OP
OP
Horatio
Allowing Ads
He also lists a G ED VR zoom as one of Nikon's 10 best!
-
Welcome to Photrio!Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.Click here to sign up
Nikon G lenses - good, bad or meh?
-
A
- Thread starter Horatio
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Leica M9 not working sensor _ for repair
- Started by Manual Camera
-
Want to Buy WTB: 4x4 Resin 81B Filter
- Started by NortheastPhotographic
-
For Sale LINHOF SUPER TECHNIKA III VERSION 5 with Raptar 135, film holders and FP4
- Started by Simon Benton
-
For Sale LINHOF TECHNIKA III ver 5 LENSBOARDS
- Started by Simon Benton
-
Sold KODAK COLOR THERMOMETER F
- Started by Jon Shiu
Forum statistics
Proving the correctness of my very low assessment of KR.
OP
OP
Horatio
Allowing Ads
Just a thing I tie up for brookies in the spring. Cannot remember who showed me that one.
Mal Paso
Allowing Ads
I have 5 G lenses for my D810 and am often stunned by the image quality. Distant tree branches are sharp and clear right down to the pixels at 36MP. I'm sure they will hold their own through a couple generations of sensors, they are now at 45MP. I did not buy the fastest lenses either. The 70-200 is f4+, someone else can carry the f2.8, I was looking at a picture of Pt Sur Lighthouse from 2 miles and you can see antennas and french window panes, the detail is amazing. It's way past 2 1/4 film and knocking on 4x5 Film's door. From the lenses I have I think optically they are keeping up.
You can see and correct chromatic aberrations in the new photo programs. That 70-200 shows minor fringing at the edges if you have your nose to a 3 foot print. Zooms were never that good when I had 35mm film.
You can see and correct chromatic aberrations in the new photo programs. That 70-200 shows minor fringing at the edges if you have your nose to a 3 foot print. Zooms were never that good when I had 35mm film.
Chan Tran
Allowing Ads
It's true that Nikon made the G lenses to save cost but since all newly introduced lenses are all G lenses so some of them are the best Nikon made.
Haven't experienced a bad one. Most of the ones I've used have had a cheap loose feel to the controls if used manually. The photos are fine just an "experience" thing. I am a fan of Nikon's manual focus glass so I'm accustomed to that solid well damped feel which the G lenses lack. Somewhat understandable since they're made for AF use. My biggest dislike with them is the internal focus motor. Had failures........they begin squeaking on focus and eventually just stop. Cost more to repair than the lenses were worth new. Of course we're talking about consumer grade lenses here. When going pro level I prefer Ais lenses.
It is not a question about the quality of the optics, it is about the lack of the aperture ring, the loss of control and the inconvenience.
Huss
Allowing Ads
Actually it proves that you are incorrect as I have validated his view in actual images. By actually using the gear.
Outside not having an aperture ring, what issues do you have with these lenses that actually matter i.e in the creation of images?
Huss
Allowing Ads
There aren't any bad G lenses.
People who are ruining this thread by whining about aperture rings are not answering the question, but that's never mattered to them.
It's quite amusing that those same people who are up in arms about missing aperture rings have no problem using cameras like the F100 that no longer have traditional shutter speed dials..
Anyway, G lenses are super. Difference between them tends to be in build quality/max apertures etc.
If you want useful advice, fredmiranda.com has lots of very helpful people.
Mal Paso
Allowing Ads
I was shooting this morning and the aperture "ring" was a wheel under my thumb with the exposure at the bottom of the viewfinder. I can't imagine anything more convenient. It's just different that's all.
The plastic bayonets for plastic lens hoods doesn't thrill me but if that's the tradeoff for outstanding optics...
What I found Totally Weird was focusing past infinity. I used to rely on the fact that lens focus rings stop turning at infinity, no more. LOL
The plastic bayonets for plastic lens hoods doesn't thrill me but if that's the tradeoff for outstanding optics...
What I found Totally Weird was focusing past infinity. I used to rely on the fact that lens focus rings stop turning at infinity, no more. LOL
The F100 has a shutter speed dial. The G lenses do not have an aperture dial. Which is the point. If some of your equipment was removed, you would have something to say about that.
Many of us have watched what KR has written and his articles are often not accurate and are more often off base. He just does not cut the mustard, but he does cut the cheese.
I all not stopping at infinity is definitely a failure.
Huss
Allowing Ads
The shutter speed dial is not the same as the traditional dial. Like it is not the same as the traditional aperture ring. it is now just a little dial on the front or back of the camera, that happens to be the same dial as what controls the aperture depending on what mode you are in.
Funny how no problem with that set up for the shutter, but OH MY GAWD HOW CAN I CONTINUE when it comes to selecting the aperture.
I do not like the trend to put all the controls to be operated by the control wheel.
There were two original questions:
1. "Nikon G lenses - good, bad or meh?"
2. "... how do they compare optically to older AF Nikkors?"
I own two G lenses. The 18-55mm which was given to me as a gift and the 14-24mm f/2.8 auto focus which I bought because there was no comparable D zoom lens available. I was unable to answer the second original question because I have no older auto focus Nikkor lenses do use for a comparison.
My original response to the first original question was, "I do not know and I do not care" because if I cannot use G lenses on my favorite manual focus and manual exposure film camera (the Nikon F2) and if I can only partially use it on my favorite auto focus and auto exposure film camera (the Nikon F4), I have little use for it.
However, not that I think about it, a Nikon F-mount lens that will not work on my Nikon F-mount cameras is a bad lens. I have Zeiss, Vivitar, and Tamron F-mount lenses that work better on my F2 and F4 cameras than my two G lenses.
In conclusion, I do not consider myself whining about aperture rings. I am merely expressing my opinion and explaining why I have little use for G lenses.
Booohooo look at me I'm whining about a lens made in 2021 not working with my camera from the 60s. Give me a break.
On a serious note, what is the original question about? Optically there are good and bad G lenses just like there are good and bad AF/AFD/AIS/AI/pre-AI lenses. In general though any mid/pro level G lens made today will be objectively (ie test charts and all that boring claptrap) better than anything else. Period. Done. The future does not wait. Just like a 2l turbo petrol engine today gets 200bhp and 50mpg vs a 5l engine of the 50s that makes 150bhp and burns a barrel a mile. I'm sure the 5l sounds better but that is is not a measurable metric when it comes to "better", it falls into the subjective criteria that has nothing to do with going from A to B, efficiency and other measurable metrics.
So Nikon G lenses. Good, bad or meh? Well...which G lens. And versus which old AF Nikkor? And on what features? Compatibility with a 50 year old camera? Optical performance? Focus smoothness? Or just subjective personal preference? I do not understand how someone can jump from "I have no use for XYZ" to "therefore all XYZ are bad".
Canon got this right 40 years ago. You either use a manual camera or you use an electronic one. No confusion or cross over in between.
On a serious note, what is the original question about? Optically there are good and bad G lenses just like there are good and bad AF/AFD/AIS/AI/pre-AI lenses. In general though any mid/pro level G lens made today will be objectively (ie test charts and all that boring claptrap) better than anything else. Period. Done. The future does not wait. Just like a 2l turbo petrol engine today gets 200bhp and 50mpg vs a 5l engine of the 50s that makes 150bhp and burns a barrel a mile. I'm sure the 5l sounds better but that is is not a measurable metric when it comes to "better", it falls into the subjective criteria that has nothing to do with going from A to B, efficiency and other measurable metrics.
So Nikon G lenses. Good, bad or meh? Well...which G lens. And versus which old AF Nikkor? And on what features? Compatibility with a 50 year old camera? Optical performance? Focus smoothness? Or just subjective personal preference? I do not understand how someone can jump from "I have no use for XYZ" to "therefore all XYZ are bad".
Canon got this right 40 years ago. You either use a manual camera or you use an electronic one. No confusion or cross over in between.
Last edited:
The 200mm f/2 is a G ED VR lens. Must be crap.
StepheKoontz
Allowing Ads
Right. Lets see someone simply mount a 70-200mm f2.8L on an AE1.
And I honestly can't believe anyone praising the ergonomics of a top mount shutter speed dial over a thumbwheel.
The Nikon F2 was not from the 60s. I was manufactured from 1971 to 1980.
Also, during that time, Nikon advertised that they made obsolescence obsolete.
The optical prescription could be the same or better or worse, its that packaging that is disappointing.
Mal Paso
Allowing Ads
Bill Gates said 640KB of memory was all anyone would ever need.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |