Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor  (Read 1227 times)

sanvandur

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 93
    • http://www.santiagovanegas.com
Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« on: June 29, 2018, 11:20:20 AM »

Most Milvus vs Nikkor reviews Iíve read indicate the Milvus has the edge on image quality. Iím unsure how they stack up next to their Nikkor (primes) counterparts. Is the image quality so good that itís worth sacrificing AF and VR from the Nikkors? I primarily shoot landscape, street/travel, fashion and would be using a D850. Any thoughts? Thanks!
« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 11:26:17 AM by sanvandur »
Logged

henrikfoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 884
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2018, 04:39:39 PM »

For landscape I think you will not miss af.

When shooting people and you use a small f.stopp, I would say the af is
almost crucial. A small increase in pc will be very easy to loose if the focus is just 95%
accurate. I use both, but for people I allways use af. (unless they are very still and I have much time).

Good AF is gold!
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11234
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2018, 05:52:48 PM »

My view is that the Zeiss glass was clearly superior 5 years ago, but with recent releases such as the 105mm f1.4, 70-200 f2.8 E FL, 19mm T/S, 24mm f1.8, 28mm f1.4,... Nikon has caught up in technical qualities and is now overall ahead in terms of look.

I have only kept my Otus 55mm f1.4 and have sold my other Otus in favor of the Nikon equivalent. The Otus 28mm and 85mm were still a tiny bit better but the lack of AF, less rugged build, higher weight and bulk were far from compensating the slight advantage in image quality.

Cheers,
Bernard

sanvandur

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 93
    • http://www.santiagovanegas.com
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2018, 06:25:03 PM »

My view is that the Zeiss glass was clearly superior 5 years ago, but with recent releases such as the 105mm f1.4, 70-200 f2.8 E FL, 19mm T/S, 24mm f1.8, 28mm f1.4,... Nikon has caught up in technical qualities and is now overall ahead in terms of look.

I have only kept my Otus 55mm f1.4 and have sold my other Otus in favor of the Nikon equivalent. The Otus 28mm and 85mm were still a tiny bit better but the lack of AF, less rugged build, higher weight and bulk were far from compensating the slight advantage in image quality.

Cheers,
Bernard

This is very good to know. Thanks so much for your insight! One thing though... Iíve read that many of the new Nikkor primes are very plastic and have a cheap feel to them. True?
« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 06:54:37 PM by sanvandur »
Logged

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1791
    • Pieter Kers
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2018, 08:06:53 PM »

This is very good to know. Thanks so much for your insight! One thing though... I’ve read that many of the new Nikkor primes are very plastic and have a cheap feel to them. True?

i dropped my nikkor 24mm 1.4 lens 4m down on a concrete floor and the driafragma had to be repaired the lens itself was still perfect, even the alignment.
That said the 14-24mm nikkor is more complex and sensitive; if you drop that it the lens alignment is off and it will cost you ...

I can understand metal feels tougher than plastic, but then i think of the knights with their chain armor fighting against the Mongols that were dressed in silk shirts.
They could pull out the arrows with the shirt and were much faster...
Logged
Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu

sanvandur

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 93
    • http://www.santiagovanegas.com
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2018, 09:21:09 PM »

i dropped my nikkor 24mm 1.4 lens 4m down on a concrete floor and the driafragma had to be repaired the lens itself was still perfect, even the alignment.
That said the 14-24mm nikkor is more complex and sensitive; if you drop that it the lens alignment is off and it will cost you ...

I can understand metal feels tougher than plastic, but then i think of the knights with their chain armor fighting against the Mongols that were dressed in silk shirts.
They could pull out the arrows with the shirt and were much faster...

Good thing Iím not planning to fight any Mongols ;)
« Last Edit: June 30, 2018, 10:20:50 AM by sanvandur »
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11234
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2018, 10:46:49 PM »

Most of my nikkors look like new after months or years while the soft rubber focusing ring of the Otus looked old after a few weeks of usage.

The D810 on which my Otus 55mm f1.4 was then mounted fell once from the top of a 40l backpack (a 50cm fall maybe) on a hard wood flooring and that cost me 800 US$ in repair...

Cheers,
Bernard

sanvandur

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 93
    • http://www.santiagovanegas.com
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #7 on: June 30, 2018, 08:47:07 AM »

What do you think of the image quality of the Zeiss compared to the Nikkors?

Two23

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #8 on: June 30, 2018, 09:33:53 AM »

I shoot mostly landscape-type stuff, and have settled on the Sigma Art lenses for the most part.  These are sharper than their Nikon counterparts, sometimes considerably so.  Most testing websites (e.g. LensRental) suggest they match the Zeiss.  According to DxO the sharpest lens you can put on a Nikon is the Sigma 85mm f1.4.  That said, for landscapes my most used lens is the Nikon 24mm PC-E.  Just can't beat the versatility of that lens!  If I had the $$ I'd have the new Nikon 19mm PC-E instead.  That's my dream lens!  I can't imagine not owning a shift lens or two.


Kent in SD
Logged

sanvandur

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 93
    • http://www.santiagovanegas.com
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #9 on: June 30, 2018, 10:21:46 AM »

Most of my nikkors look like new after months or years while the soft rubber focusing ring of the Otus looked old after a few weeks of usage.

The D810 on which my Otus 55mm f1.4 was then mounted fell once from the top of a 40l backpack (a 50cm fall maybe) on a hard wood flooring and that cost me 800 US$ in repair...

Cheers,
Bernard

Ouch! Live and learn ;)

sanvandur

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 93
    • http://www.santiagovanegas.com
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #10 on: June 30, 2018, 10:31:00 AM »

I shoot mostly landscape-type stuff, and have settled on the Sigma Art lenses for the most part.  These are sharper than their Nikon counterparts, sometimes considerably so.  Most testing websites (e.g. LensRental) suggest they match the Zeiss.  According to DxO the sharpest lens you can put on a Nikon is the Sigma 85mm f1.4.  That said, for landscapes my most used lens is the Nikon 24mm PC-E.  Just can't beat the versatility of that lens!  If I had the $$ I'd have the new Nikon 19mm PC-E instead.  That's my dream lens!  I can't imagine not owning a shift lens or two.


Kent in SD

Didnít know that about the Sigma lenses. Good to know. From all Iíve read online, Iíve yet to come across a review that says the Nikkor image quality surpasses the Milvus. Price aside, Iím undecided whether or not im willing to sacrifice the Nikon AF for a MF Milvus. Iím transitioning from medium format (a P30+ and DF body I used for 10 years), so Iím accustomed to not having super AF. If anything, I shot MF most of the time. But reading all that the Nikon D850 AF is capable of, itís tempting to try a *real* AF system. On the flip side, coming from a Phase One system, image quality is paramount to me. Iím not an action shooter. Most of what I shoot is either very slow moving, or doesnít move at all. So if IQ between the Nikkor primes and Milvus is significant, Iíll go with the Milvus. If not, Iíll succumb to the AF Nikkors. Ahhhhh!!! Too much awesome gear out there!
« Last Edit: June 30, 2018, 10:56:33 AM by sanvandur »
Logged

Two23

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #11 on: June 30, 2018, 02:24:39 PM »

Didnít know that about the Sigma lenses. Good to know. From all Iíve read online, Iíve yet to come across a review that says the Nikkor image quality surpasses the Milvus. Price aside, Iím undecided whether or not im willing to sacrifice the Nikon AF for a MF Milvus.


Since I shoot weddings and family portraits on weekends, I definitely was not willing to give up AF.  I researched it for months and tried several different lenses.  The Sigmas aren't just sharp, they are astounding.  I couldn't decide between the 35mm & 50mm f1.4 as both were so excellent, so I ended up keeping both! :)  They have the Zeiss performance and Nikon AF.  The top ones are the Sigmas 20mm f1.4, 35mm, 50, and 85mm.  On a DX camera no other lens comes close to their 18-35mm f1.8 & 50-100mm f1.8.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigma-85mm-f1-4-art-lens/5
https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/lensrentals-tests-best-50mm-lenses-sigma-50mm-art-whows-again/
https://www.dxomark.com/sigma-20mm-f-1-4-dg-hsm-a-canon-lens-review-picture-perfect/

https://www.dxomark.com/best-lenses-for-the-nikon-d810-part-ii-wildlife-and-landscape-primes-and-zooms/


My own "standard" bag is:
1. Nikon 24mm PC-E.  I can shift the lens sideways to make wide panos with it.
2. Sigma 50mm f1.4.  Extreme sharpness and f1.4.
3. Nikon 105mm f2.8 Micro.  Sharp mid-tele AND macro for fungus etc.
4. Nikon 300mm f4 PF.  Lightweight & sharp for wildlife.



Kent in SD


Logged

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1791
    • Pieter Kers
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #12 on: June 30, 2018, 07:04:15 PM »

My own "standard" bag is:
1. Nikon 24mm PC-E.  I can shift the lens sideways to make wide panos with it.
2. Sigma 50mm f1.4.  Extreme sharpness and f1.4.
3. Nikon 105mm f2.8 Micro.  Sharp mid-tele AND macro for fungus etc.
4. Nikon 300mm f4 PF.  Lightweight & sharp for wildlife.
Kent in SD

I agree the 50mm sigma is a very fine lens; i also have the 85mm sigma 1.4 that has the same quality.
the 300 pf lens is one my favourites; handheld 1/30s sharp is possible with the d850 - but not with the two Sigma lenses!  amazing VR and rendering and very light.
Logged
Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11234
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #13 on: June 30, 2018, 08:50:07 PM »

Sigma makes very fine glass for sure. I currently still own the 35mm f1.4, but previsouly owned the 20mm f1.4 in Nikkor and Sigma mounts and the 85mm f1.4 in Sigma mount.

The 35mm is very sharp but I am not a big fan of its look. I find the Nikkor 35mm to be superior from that standpoint.

I sold the 20mm in favour of the Nikon 19mm T/S which is superior for landscape.

The 85mm is very nice for sure but I prefer the Nikon 105mm f1.4. Just as sharp but a nicer look IMHO.

Cheers,
Bernard

sanvandur

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 93
    • http://www.santiagovanegas.com
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #14 on: June 30, 2018, 09:52:22 PM »

Thanks to you guys, Iíve now read up on the Sigma Art lenses. The reviews are all pretty solid, except two things.
1. There seems to be less love for the Sigma Art 50mm 1.4. Iíve read several times people saying itís super sharp, well built, but has ďno characterĒ.
2. Apparently, many have needed to buy the Sigma usb dock to calibrate the AF on their new Art lenses. So, theyíre great, but as long as you calibrate the AF yourself with the Sigma dock? Shouldnít they leave the factory calibrated already? Are these isolated incidents or is this a common problem?
« Last Edit: June 30, 2018, 10:54:15 PM by sanvandur »
Logged

Two23

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #15 on: July 01, 2018, 12:43:39 AM »

Thanks to you guys, Iíve now read up on the Sigma Art lenses. The reviews are all pretty solid, except two things.
1. There seems to be less love for the Sigma Art 50mm 1.4. Iíve read several times people saying itís super sharp, well built, but has ďno characterĒ.
2. Apparently, many have needed to buy the Sigma usb dock to calibrate the AF on their new Art lenses. So, theyíre great, but as long as you calibrate the AF yourself with the Sigma dock? Shouldnít they leave the factory calibrated already? Are these isolated incidents or is this a common problem?


1. Highly subjective.  I like the look I get.
2. I've had to calibrate all my lenses to some degree, no matter the brand.  The D850 has a built in function for that.


Kent in SD
Logged

sanvandur

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 93
    • http://www.santiagovanegas.com
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #16 on: July 01, 2018, 12:50:01 AM »


1. Highly subjective.  I like the look I get.
2. I've had to calibrate all my lenses to some degree, no matter the brand.  The D850 has a built in function for that.


Kent in SD

1. True
2. Will the D850ís built in function work on Sigmas, or only Nikon lenses?

Thanks!

Two23

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #17 on: July 03, 2018, 08:09:38 PM »

1. True
2. Will the D850ís built in function work on Sigmas, or only Nikon lenses?

Thanks!


Don't have the D850--waiting for the price of used ones dropping below $2,000.  So, can't comment.  Have had no trouble calibrating with D800E or D810 though.


Just stumbled across this thread:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1513352


Kent in SD
« Last Edit: July 03, 2018, 08:42:34 PM by Two23 »
Logged

scrane

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #18 on: July 05, 2018, 08:53:34 AM »

I find the Nikon 28/2.8 AIs and Zeiss 35/2 ZF comparable in IQ. I also find the Nikon 105/2.5 AI or AIs comparable to the Zeiss 100/2 ZF. I believe both these ZF lenses are the same design as their Milvus counterparts. I give the edge to Zeiss in color and contrast. The Nikons are considerably lighter and more compact.
Logged

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1791
    • Pieter Kers
Re: Zeiss Milvus vs Nikkor
« Reply #19 on: July 05, 2018, 01:37:57 PM »

1. True
2. Will the D850ís built in function work on Sigmas, or only Nikon lenses?

Thanks!

1 like the look of the sigma 50...
2 yes you can calibrate the sigma with the nikon body..
the dock has the ability to calibrate on three distances... so i prefer that method. I get tack sharp images at f1.4 - 46MP


in general
infinity is usually the most difficult thing for AF precision especially with wide angle lenses
Logged
Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up