    02.05.2017

    Not, well, the picture is quite nice, certainly not for the money, but for those who collect gold rings, it’s quite a must have)

    Reply

  4. NoRules
    02.05.2017

    Nikosha performs, insulting.
    "In the Nikon development department" klaaaass))

    Reply

  5. Oleg
    02.05.2017

    Cool picture!

    Reply

  6. Andrei
    02.05.2017

    Arkady was sold in earnest, but I agree with him 100%

    Reply

  7. Peter Sh.
    02.05.2017

    Hackwork. Shaped disgrace. The crooks.
    Although I don’t care.
    I looked at the prices of Kenon, they completely lost their conscience. Theirs D5 mark iv costs like two D750s. And removes the same. Also crooks, all around are crooks.

    Reply

    • Dim
      03.05.2017

      These are all questions of product promotion, Nikon apparently adheres to the tactics developed by Gillette - the machine is almost for nothing, the blades are wrapped, and Canon does not work like that - they have expensive carcasses. Apparently this is why Nikon strives to get rid of the old optics - people take carcasses for cheap, and then graze in the secondary market, but they still need to somehow pay workers, engineers and loans.

      Reply

      • Peter Sh.
        03.05.2017

        So Kenon and optics are not cheaper.
        If you break the prices for cameras like this, then you need to give at least something specific for this.
        And they give nothing but a spherical skinton in a vacuum.
        Only the last 5D mark iv is catching up with Nikon on reporting performance.
        What to pay twice?
        Although the competition is still all the same with the Kenon with flashes and gates, they don’t see anything. Or maybe a habit already.

        Reply

  8. anonym
    03.05.2017

    The color reproduction of this lens is impeccable, bokeh resembles old lenses, but with modern sharpness and excellent autofocus.

    Something you too biased crap this glass. From the objective you only have that it is too expensive, and that the body is made of plastic, and is chromate, and the filter is not 77 diameters. At the expense of autofocus, you are very mistaken, it’s fast and accurate, which can’t be said about, for example, the Nikkor 50mm f / 1.4 and, indeed, the Sigma 50mm ART (this is a separate issue).

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      03.05.2017

      and… and… and… the focus is accurate, really, I never said that with the accuracy of the problem. The speed is the same as the 50 1.4g - the running time of the lenses is too long.

      Reply

      • anonym
        04.05.2017

        You would test it at d70, links to stores all the time.
        58mm is positioned as a prof. lens, I think it is appropriate to see his work on prof. DSLR, and not on the obsolete d90. This is just my opinion, I do not intend to convince anyone.

        Reply

      • varezhkin
        07.05.2017

        interesting, but does the class / year of birth of the carcass somehow affect the AF speed in the case of swm? maybe really this is the place to be?

        Reply

      • Skai
        08.05.2017

        It does not affect in any way. For me, at one time there was a shocking speed of 50 1.4 g compared to 50 1.4 d
        Try to test both lenses in some sort of used equipment store, since they are very common.
        I used fifty dollars on the d610 d version, it feels like a tribe faster. 35 ka is also fast. Dx on d90.

        Reply

      • Denis
        07.05.2017

        This is just my opinion, I do not intend to convince anyone

        but in vain. most likely you are mistaken, and the speed of the carcass (significantly) does not depend

        Reply

    • anonym
      03.05.2017

      Nothing biased, all sarcasm on the case. We must praise manufacturers for real improvements and criticize them for the deterioration and marketing tricks that are directed against us. Such a reaction, coupled with competition, helps to wait, at least from time to time, for normal products for consumers.

      Reply

    • NE
      14.08.2017

      I have Sigma 50 1.4 ART since it went on sale, i.e. for more than 3 years. This is my favorite and most used lens. There are no complaints to him.

      Reply

  9. Pilotpirks
    03.05.2017

    Arkady, and what kind of profile when converting pictures from d90? Painfully decent colors for the d90. Please write how these images were converted specifically

    Reply

    • Dim
      03.05.2017

      You have to work with color and it will be decent, if you shoot on the machine, then the machine will.

      Reply

    • Reader
      03.05.2017

      Yes, the color is good. Maybe because of the lens. Arkady writes that he did not make additional adjustments

      Reply

      • Dim
        03.05.2017

        I still set the white balance, as I think, and it is quite possible that he has no default Picture control.

        Reply

      • Pilotpirks
        03.05.2017

        Well, not a raw picture, obviously. I used some profile when converting. I know d90 profiles well. If this is "Standard" without adjustments, then the lens gives a crazy contrast, judging by the pictures.

        Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      03.05.2017

      The standard profile of the built-in nikon d90 is “neutral”, nothing else.

      Reply

      • Alexander
        04.05.2017

        Well, that means the lens provides that kind of contrast out of the box. Impressive. Sharpness at 1.4, as for me, is also very good, while I do not see any pronounced aberrations

        Reply

  10. anonym
    03.05.2017

    Everyone praises the bokeh of this lens. Sigma Art has poor bokeh. Otus is very expensive.

    Reply

    • anonym
      03.05.2017

      ... and if you look closely, Nikkor loses out to Otus only in sharpness. The rest wins!

      Reply

    • Molchanov Yuri
      03.05.2017

      Sigma's bokeh isn't bad, it's different. Nikon on contrasting details, against a background of snow, leaves colored fields in the out-of-focus area (unlike Sigma Art 50). It's beautiful in its own way, but it's still distortion. Another thing is that this kind of movement in the background creates.

      Reply

      • Dim
        03.05.2017

        On my Sigma, the background with triangles is a bit harsh for a woman's portrait, besides, it is natural for a person to see rounds or ellipses in the out-of-focus area, but not triangles. Those. Sigma produces unnatural bokeh, not bad.

        Reply

      • Jury
        03.05.2017

        and which lens do you have? I have two Sigma: 17-70 (https://radojuva.com/2015/04/sigma-17-70-2-8-4-dc-os-hsm/) and 20 1,4A, did not observe triangles

        Reply

      • Dim
        03.05.2017

        30 1.4

        Reply

  11. Dmitriy
    03.05.2017

    It's all over Nikon.
    Urgently merge junk and take Sony or Fuji.

    Reply

  12. Lynx
    03.05.2017

    "Hypanem a little" ©

    Reply

  13. Jury
    03.05.2017

    Arkady did not include this photo in the review, and the tulips are beautiful. Thanks for the review, the glass is good, if the price were up to $ 1k, all other shortcomings could be forgiven. And with a focusing motor of 105 1,4 Nikon completely upset, as with "Made in China"

    Reply

  14. Pastor
    03.05.2017

    I agree with the review completely. In fact, the main problem is the price. If this glass was 100 bucks more expensive than 50 1.4g, then all the jambs could be forgiven. But at a price higher than the Canon Elka - this is clearly too much. I didn’t make a direct comparison, but from memory 50 1.2L was much more interesting than this “overshoot” :) Not even because of the wide aperture, but simply by the picture. Well, the assembly does not raise questions there. It is sad that Nikon has created such a bayonet for himself, which is not able to digest glasses from 1.2. And so it would be great to have an analogue of 85 1.2L from Nikon. For the Canon one is too ambiguous for my taste.

    Reply

  15. anonym
    03.05.2017

    DRTV about this lens https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptgN-uPAwac
    And about Sigma Art 50 / 1.4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuAGWNjwhvM
    In Russian.

    Reply

  16. Shalva
    03.05.2017

    Sorry, but this is the first time a review from the series “expensive bullshit, a couple of pictures for reporting”. The glass is gorgeous, the color rendition is almost perfect, the body is made of polymers, and not plastic as it is written. If anyone is interested in bokeh, then it is soft, more watercolor and somewhat reminiscent of 58 / 1.2. The focus is very fast and accurate, but the main advantage is the backlight sources! It is a pleasure to shoot with this glass at night.

    Reply

    • R'RёS,R ° F "RёR№
      03.05.2017

      What is the difference between plastics and polymers? And little is done from polymers alone, they add additives and get ... plastic.

      Reply

      • Rodion
        03.05.2017

        You just ask this glass.

        Reply

      • zengarden
        03.05.2017

        Of course, polycarbonate can also be called "plastic", but this does not make it less durable.

        Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      03.05.2017

      No one says glass is bad. But his focus is not fast.

      Reply

  17. anonym
    03.05.2017

    They did not let kament about DRTV review this glass! How so ?! Censorship?!

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      03.05.2017

      There is no censorship, if there are several links in a comment, it gets moderated.

      Reply

      • Shalva
        05.05.2017

        You tested it on the D90, this is a crop with a rather weak focus module, in conjunction with Df and D810. Focusing is very fast, the speed is the same as 16-35 / 4. At least I do not notice the difference when working with these glasses.

        Reply

  18. Dmitriy
    03.05.2017

    Maybe a little off topic, but the article mentions an X-ray lens. There are several. Here is a photo of one.

    Reply

  19. Kirill
    03.05.2017

    I don’t know, but for me this lens is perfection itself, everything, if not damn cool, then just cool! tr. in my city ... for me it's just some kind of space ...
    I have always loved and use only fixes for:
    1. Exceeding aperture more than 2 times, if we compare the usual prime and TOP zoom - 1,8 and 2,8
    2. The quality of the picture with a simple affordable fix 1.8G is comparable to the TOP zooms
    3. And probably the main thing, for the price of the new 24-70mm f / 2.8G, I can buy 4 awesome fixes 28mm 1.8G, 35mm 1.8G, 50mm 1.8G, 85mm 1.8G! And if, excuse me, not to show off, but to buy everything b / y, then the D610 will also remain for the full frame!
    In connection with all of the above, this lens is from the evil one ...

    Reply

    • Alexey
      03.05.2017

      Well, 24-70 can be used. take, so: "You've swung your mother twenty rubles." (from)

      Reply

      • Kirill
        04.05.2017

        Yes, even if we consider 24-70 b / y for 60t.r., then fixes are still more profitable.
        Personally, I bought 28mm 1.8G - 27 tons, 35mm 1.8G - 7 tons, 50mm 1.8G - 11 tons, 85mm 1.8G - for 20 tons. total 65t.r.

        Reply

      • Alexey
        09.05.2017

        Well, 610 doesn’t fit in any way, but 24-70 is usually 55t.r.

        Reply

      • Novel
        10.05.2017

        A collector of Nikon plasmassofixes? Why on crop, and judging by 35ke for 7 you have exactly crop, you need 28 / 1,8G for 27? What is difficult to do with the 35 / 1,8G DX two steps back? Yes, and half the price in the presence of 85 is not comme il faut.

        Reply

      • Dmitriy
        10.05.2017

        For such a price, the crop will be better: Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f / 2.8 or 28-105 f / 2.8, + tamron 90 mm f / 2.8 macro + nikkor 50 mm f / 1.8 D (for 2500 rubles) or 1.4 + 35 mm f1.8G. In the presence of 35 mm. value 28 mm. not too high. And at the price to me this kit entered the used market of 35000 rubles (nothing broke, all the lenses are extremely reliable, they work in the cold, in the mud, in the sand, they traveled and traveled thousands of kilometers with me on the D7100).
        If regarding convenience, it is better to have high-aperture zooms, closing all focal lengths of 10 - 300 mm on the crop, plus having an analogue of a fast fifty-ruble lens (35 mm) and an analog of a high-aperture 85 mm portrait lens. (90mm. 2,8, since 85mm. Is extremely expensive, and, at the same time, it's a good macro lens). On the rest of the focal levers, they are elementary inconvenient (excluding, of course, 135 and 400-500 mm).

        Reply

    • A.N. Onim
      04.05.2017

      Why take it new ?? I was lucky in the commission for 60 ty to buy. I did not notice the brakes in focus. At 1.4, the picture is covered as if by a soft filter, then from 1.8 everything becomes sharp. I still made the adjustment, so in general everything became chocolate)))

      Reply

      • Denis
        04.05.2017

        I don’t understand why someone bought it (expensively!), then to hand over to the commission at half price

        Reply

      • A.N. Onim
        04.05.2017

        In early 2014, he cost somewhere around 80, threw off 20% and sold

        Reply

  20. Gonzaga
    03.05.2017

    I also liked the lens very much. If only he would have been tested at d700, I think we would have been out. Of course, I do not presume to indicate, but in my opinion Nikon's trolling in this review is not appropriate. Glass is great. The price is also “fine”.

    Reply

  21. AND
    03.05.2017

    The review is heartfelt, of course, I liked it very much. And then I thought that it was only troubles with a half-weight in the boot - either a relatively new 50 / 1.8stm, or 50 / 1.2. 50 / 1.4 looks at least archaic in terms of constructiveness against the background of newer lenses, and it is rather weak when open. In general, it's a pity that the choice between 50 and 85mm is for the same canon, the picture from 58mm of the same g44 is somehow closer and "more correct" in terms of perspective than the 50 / 1.8, but as usual it is IMHO.

    Reply

  22. Pavel Tikhiy
    04.05.2017

    I did not think that it would be the same in speed as 50 1.4g, maybe there is a problem in the carcass?
    I have 28mm 1.8g, on the d90 it focuses much slower than on the d600, Arkady, maybe it should be checked on other cameras?

    Reply

  23. anonym
    04.05.2017

    Would buy it right after 105 / 1.4E

    Reply

  24. Andrei
    04.05.2017

    Regarding AF speed, I’ll say that there is a difference in carcasses.
    I have a D300 and a D7200, a heavy tamron 70-210 2,8 LD67 d7200 drives much faster and more accurately
    although the D300 is an old professional crop, and the D7200 is just an advanced crop

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      04.05.2017

      70-210 - this is a non-motorized lens, and therefore the focusing speed depends on the motor of the camera and it has long been known that in different cameras the motors turn in different ways https://radojuva.com/2014/12/nikon-af-speed-body/
      With lenses that have a built-in focus motor, speed rarely depends on the camera. But sometimes it depends, it is connected with the logic of the focusing system, as well as with the lighting and the type of scene being shot. With 58 / 1,4, I did not find a difference in speed depending on the lighting. Usually, the lens travel time with similar lenses is camera independent.

      Reply

  25. Alexey
    04.05.2017

    Look at the optical design - this is a typical planar, only a couple of aspherical elements were added to it. Asferica is expensive, but it significantly increases the sharpness of the picture on open holes. The nano-coating protects well against glare in backlight. Therefore, the price for such a lens will be higher than that of a conventional planar, without aspherics and anti-reflective coatings. Chromatic pairs seem to be present here too, so the presence of strong CAs is not entirely clear to me. Apparently they are made of plain glass, not low disperse glass.
    It makes sense to compare this lens with a standard 50 / 1,4G open hole. Maybe then it will be clear how the high price of the lens is justified.

    Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer