Nikon 58 F1.4 VS Nikon 58 F1.2 Noct
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ย. 2024
- froknowsphoto.c... Click Here to download the FULL RES Jpegs and 9 RAW Files.
When Nikon told me about an upcoming lens the Nikon 58mm F1.4 I kind of laughed. One I did not understand the price of $1,699 and two I didn't understand the history behind this lens. The reps told me it was a throwback to the Nikon 58 F1.2 Noct from years past. This Noct lens is said to be one of the best lenses ever produced.
As you guys know, when AllensCamera.com gets a new lens in of interest they give me a call to come in, sniff it and run it through some tests. Keep in mind my goal with these reviews is to give you the FULL RES Jpegs and some RAWfiles to pixel peep yourself. Of course I have to toss in there what I think about the files and lens.
While I was taking test shots with the 58 1.4 a customer walked in with a bunch of old Nikon lenses. One of them so happened to be a 1.2 Noct which I personally have never seen. Talk about perfect timing, I asked if I could take some pictures of it and with it and he was nice enough to allow me the pleasure.
To connect with FroKnowsPhoto please follow below
froknowsphoto.c... Check out the FroKnowsPhoto Flash Guide.
froknowsphoto.c... FroKnowsPhoto Beginner Guide
store.froknowsp...
Facebook: / froknowsphoto
Twitter : / froknowsphoto
Google + : plus.google.co...
Please Subscribe www.youtube.com...
I grew older waiting for an example of the f1.2 in action. Waited and waited and they took me off to a nursing home while I waited.
And legend has it he's still waiting
This is a specialty lens. It's engineered to be shot wide open and deliver a specific type of performance in terms of coma, flare, and point sources that your typical 50mm cannot, irrespective of the make. It's not purely a matter of sharpness. It is a successor to the 1.2 Noct-Nikkor meaning it is a premiere performer in extreme low light. Your 50mm CANNOT match this performance. You will get the best results for night shooting and cine. If these are not your needs, this is not your lens.
I am a lucky enough girl to own the 1.2 Noct AI yet I love this 1.4G that I have owned for 6 years very much... It's a successor but IMO for different reasons... the 1.4G as a portrait lens has a magical property that makes my customers swoon... and concurrently makes me rich... the 1.2 Noct makes ME swoon.... I swear it's pure magic.. but me getting wet panties doesn't pay the bills... My 1.4G is the husband that pays the bills.
The older lens has much better micro-contrast wide-open. They just don't make lenses like they used to anymore.
Love to see how this compares to the Zeiss Otus 55 1.4
would like to see this compared to the voightlander 58mm f/1.4 nokt
First of all thanks for your time to review regarding this beautiful lens.
I think it is a good idea to run the test first 58mm (1.4) to calibration with your Nikon D4 to make sure they are in correct "AF Micro Adjustment", before you take many sample headshot - this is only way to get accurate sharpness out of F/1.4.
Again I'd like to have NEF format because i like to use Nikon capture NX to see how sharpness it is, adobe camera raw is always tad softer image overall compare to capture NX.
I'm interested as to why the bloke brought the 58mm F1.2 Noct into the shop, was he selling it and how much did he get?.
I suppose the reason why you struggled getting tack sharp images at f/1.4, is that the lens need an AF micro adjustment. Try it out?
yes in the first cloth photo it looks like it's front focusing on the plastic package at the base of the cloth @5:35
Whats the point of having a f 1.4 lens if you have to stop it down to f 2.2 or something to get sharp images? This lens had to be sharp wide open to justify a hefty price tag...
Danijel L The point is that no lens is as sharp at 1.4 or 1.2 or whatever the widest aperture is as it is stopped down. Jared says it in the video. The reason is that people then have a perfectly sharp lens at f2.2, because if you'd buy a f2.8 lens you still have to stop it down to get the maximum sharpness.
the 50/f1.4 G Nikon is around the same prices of the Canon's one. But the 58mm is a Nanocoated optic, in the same pro range as the 35/f1.4 and 85/1.4
it is sharp at 1.4 but it's difficult to capture it because there's such a small zone which is in focus when you're that wide open.
Honestly is there a lens in the past 10 years ( including the 18-55 for that matter ) that is not "BOOM" sharp at f8 ?? I really can't help but laugh at your outbursts whenever you're looking at a f8 photo. It's sharp ... jeez ... le'me jump on the wagon and order one RIGHT NOW. Better yet, I'll take two !!
The SOLE reason why you pay a premium price for a 1.4 lens is to SHOOT IT AT 1.4 !!!
My sole reason for using a 1.4 is not to shoot at 1.4 its to shoot at 2.0, 2.2, 2.5 and see how amazing those images are. Dont blow out of proportion my f8 amazement.
Jared Polin I would like to say, tranditional 58mm is not ues for shooting so close, just the big head. usually we would use that len in half a body or full body Portrait, so that you can really use the len wide open, to get the body shape and good isolation from the background.
Jared Polin I agree with you there, but there really is no point stopping down more than 2-3 stops. He is right - everything is sharp at f5.6-8.
+Marius Godeanu Have you guys tried to shoot with a tilt-shift at f8 ?
Not so sharp :P
+Marius Godeanu Wasn`t the original Noc more for astro anyway? That would mean inf. and 1.2 to allow for faster shutter speeds to counter earth movment blurs...
This noct nikkor sell here in the Netherlands for 3500 euros secondhand.
Primes like these are built to shoot wide open. There are many variables to explain why you are having issues at 1.4. With such a tiny DOF if your focus calibration is off, you'll have issues. You would be wasting your money buying one of these lenses to be super sharp at 2.5 or (lol) 8. 50mm 1.8 is sharp too! Lol.
But what prime isn't super sharp at f8? I just don't know if I could ever justify that price. At least the Canon f1.2 primes are even pretty great at 1.2 so it's easier to understand their price.
Jared you couldn't achieve focus was it the lens or your camera body?
but why not MF Voightlander 58 1.4 instead! ? I am tempted..but still want a AFS 20 1.8 G. I have other more common AFS 50 1.4g and a 55 2.8 AiS and micro 60 2.8D. in that FL range.
kind of taken out of context. Of course you buy a 1.4 to shoot at 1.4. But its also so useful at 2 and 2.2 and 2.5. Boom
what is w/ the 58mm focal length? like mostly 35mm environmental portraits, 50mm for streets, & 85mm for Portraits..
Maybe the auto focus is off, try shooting in live view if you're having trouble getting images sharp at 1.4
"On certain cameras-I can't even say" Could perhaps be referring to the Df?
Jared are you ever going to make those videos where you had people edit a single raw file and you'd show the different ones in a video?
Well no, you get high-end 1.4 lenses so you can shoot at 1.4 and get good results. It's not that your photos aren't sharp, they are. Your in-focus area is just extremely shallow, exacerbated by how close you are to your subject. Your f/5 etc. pictures look "sharper" mostly because more is in focus. I wouldn't consider that close of a distance an ideal use for a 58mm focal length. If you were to step back and shoot at 1.4, it'd be fine, and that's how you should have compared them.
Jared.
Do you have a light source coming in from the left (video-left, your right)? If yes, why the change in set up?
Hi Jared, recently a bought a 35mm 1.8f Nikon lens, and I noticed the lack of sharpness in the pictures at 1.8f. First I blamed it 100% to the shallow depth of field at 1.8f with the subject very close; but now when you mentioned it, it sounds like a technical limitation from the lens, and not just depth of field alone; Did I understand correctly?. Another question, I only have this lens plus the kit 18-55mm lens, should I keep using 55mm for portraits? Thanks.
What would one use a 58mm for? I can see dropping $1600 on a 35 1.4G or $300 on a 50 1.4G or $1600 on an 85mm 1.4G, but 58 seems like a strange length to me.
I like how you can see the person you were shooting walking around in the back ground - =O is it Allan?
WTF is going on with the captions? It sounds like it is the guy behind you.
Some people actually like the f/1.2 apature‘s so they can take night shots. I guess that little Point was not that important to you.
I believe you need to have better eyesight than I do to throw out my Nikkor 50 mm 1.4 G in favour of any of those 58mm glasses. By the way, you compared two shots, the one at f8 the other at f11.
From what I have heard this lens is supposed to be SUPER sharp and to give you amazing bokeh. But from what I have seen here it behaves just like almost every other lens wide open, as in it's a little soft. The 50mm 1.4G is sharp around f2 to f2.5 as well and I don't really see a reason to pay an extra 1000 bucks just for good bokeh...
Now I'm only going by the sample images that I saw in the video. Am I missing the point why this lens is so expensive?
Honestly I love the 58-60mm focal range (that becomes a 90mm on apsc) but the issue I see here is that the 58mm 1.4G seems to have the same softness issue as the 50mm 1.4G. I owned the 50mm 1.4G and compared it with my Sigma 1.4 HSM 50mm and Nikon 50mm 1.8G. These 2 lenses were sharper, the Nikon 50mm 1.8G being better at 1.8 than the Nikon 50mm 1.4 at the same apertures. the Sigma 50mm 1.4 HSM (non art) is an awesome lens for the price. It has beautiful colors and sharpness. I use it on my 16mp, 20mp D500 and 24mp D780. Highly recommended. The 85mm 1.8G is a better lens than the 58mm too.
are you going to review or at least talk about the new zeiss 55m 1.4 Otus
If you look at minute 8:45 you can see that the Noct was front focus on the lower center of the image...."the stitching" and not on his afro...
Youre right Marius wtf is the point of wasting that much money on a 1.4 if you have to stop it down to get it sharp!
why "processed slightly" I wouldn't do that if wanted to test the lens. its about the RAW file right!?
I just shot last weekend with my Canon A-1 Film, with 50mm prime f1.4 lens. BEAUTIFUL quality prime lens. Just need to get the equivalent on my Nikon now...
How much does it cost?? Can't understand :/
Finally someone who puts up RAW files
I buy my 1.4's for versatility, so if I want to or need to shoot at 1.4 I can.
and the Sigma 85 f1.4 focuses twice as fast as the Canon 85 L, and my Sigma 50 f1.4 is slightly sharper than my Canon 50 f1.4, and my 35 f1.4 is amazing, with all three of them you can get sharp images at f1.4 if you understand whats going to be in focus, but personally I usually use them at f 2.2 but sometimes less and sometimes more, if everyone wasn't so loyal to Canon and Nikon, they would not get away with there high pricing, I love that Sigma and Tamron are shaking up the lens market
what do you think about the free alternative to lightroom called lightzone? I´m just about to start using a dslr and shooting raw and don´t want to spend money on lightroom if I don´t have to (this will be only a hobby for me, don´t plan to earn money with it.....)
why didnt nikon do an update of the noct? (a new 58 1.2)
lol, how you smell the lenses
Hi, i am from spain and i have a canon 550D
What objective would you buy for it that has a cheap price?
Thanks ;D
Talking about stopped down performance is almost trivial. If you are shooting at F2.5 like you praised this lens for, the same can be done with the 50mm F1.8. Any of these primes should be "sharp" stopped down. The whole paint of the noct was to shoot wide open (and the control of saggital coma flare) , thus the focus for anyone looking at this new lens would also be wide open performance. Another big sticking point was Bokeh, and from the samples I saw earlier in the week on NR it looked to have onion rings in the highlights! Lastly nikon never made a noctilux, they made the NOCT.
wish he wouldn't talk crap and do a decent review
"people buy f/1.4 so they can shoot at 2.8 or 3.5 and have that sharpness bla bla bla"
Jared, you might wanna try a career as a genitor or something. Nobody on the planet pays that much for a lens and stops it down 2 stops. The other time in on one of you videos you were whining that "nobody uses tripods anymore". Really man you are just embarrassing your self and it's getting worse episode by episode.
You mean janitor?
@@mukmin01 Bro, 5 year old grammar police ticket? That's only marginally better then an 8 month old counter grammar ticket I'm giving you now. FYI Sharpness is relative Bud. Generally a f1.4 is sharper at 1.8 than and 1.8 is at f1.8 wide open...
You send your products to Brazil?
what store is that?
@2:00 Why is the guys head in the photo a bit concaved?
Hey Jared, could you please review the awesome Leica APO-TELYT-R 1600mm f/5.6 lens? :)
You're certainly not speaking for me, or many other photographers that prefer good, sharp images. I only shoot my lenses wide open out of absolute necessity. Otherwise, I'm buying a 1.4 to shoot at f/2 or so.
Why should i buy a 58mm 1.4 which is sharp af 5.6 or f8,i would prefer to get the normal 50 1.4 or 1.8,or just get the 24-70 2.8!
No deal for the nikon 58mm 1.4
I have heard Jared say in videos, he would only buy the Nikon or Canon Glass, no 3rd party glass for Mr.Polan, and it is because of people like him, that Nikon and Canon get away with charging so much for there glass, because anyone who is smart gets that some of the 3rd Party glass is just as good at 1/2 or even 1/3 the price, but sometimes not weather sealed, I personally own the Sigma 35/50/85 f1.4 lenses, for my 85 f1.4 I paid 1/3 the price of the Canon 85 L, and at f2.2 it's sharp as hell
when comes a new 200mm makro?
The 50mm F1.8G is so good already. at 200$.
No point to spent so much on that little extra performance.
The 58mm noct is a legend It renders so differently especially outside in the dark.
Would love to have 1 but i just don't have the money.
The 50mm F1.8G is good for ~$200 but it isn't a sharp lens.
Sascha Robitzki
www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-58mm-F14G-on-Nikon-D800E-versus-Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-50mm-F18G-on-Nikon-D800E___1254_814_435_814
Checkout yourself whether less then 10% extra is worth a 1500 premium
Sascha Robitzki
www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-58mm-F14G-on-Nikon-D800E-versus-Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-50mm-F18G-on-Nikon-D800E___1254_814_435_814
Checkout yourself whether less then 10% extra is worth a 1500 premium
BarnET0 I didn't say the 58mm is any better or worth the premium. I said the 50mm isn't sharp and when you look at the DxO field map you can see it isn't:
cdn.dxomark.com/dakdata/measures/NikonD800E/Result/DakResult/Nikon_AF_S_Nikkor_50mm_F18G/MTF_v2/MTF_ACUTANCE_50mm_f1.8_small.png
The 58mm looks actually worse at f1.8:
cdn.dxomark.com/dakdata/measures/NikonD800E/Result/DakResult/Nikon_AF_S_Nikkor_58mm_F14G/MTF_v2/MTF_ACUTANCE_58mm_f1.8_small.png
Sascha Robitzki
I think the 50mm f1.8g is a damn Sharp lens. No lens is sharper for it's price that I am aware off.
Of course it ain't an 14-24mm or an sigma 35/50mm art. But it's a whole lot lighter and cheaper too.
My same exact thoughts....its meh wide open it seems. Not just from this review, many others as well.
Unless they know what they're doing...I came to terms a while ago that shooting at maximum apertures is often like shooting at a camera's hi 1 or hi 2 ISO.
Do review on the sony 135mm f/1.8 Carl Zeiss.
I have the sony 50mm zeiss 1.4 only$1,499 comes with a 1 year warranty :(
50mm 1.8G blows my mind at f1.8 and colour is awesome. if you are super rich then ok - but if its not sharp at f1.4 what's the point????
the point of this lenses is not to shoot at f1.2 or f1.4 it's all about the astonishing sharpness starting at f1.8, pro photographers usually shoot from f1.8-3.5 with such lenses
by the way i got the 50mm 1.8g and I am more than content with this lens !!!
I know plenty who buy primes to be sharp at the lowest f-stops - depends on the shooter :)
Well canons 50mm 1.2 is also around $1500-1600. Its expensive because its sharp glass. Good glass costs money.
Is f1.4 now considered Nocta?? I guess I have 2 Nocta lenses already then in my Nikon 50 and my 85. LOL!
why do i spend half the video watching the Staff in the background?
The 24-70mm is nowhere near as sharp as the 50mm 1.4 or 58mm f/1.4 (hell, the 50mm f/1.8 is arguably sharper at certain apertures). This lens is quite sharp at 1.4, from what I saw in this video is that the focus / angles weren't executed well to shoot at 1.4. Such large apertures take time to master and learn how to properly shoot at such a wide aperture, I just think these examples don't do it justice, but like any other lens, there is a specific sweet spot you have to find.
Is it the perfect portrait lens for DX?
You should do a video on the Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4!
What's the point in spending $1600 on a lens that isn't sharp at the maximum aperture. They don't make the Canon 85mm 1.2 so you can shoot it at F8. If i buy 1.2 or 1.4 I want to use it at those apertures with some decent quality.
$1699!? Holy shit.. You can buy the new full frame Canon 6D AND a Canon 50mm f/1.4 for that price...
But why on earth is it so expensive? Does anyone know? The Canon 50mm f/1.4 is around $280... I don't get why that 58mm is around 6 times more expensive.
I bought my sigma 50mm to shoot at 1.4 from time to time but I love shooting it 2.8-5.6 the most. its so sharp and buttery. im sure this lens is super sharp and really nice but id rather buy a 105 F2 for the cost honestly
People don't buy an f1.4 lens to shoot at f1.8 and f2 lmao
And really? A lens is sharp at f8 and you're praising it? A broken Canon 50mm f1.8 is sharp at f8 lmao
The sigma f1.4 lenses beats this overpriced piece of shit. Nikon definitely paid you
I agree, he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. However, the 58mm f/1.2 Noct-Nikkor is a classic, extremely sharp, very well-corrected lens, even wide-open, so at least that part is true.
I prefered clear shoots starting at 2.8 to 4.5
So when it came to the Zeiss Otus there you had "eyes problems" and here when it is Nikon Noct - suddenly you are praising it sky high? How much do Nikon pay you?
AminTheMystic .... in real world use, it seems the 50 f1.4 is just as sharp for about $1200 less. Nikon should have made it more sharp at f1.4 because, the Noct was all about use at night, the new one should be as well.
singletrack29349
I am objecting to something else.
- -
The Otus range was built to take advantage of these new high mp cameras.
50mp Canon and Otus 50/85.
Dream combo. I bet it would really give Medium format the run for its money.
When you weight it up like that then it really is quite a bargain.
- -
No one is suggesting you buy something like d7200 dx format and then go out and get Otus.
AminTheMystic Oh, yeah.... 5DS and an Otus is pretty hard to beat, so long as you can work in the 5DS' limited ISO. Which, honestly, shouldn't be a problem for most.
On another note.... The A7RII and a 85 Batis would also beat the pants off this Noct...
singletrack29349
Limited? Again the comparison isnt fair. 50mp competing with MF. And with that high pixel count, it isn't all that limited. 5DS is NOT for something like sports photography. Although this is quite possible.
- -
Plus, it would be interesting to see how the A7R2 stacks up against the Canon. Especially given how Sony are making better sensor.
AminTheMystic Hard to say since we haven't seen files from the A7RII yet.... It's hard to say any of these options are "bad" unless you shoot a lot of action.
Nikon didn't call it the Noctilux, they called it the Noct-Nikkor
The guys in the background are the real stars here....
Dxomark says the 58mm isn't so good. Why are you so hype on it? The 85mm is the best Dxomark auto lens ever so wouldn't it be best to just go with that when ever possible?
For portraits, in any case, the 85mm lens is better than the 58mm lens.
Dell Schanze See this is the exact problem some photographers just don't understand. Sharpness, is one characteristic of a lens. Of many, such as bokeh, rendering overall, colour, tone, microcontrast, in and out of focus fall off transition, CA, spectrochromatism. I shoot a 135mm f/2 because of its LOOK alone, nothing else. This 58 lens is sharp, I don't own it and I can tell you nikon aren't going to put out a lens that isn't sharp and useable at this price. But it is, totally and utterly, made for the bokeh so you expend some ultimate pixel peeper sharpness perhaps. A lens is a paintbrush and I see some stunning images with this one in expert hands.
Dell Schanze I shoot portraits with Helios 58mm f/2 , amazing sharpness,even wide open,swirly bokeh!
what camera you use
How about 58/1.4 vs 85/1.4g
isn't every lens sharp at f8 ? :)
3:28, is that a reference to the DF?
always Noct nikkor 58mm f:1,2
1.4 is more sharp then the 1.2 noct,but it become bigger and the aperture down to 1.4
thanks for compare these two lens
2:29 , That's the guy whose pictures keep popping up .......
The whole idea of this lens is to be sharp WIDE OPEN from Corner to Corner or why bother spending that kind of money??
image viewer app's name please..
Lightroom 5
4 minutes in and I had to stop the video. Awful awful awful awful. From the sample photos that were quite shocking, the lame acting of that dandelion-headed guy who shoots RAW, apparently. Smelling a lens...?
Come on, the gear is more important than the photography now. All that you need to do is spend your time unboxing lenses and pixel peeping shots of a brickwall. Today's definition of professional photographer is defined by how much you spent on your gear.
Maybe he’s a covers over head when he farts in bed type guy? 🤔 Don’t answer Jared, I don’t want to know. 😂
WOW, 5 years warranty??? Here in the UK Nikon only give us 2 years warranty if we register it in 30 days otherwise its 1 year and they pretty much only do that because the EU forced them to do something about having more than just 1 year. Really wish Nikon UK treated their customers as well as Nikon USA treat theirs
For that price, it (the new 58mm 1.4) should be sharp at f/1.4. It isn't. Not in this, and not in everything else that I've seen and read. If you are interested, do yourself a favor, spend less, and get better image quality with a Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art, which is just coming out now.
According to your old friend Ken Rockwell, "Noct" means "nocturnal".
A few years after this video you just can not only say it but also, you love it! :P
Why the hell would be stop? It's his brand!
Newbie here. What sort of photography would these lenses suit best - insects, portraits? And is it just about tack sharpness or is stuff like colour or reflection (along with bokeh) that are also involved in a choice of a low-f-number lens? Also, I've been told that the Sweet Spot is not on or close to the extremities of the lense's f-setting. Is that right? Wondering if this varies between lenses, like the ones Jared compared?
You would be looking for Macro lenses that are around the 100mm Focal length. They will be able to photograph small objects very well and are very good for portraits as well.
it is spelled NIKON. not NAYKAN.
and if you want a sharp lens at 1.4 then buy a sigma 50/1.4.
I am happy with my 50 1.8 that I paid $75.00 for. Very sharp lens
It's 2024....
I bought mine in 2018 for $600 from a disaffected owner who wanted "tack sharp" Nikkor 58mm NOCT 1.2 replacement and didn't get it....
...So I already earnt $1000 from just two live shoots with this overspecced little bugger... NGL my customers just seem to absolutely love the photos of their dogs/kids/parents/significant others that I take with this "Useless unsharp POS" piece of glass.
Now look, TBH, I don't care whether I feel this hunk of chunk performs anywhere near my Sigma ART f/1.xx.... I care what my paying customers think.... And they seem to love this "aberrant planed, barely focussed" piece of glass. I am a simple girl... I'm here to service their needs and never complain when someone opens their wallet wide af.
In the paraphrased words of Tarzan... They Pay... Me Play....
Hey Jared, great video my question which I see in the comments if you had to choose Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G or Nikkor 58mm f/1.4? Does the 58mm make that much of a difference?
i guess so. cause you'll get the 1.5x crop factor, it will be an 85mm lens :)
Seeing how the original 1.2 lens cost about 3.5-4k on average....this lens is a bargain :P
6:25
At 1.4 and 1.8 I agree is not sharp, but after 2.5...