[LRflex] Elmarit vs. Nikkor Part Deaux
- From: bob palmieri <rpalmier@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 17:07:03 -0500
Folks -
As some who might be interested in such things may recall, last week
i was somewhat shocked to discover that in a comparison of nearfield
performance between 2nd version Nikkor 105mm f2.5 and 1st version
90mm f2.8 Elmarit R lenses the Nikkor didn't look so great. I have
since uncovered some reliable info which puts this into perspective.
On Nikon's website there is a fair amount of good info on lenses,
including some writings by the company's lens designers on some of
the iconic lenses. The full relevant piece on this lens can be found
at:
http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/portfolio/about/history/nikkor/n05_e.htm
but the interesting part for me is the following:
"...at portrait distances the correction for aberration seems to be
slightly insufficient. The insufficiency as far as spherical
aberration in particular is what makes defocus background appeared
beautiful. The aberration balance has been calculated carefully for
use in portraits. When the aperture is open contrast is good, and
delineation is soft."
It would seem that the particular set of tradeoffs in this design
allow for a lens that shows great acuity at longer distances (even
wide open, as far as I can see) while also offering good bokeh in
general and softer behavior for close-up for portraiture.
So, I took the thing out on a gig (shooting the Columbian musician
Lucia Pulido wide open on my 20D) and was quite pleased with the
results:
http://www.pbase.com/bobsworld/image/76529169
(A coupla other examples can be seen by hitting the "previous" &
"next" buttons when this screen comes up.)
The very nice bokeh shows up well in this (combo-cutsie-creepy) shot
(closeup. but stopped down to 5.6):
http://www.pbase.com/image/76574471
So, instead of taking the cynical view that the Nikon folk are making
excuses for soft closeup performance I'm buying the rap that this
undercorrected spherical aberration is an integral part of the lens'
fingerprint. Also, the whole business makes me feel OK about my
usual "lens test" M.O., which is to spend a few days figuring out
both what the thing does great and also where the bodies are buried.
Then I go out, both forewarned & forearmed, and shoot.
Bob Palmieri
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
