Nikon lenses wide/normal - sharpness comparison at short distances

[armand]

I'm doing these tests for my own benefit to figure out what lenses to take with me in a future trip but I thought I should share my conclusions with you.

I'm not going to attach the photos unless somebody asks for a specific shot, too much time to put them together.

Testing conditions: flat chart at about 1.5-2 m away (too cold and too lazy to do the longer distance yet), shot at "landscape" apertures: 5.6, 8, 11, 16. Sharpened as per my routine (F16 got more).

@ 24 mm
24 F1.8 _ 24-120 F4 _ 18-35 F3.5-4.5

24 vs 24-120
Center: while the 24 has at times a small advantage for practical purposes they are very close at all apertures (again: 5.6-8-11-16)
Corners: there is no comparison, the 24 is by far better at all apertures. The sad part is that the 24-120 barely improves in corners with decreasing the apertures, even at F16

24 vs 18-35
Center: the 24 is a better at F5.6, otherwise they are very close
Corners: the 24 is much better at 5.6, and from there the difference is decreasing: better at F8, a little better at F11 and only a little better in extreme corners at F16

24-120 vs 18-35
Center: very similar, give or take
Corners: the 24-120 is worse at F5.6 (with a little better contrast though) and from there the difference is even bigger in favor of 18-35.



@ 35mm
18-35 vs 24-120

Center: they are very close
Corners: the 18-35 is a little worse at F5.6 and F8, even worse at F11 but a touch better at F16


@ 50mm
24-120 F4 vs 50 F1.8G

Center: the 50 is a little better at all apertures
Corners: I was surprised to see that my copy of 50 is definitely worse in corners at F5.6, a little worse at F8, about the same at F11 and a little better at F16


Next will be from 70 to 200/300 in various combinations of lenses

[kers]

It is sad Nikon has not made a decent 50mm standard lens;

I do not think it is 'your copy'
I had/tested Nikons 50mm's and 58mm ..
Both 50mm lenses miss good ( nano) coatings and are just too made too cheap. I still have the 50mm 1.8G because it is so light and tiny.
the 58 is soft but has something special ; very good coatings/contrast and colours and a very short area of sharpness.
I am afraid you have to buy the sigma to get a good 50mm. It is one of Sigma's best lenses.
In this case Lenscore is in line with my experiences.

[AFairley]

I was stunned at how poor th corners were with my 50 1.8, returned it immediately, sticking with my 55 f2.8 AF Micro, an oldie but goodie and cheap as dirt for what it is.