More than you want to know about lenses, updated.. This article originally appeared in the Nikon DSLR Report, issue #6. A lot has happened both in cameras and lenses since I wrote that article. But that article was also my basic treatise on how to make decisions amongst lenses. Thus, I've decided to take the time to do a thorough update to the article and post it here for everyone to partake.

A long and full assessment of the best lenses for Nikon digital bodies.

Nikkor lens reviews for Nikon DX and FX cameras. Review manufacturer specifications and detailed lab measurements for the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens. Compare the specs and measurements of this lens. AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR AF-S TELECONVERTER TC800-1.25E ED. Special-Purpose.

• Lens Reviews - Nikon / Nikkor (APS-C) Please note that the tests results are not comparable across the different systems! Please visit our Nikon Forum.
• Active topic Active hot topic Inactive or read topic. Used FM Forums Nikon Forum Join Upload & Sell.

If you read the original, you can skip down to the section labeled . Original: 5/1. 9/2. Update: 4/8/2. 00. Auto Mouse Click Software Utility Free Download there.

Shop the latest DSLR cameras, compact cameras and camera Accessories from the official Nikon USA site. Choose the right photography camera and accessories.

Update: 2/1. 9/2. Update: 2/1. 2/2.

Some Background. As most of you know, I get dozens of emails every day from Nikon users, and a large group of them fall roughly into the “what lens should I get” category. Before we go there—I’m sure you all know what I mean by “there”—we have to get a few other things out of the way. In terms of image quality, the biggest investment you make is in lenses, the second biggest is in a support system, and the smallest is in the camera/film. Digital SLRs distorted that a bit, but consumer DSLR body prices have come down to where that’s right again, and even for us pros we've almost all got far more invested in lenses than we do our DSLR and backup bodies. Things were a little more obvious in the days of yore (and the nights, too), when anyone could see that the primary difference between an N6. F5 shooting Velvia lay mostly in the feature set of the body, not in the ultimate image quality.

After all, Velvia was Velvia, and assuming everything else equal, an N6. F5. Sure, we could argue about a few minor things, such as mirror slap, but as Galen Rowell once discovered, it’s a heck of a lot easier to get an N6. F5. And his pictures didn’t suffer for those times when he did that. With digital, things got much messier. A three- megapixel camera has some obvious deficiencies compared to a six- megapixel camera, for instance, as it simply has fewer sampling points across the same area, and that has a direct impact on resolving power. Same thing with the six- megapixel to twelve- megapixel leap. But noise tendencies, dynamic range, antialiasing filters, sensor size, and color fidelity also vary amongst the DSLRs, as I’ve outlined in my reviews and books, and at least two of those things (antialiasing) come directly into play when evaluating lenses, if not all of them.

Be that as it may, I can still tell when I put a bad lens on any one of the DSLRs I own. The better the body, the more obvious this is, but even with a “lesser” body you’ll see a difference if you know what you're looking for.

And when you think about it, this really isn’t any different than putting a very fine- grained, high- quality film in your 3. SLR (e. g., Provia) or a bigger grained, muddier film (e.

Kodachrome 2. 00) in the same body. It wouldn’t matter which of those films I put into my F1. I’d still see the difference between a “good” lens and a “bad” one. It’s just that the better film or a better sensor makes it easier to see the difference. Before we get to the lenses themselves, we need a brief aside about how resolution works on digital SLRs.

The pixel pitch, the filtration over the sensor, and the lens all combine when it comes to our ultimate resolving ability. But let’s go back to film for a second. Back when we all shot Velvia, the resolution possible with our equipment was defined like this: 1 / Resolution = ( 1 / Lens. Thus, when we shot only with Velvia and moved around between cameras, the film value stayed the same and our ultimate resolving power was really only determined by any change in the lens.

Put one lens on a film camera loaded with your favorite stock and you got one resolving ability; put another on and the resolving ability changed. Switching films generally didn’t make a big difference, as the variability of resolving power of most films professionals used was not particularly high. With digital, we have more variables, though it’s still the same type of equation that we use to describe the relationship: 1 / Resolution = ( 1 / Lens. Note that raw files wouldn't be impacted by the last factor. There is the implication, however, that different conversions may produce slightly different resolution results, which is borne out in practice.) Suddenly we have several variable factors, as those last three things all vary from DSLR to DSLR. I think everyone knows by now that the D2h doesn’t have an aggressive antialiasing filter, but it also has fewer photosites; this combination actually produces pretty reasonable resolution (lens being the same) compared to what you’d expect against a 6mp camera such as the D1. ASIC that reduced resolution comparatively. Install Mac Os On Windows Laptop.

If you look closely at the equation I just presented, the D8. E should immediately leap to mind: it has the highest pixel count of any Nikon mount DSLR (to date as I write this, plus non AA filter). Increasing the sensor pixel count by a factor of 3x (over all the 1.

A weak lens on a strong sensor can compromise the overall resolution obtained. So, one thing to remember as we move deeper into our evaluation is that “good lenses” are not the only determiner in our ultimate resolving ability. If you look at a lens on a D1. D7. 00. 0 or D8. 00 will produce a different sense of how good it is. Ditto a D1 versus a D3x.

Given my unique position of having tested most every combination along the way, I can make somewhat more definitive conclusions than you might be able to if your data set is only one DSLR and a handful of lenses. Our goal here is to find the . Here are some other elements (pardon the pun) that come into play when making a decision about the image quality of a lens: Good Lens.

Bad Lens. Even exposure edge to edge. Visible light falloff in corners. Chromatic aberration controlled. Obvious color fringing on edges in corners or in near/far out of focus areas. Straight lines are straight. Linear distortions of straight lines. High acuity (defined edges)Low acuity (fuzzy edges)High contrast.

Low contrast. Little or no flare tendencies. Significant flare or ghosts in back light. No color shifts. Lens coating shifts colors. Excellent bokeh in out- of- focus areas. Clear artifacts in out- of- focus areas. The preceding table is about image quality considerations.

A lens could also be dinged for mechanical aspects: Good Lens. Bad Lens. Focus/Zoom rings smooth in operation. Focus/Zoom rings sloppy or stiff in operation. Doesn't zoom on its own.

Obvious zoom creep. Good weather protection/sealing. Poor weather protection/sealing. Clear and useful focus and zoom markings. Missing or unclear focus and zoom markings. Autofocus is zippy and doesn't hunt.

Autofocus is slow and hunts. Autofocus can be overridden. Autofocus cannot be overridden. VR, preferably with flexible settings. Lack of VRSolid and adjustable tripod mount/collar. Flexing in mount, non- adjustable mount/collar. Finally, we have basic design decisions: Good Lens.

Bad Lens. Fast aperture (f/2. Slow aperture (f/5. Wide focal length range (zooms)Small focal length range (zooms)Useful focal length (fixed)Odd or less useful focal length (fixed)Close focusing distance. Long focusing distance. Internal focusing (no front rotation)External focusing (front element rotates)Some users get excited by metal lenses and are bothered by plastic, or whether it has an aperture ring or not, but as long as the lens is otherwise well specified and made, I simply don’t care about these “religious” issues. Price point is another contentious issue, but in general, you get what you pay for (I'll try to point out some obvious bargains when we get to the actual lenses). It ought to be obvious by now that lens designers juggle an enormous number of factors when they design a new lens.

The preceding lists are just the tip of the iceberg, actually. Fortunately, we don’t need to drop below the surface and examine the keel; the list so far is enough to keep us busy for far too long as it is. One principle that’s necessary to understand, though, is that there is no such thing as a “perfect” lens.

Nikon Lens Specifications.