Author ArchiveJust got a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 and wanted a quick test to see where it stands in terms of IQ. My next choise is my ultra sharp Sigma 30mm f/1.4 which easily outperforms my Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D. 1. The test is of low quality (handheld) since I intented it to be a quick hands-on check. But…from the result I got, I won’t bother doing another. The two lens are not comparable 2. Tokina has A LOT of CA…I shot in RAW and saw them, I shot in jpg and in some conditions D90 didn’t manage to get rid of them all !!!! At jpeg though the CA are almost non-existent (see the SRS logo in the border crops). 3. The center of the Tokina doesn’t seem to get better from f/4 onwards…This means that either the resolution outperforms my eye’s resolution or CCD’s resolution (Nikon D90) or is it’s top res. Can’t decide ! 4. The corner crop is actually …BORDER…not Corner. As far as I saw, Tokina’s borders was 0.5 stop better than corner so do the maths. I didn’t do the corner crop since sigma is a very nice lens and I do not want to ruin it’s reputation… 5. As I see from photozone.de , 11mm is not Tokina’s best (14mm supposed to be the best) but again…I won’t bother do another test at 14mm ! 6. Camera is a Nikon D90, standard picture settings (no sharpnening) and test was done at ISO200 with ceiling bounced flash (in order to exagerate the CA). This is a simple amateur ISO performance test of the Nikon D90. The test was done with Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D , manual focused at 50cm. No sharpening or NR is applied on camera. The crops are from camera jpg. 1st image (circuit) is with average fluorescent light. Here, even at ISO3200 the iso performance seems (to my eye) excellent ! At the 2nd image (low tungsten light) we have a slightly different performance. Up to ISO800 I think the result is excellent. But at ISO1600 I see a difference in colour (small) and noise kicks in. But the image is still very clean and totaly usable. ISO3200 looses much in colour and noise becomes apparent not only at the shady part of the images. Smudging also seems more intense than the 1st image. But again, the image is very good and I don’t see too much of that annoying chroma noise. ISO6400 however is bad. The image has very bad colour. Noise is more visible allover the image an in the dark areas you see very much white spots and chroma noise. I don’t think that 6400 is usable except at extreme conditions. Santa gave me a new lens (and a camera) to play with…here is a quick test. Notes: Nikkor costs ~100Euro and Sigma ~370Euro. All tests done with Nikon D90 , no sharpening on camera, jpeg (so you won’t see any CAs) large, no PP. All crops are 100%.
08
06
2008
 
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 vs Nikkor 18-55 f/3.5-f/5.6 (Nikon D60)Posted by jous in Cameras, Lenses, NikonI recently bought a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 to accompany my Nikon D60. At first I was disappointed with some severe issues with front focus. It was really bad since I could see it even at long range photos. But, the local Sigma service point did it’s best and tweaked the sigma to my body. The results was astonishing. A strange thing is that Sigma overexposes about 0.7EV. But you can fix that (if you want) quite easily by setting a -0.7EV on your camera. On the comparison there are various shots from f/1.4 to f/16 and all are compared to the Nikkor 18-55 VR. The last, is the normal kit lens that comes with the D60 and it’s quite good. You can see below the Original image (scaled) taken at f/8 with the Sigma (EV-0.7). Ready to see the tests ? Read on… |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Entries (RSS)