Maybe 3D pop isn't a crock of bull after all....?

bigeaterbigeater Posts: 36Member
In a Japanese magazine called DC Match, a couple of Nikon engineers were being interviewed and one of them piped up with this interesting observation about the difference between the 85mm 1.4 D and G as tested on their newish lens evaluation system called OPTIA. It's a terrible translation but here's the gist:

" Sharpness etc. are better for the newest designed G lens, but...the three-dimensional characteristics etc. are rather better for the D lens There was also a part thought. Although the residual aberration is generally smaller for the G lens, the D lens realizes well-balanced depiction by leaving aberrations well."

Does that jibe with your experience? Ignoring sharpness, does the D version do better at 3D rendering than the G?

Here's a link to the Google Translate version of the story

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=ja&tl=en&u=https://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/621449.html

Comments

  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,916Member
    Cannot speak about the 1.4G, but I loved the 1.4D when I rented it for a few occasions. Images really did have a sense of pop that some of the newer glass cannot duplicate, which is why I’ve gone back to some of the older D series glass in some cases. At some point I would like to own the 1.4D, but it’s hard to justify give the other glass I ready have.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
Sign In or Register to comment.