Nikon Z6 and Z7 mirrorless
- Thread starter Scots_quine
- Start date
Roger tests at least 10 copies of each lens so is consistent if nothing else.
I very rarely see a disparity between lens charts and real world photos. For example my Tamron 85 1.8 according to dxo resolves every pixel of my D810 and yes I can count the eye lashes and f*** me that lens is Razer Razer sharp.
Dxo tells me my Nikon 58 1.4G is softer and real world testing matches that but of course that lens offers a rendering and 3D look that produces remarkable images (albeit without counting the eyelashes when it comes to pixel peeping time)!
I very rarely see a disparity between lens charts and real world photos. For example my Tamron 85 1.8 according to dxo resolves every pixel of my D810 and yes I can count the eye lashes and f*** me that lens is Razer Razer sharp.
Dxo tells me my Nikon 58 1.4G is softer and real world testing matches that but of course that lens offers a rendering and 3D look that produces remarkable images (albeit without counting the eyelashes when it comes to pixel peeping time)!
When you’re tracking, the evf does take a little behaviour adjustment. You are always playing catch-up, but not by much.
I do like shooting at Hi extended though, it’s great for tracking a sequence.
I must stress, I am NOT a birder, so my technique won’t be up to much, my only observation for this thread is that I preferred the D810 because it gives me a touch more resolution when working at the long end of a long lens. So a Z7 may fix that for me. I can’t justify buying a Z7 at this time.
Every other aspect of the Z6, I love.
I do like shooting at Hi extended though, it’s great for tracking a sequence.
I must stress, I am NOT a birder, so my technique won’t be up to much, my only observation for this thread is that I preferred the D810 because it gives me a touch more resolution when working at the long end of a long lens. So a Z7 may fix that for me. I can’t justify buying a Z7 at this time.
Every other aspect of the Z6, I love.
Nope not remotely the same. Roger is completely transparent about his testing, there is meaning to his MTF measurements and he is a reliable source of information as long you understand how he does his testing. You can even chat him up and he'll fully reply to your questions as long as they are meaningful. He is also a member of dpreview where I have had several conversations with Roger and co.
Dxomark on the other hand is a blackbox, they aren't transparent about their testing, full of contradictions especially on their mostly meaningless and/or pointless p-mp sharpness score they have invented. But dxomark has sharpness field maps that are actually somewhat reliable especially to judge how lens performs across the frame at different apertures.
Dxomark on the other hand is a blackbox, they aren't transparent about their testing, full of contradictions especially on their mostly meaningless and/or pointless p-mp sharpness score they have invented. But dxomark has sharpness field maps that are actually somewhat reliable especially to judge how lens performs across the frame at different apertures.
Cool, it's still all semi confusing numbers to me but it's good someone does it for those who care about this stuff. Being a member of DPR is a con though lol, even the mods on there are below the trolls on here 
yes, I am a member, but it's much more a drop in and out quickly kind of place.
I do peep at dxomark now and then when researching a lens, but always then ask myself why I don't just go by actual user reviews. Even someone who's testing 10 copies rigourously does not have time to actually get their ass out and use the thing in the real world, not for very long at least.
yes, I am a member, but it's much more a drop in and out quickly kind of place. I do peep at dxomark now and then when researching a lens, but always then ask myself why I don't just go by actual user reviews. Even someone who's testing 10 copies rigourously does not have time to actually get their ass out and use the thing in the real world, not for very long at least.
Last edited:
It's completely confusing numbers to me, still can't get my head around MTF's 
This means nothing to me
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/05/just-the-mtf-charts-micro-43-lenses/
This means nothing to me https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/05/just-the-mtf-charts-micro-43-lenses/
Cool, it's still all semi confusing numbers to me but it's good someone does it for those who care about this stuff. Being a member of DPR is a con though lol, even the mods on there are below the trolls on here yes, I am a member, but it's much more a drop in and out quickly kind of place.
I do peep at dxomark now and then when researching a lens, but always then ask myself why I don't just go by actual user reviews. Even someone who's testing 10 copies rigourously does not have time to actually get their ass out and use the thing in the real world, not for very long at least.
yes, I am a member, but it's much more a drop in and out quickly kind of place.I do peep at dxomark now and then when researching a lens, but always then ask myself why I don't just go by actual user reviews. Even someone who's testing 10 copies rigourously does not have time to actually get their ass out and use the thing in the real world, not for very long at least.
Roger is pretty open about his testing. He only has the time to measure the lenses at infinity (and we know lens perform differently at different focus distances, for example macro lenses). He also makes measurements using lab equipments rather than through the actual cameras pretty much like for manufacturers do the tests and release MFT charts. His tests are good to understand how a lens might perform at infinity just in terms of sharpness if everything is perfect. Since he also tests multiple copies it rather good to find out if certain lenses have more or less sample variation to look out for.
Real world user reviews are subjective and generally have a certain amount of confirmation bias. They also have their place in the world of course
Last edited:
They will, especially as they score the poorly regarded Sony Zeiss 24-70mm f4 higher than the Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8
The worrying thing is that I've used DXO when looking for lenses in the past (not solely thankfully) but this has made me realise that it's a load of poop. Having used all 3 lenses I can say that the 24-70mm f4 is the sharpest I've used.
Whilst real world reviews are subjective I think I will take more from them than DXO in the future as they tend to go with my findings, ie the Sony Zeiss 24-70mm f4 is a bit soft considering it's price point, yet the Nikon is super sharp.
The worrying thing is that I've used DXO when looking for lenses in the past (not solely thankfully) but this has made me realise that it's a load of poop. Having used all 3 lenses I can say that the 24-70mm f4 is the sharpest I've used.
Whilst real world reviews are subjective I think I will take more from them than DXO in the future as they tend to go with my findings, ie the Sony Zeiss 24-70mm f4 is a bit soft considering it's price point, yet the Nikon is super sharp.
Last edited:
It's completely confusing numbers to me, still can't get my head around MTF's This means nothing to me
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/05/just-the-mtf-charts-micro-43-lenses/
This means nothing to me https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/05/just-the-mtf-charts-micro-43-lenses/
As long as you can get the gist it's probably good enough for your use case. If you spend a little time reading and comparing a few of those you'll see some are better than others. That basically all you need to work out rather than what each individual number means
They will, especially as they score the poorly regarded Sony Zeiss 24-70mm f4 higher than the Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8
The worrying thing is that I've used DXO when looking for lenses in the past (not solely thankfully) but this has made me realise that it's a load of poop. Having used all 3 lenses I can say that the 24-70mm f4 is the sharpest I've used.
The worrying thing is that I've used DXO when looking for lenses in the past (not solely thankfully) but this has made me realise that it's a load of poop. Having used all 3 lenses I can say that the 24-70mm f4 is the sharpest I've used.
There is a how to read MFT chart guide on that page
As long as you can get the gist it's probably good enough for your use case. If you spend a little time reading and comparing a few of those you'll see some are better than others. That basically all you need to work out rather than what each individual number means
As long as you can get the gist it's probably good enough for your use case. If you spend a little time reading and comparing a few of those you'll see some are better than others. That basically all you need to work out rather than what each individual number means
TBH I've tried to understand them in the past but it still alludes me. Bit odd really as technical stuff is usually my forte, I guess I just have a mental block with this
They haven't tested any of the Samyang offerings for Sony either, they still can't figure Fuji X trans out and looks like they won't bother to, there's also gaps in their M43 list - the Sigma 16mm 1.4 being an example there with many reviewers claiming it as one of the sharpest primes for the system - DXO didn't even bother. Nor the 56 1.4
Just seen this on Thom Hogan's site, does make you wonder?
Screen Shot 2019-05-30 at 08.35.06 by TDG-77, on Flickr
Either way, mine is sharp as a sharp thing so I'm happy
.
Either way, mine is sharp as a sharp thing so I'm happy
.
They will, especially as they score the poorly regarded Sony Zeiss 24-70mm f4 higher than the Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8
The worrying thing is that I've used DXO when looking for lenses in the past (not solely thankfully) but this has made me realise that it's a load of poop. Having used all 3 lenses I can say that the 24-70mm f4 is the sharpest I've used.
Whilst real world reviews are subjective I think I will take more from them than DXO in the future as they tend to go with my findings, ie the Sony Zeiss 24-70mm f4 is a bit soft considering it's price point, yet the Nikon is super sharp.
The worrying thing is that I've used DXO when looking for lenses in the past (not solely thankfully) but this has made me realise that it's a load of poop. Having used all 3 lenses I can say that the 24-70mm f4 is the sharpest I've used.
Whilst real world reviews are subjective I think I will take more from them than DXO in the future as they tend to go with my findings, ie the Sony Zeiss 24-70mm f4 is a bit soft considering it's price point, yet the Nikon is super sharp.
At the time Sony came out it got compared to canon EF 24-70 f4 which is a stunning lens but also a fair bit larger and got severely criticized for not matching it.
But I'll admit I haven't extensively used both lenses just enough to know its not for me.
Last edited:
Just seen this on Thom Hogan's site, does make you wonder?
Screen Shot 2019-05-30 at 08.35.06 by TDG-77, on Flickr
Either way, mine is sharp as a sharp thing so I'm happy
.
Either way, mine is sharp as a sharp thing so I'm happy
.
It's a bit worrying for potential buyers! I have to admit I have looked up the Z6 and that lens package more than a few times here, as I am an ever pondering eejit
But I just know I will forever be searching and I do like the look of that kit plus adapter. But if I chanced it from afar, and got a bad copy, I'd be very depressed
I was going to have a play with Silver FX but my copy of Nik Collection didn't transfer across to my new computer for some reason, and now that google no longer own it it's not free anymore
https://photorumors.com/2016/03/24/nik-collection-now-available-for-free/
Just seen this on Thom Hogan's site, does make you wonder?
Screen Shot 2019-05-30 at 08.35.06 by TDG-77, on Flickr
Either way, mine is sharp as a sharp thing so I'm happy
.
Either way, mine is sharp as a sharp thing so I'm happy
.
I'm not convinced that the sample variation is THAT large among the new S lenses -- Thom said in fact he's found an overall consistency which was previously lacking. Sigma were notorious in their sample inconsistency but they've upper their game of late since the ART lenses hit the scene. Samyang were even worse but they're starting to bring out premium versions as well. I got myself a copy of the notorious cheapo 14mm f2.8 locally which gives me a month to fully test. It's not a stellar sample but yet there are clearly far worse out there.
As for DxO, I've never paid much attention to them, I'm afraid and wouldn't trust them with a bargepole.
Couple from Mondays outing to the Surrey County Show
Both with the 24-70 f4
1
Up and Over.jpg by Trevor, on Flickr
2
Heading your way.jpg by Trevor, on Flickr
Both with the 24-70 f4
1
2
Another from the 14-30
Delivered on May 23rd 1945
Note the M1 Carbine mounted to the dashboard
DSC_1945-Edit.jpg by Trevor, on Flickr
Delivered on May 23rd 1945
Note the M1 Carbine mounted to the dashboard
Last edited:
- Messages
- 5,624
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- Yes