Jump to content




Photo
- - - - -

Nikon 85mm f/2.8D PC Micro Nikkor


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

Poll: Rate this lens (25 member(s) have cast votes)

Rate this lens

  1. 1 Star (appalling) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 2 Stars (below par) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. 3 Stars (average) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. 4 Stars (above average) (2 votes [7.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.69%

  5. Voted 5 Stars (outstanding) (24 votes [92.31%])

    Percentage of vote: 92.31%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Dallas

Dallas

    Fotozones Owner

  • Administrators
  • 18,177 posts
  • LocationDurban, South Africa
  • Edit my pics?:Yes

Posted 29 October 2007 - 15:40

Please post your opinions of this lens here. This topic will be indexed on our LENSES page. Kindly keep your comments related to your experiences with this lens, but feel free to share your images with us in this topic.

Support Fotozones:  

Amazon.com | Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.de | Adorama | B&HThinkTankPhoto | Digital REV | OWC 

Alternatively you can DONATE via PayPal (donor list)

 

Follow Me On: social-facebook-box-blue-icon.png social-twitter-box-blue-icon.png YouTube-icon.png google-icon.png 


#2 plantae

plantae
  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 17:15

really excellent lens, one of the best nikon ever made...
PLANTAE - natural perception
http://www.plantae.sk

#3 annette

annette
  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • LocationFrance
  • Edit my pics?:Yes

Posted 02 October 2012 - 22:19

I have had this lens for 3 weeks now. It takes some getting used to, but once you have got your head round it, it is even possible to shoot insects handheld and quickly... It is also an excellent lens for all sorts of structural detail - distortion free and razorsharp.
The bokeh is wonderful.

the only pity is the maximum ration of 1:2. But the I have tried it with a TC14C and it works fine.
hint to moderator - this lens should NOT be in the autofocus section-

#4 percafluvialitis

percafluvialitis

    Advanced Member

  • Subscriber
  • 354 posts

Posted 06 January 2013 - 16:00

I've had the manual focus Nikkor PC-E 85/2.8D for about 6 months now, it mostly sees use on the D800 as that's my body for product photography. It's a special tool which does not see use every week, but for specific jobs it's the best tool available.

Superb sharpness, I am convinced it can resolve more lpm than the D800 sensor because performance is superbly "flat out" all the way from f/4 to f/11. Wide open corners are just a hint less sharp than center, but still very good. Outstanding detail from f/4 to f/11, throughout the full frame. Even at f/16 the lens still draws excellent detail - outstanding!

There's no vignetting to worry about, there is no geometric distortion at all and CA is virtually untraceable throughout the frame (only a very small hint of it wide open, but that's nit-picking to be honest). The bokeh is very good, I have used it once for portraits just to try it out. In my opinion it's too sharp for portraits, none of my clients want that much skin detail!

I use it a lot for macro work and product photography (floors & panels especially), to fill in the perspective "gap" between the 60/2.8G AF-S and 105/2.8G AF-S lenses. This is also the reason why I am not posting samples unfortunately, I am not 100% sure clients are OK with posting unretouched images (the retouched ones wouldn't tell the truth of the lens anyway).

The only "weak point" I can find is that the tilt/shift locking knobs are plastic and just like my 24/3.5D PC-E it is possible to twist them too hard and break them. Did it once, never will happen again (thankfully NPS service fixed it for free).
Vilhelm

#5 Dan Brown

Dan Brown

    Advanced Member

  • Subscriber
  • 201 posts
  • LocationFort Worth
  • Edit my pics?:No

Posted 08 November 2013 - 05:45

Optically, this lens is easily a five. But, i sold mine because it is too slow and methodical for my style of shooting. I use the 60 Micro instead.

#6 JohnBrew

JohnBrew

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 929 posts
  • LocationFolly Beach, SC

Posted 08 November 2013 - 12:12

Anyone use this lens for landscape?



#7 nfoto

nfoto

    Fierce Bear of the North

  • Administrators
  • 16,649 posts
  • LocationOslo, Norway
  • Edit my pics?:No

Posted 08 November 2013 - 12:31

Certainly. It is perfectly suited for landscapes. Sometimes I stitch several frames sometimes not.


Bjørn

#8 photoArne

photoArne
  • Life Member
  • 8 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 09 November 2013 - 20:35

Certainly. It is perfectly suited for landscapes. Sometimes I stitch several frames sometimes not.

Excatly, I have the first version of this lens which has the advantage of beeing able to used on other DSLR camera with a simple adapter.  The downside is having to stop the lens down before taking the picture.

Opticaly excellent, and as Bjørn noted, a good FL for stitches.



#9 Eb Mueller

Eb Mueller

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 1,269 posts
  • LocationChilliwack, BC, Canada
  • Edit my pics?:Yes

Posted 09 November 2013 - 22:31

I'd like to use a PC-E for landscape.  Been ruminating on the subject for several years.  But which one, since I can't afford all?  I suppose the answer is that one would adapt subject matter to the lens!  The 45 PC-E is not listed among the Nikon lenses here on NG.  On naturfotograf.com, it is rated 4.5 to 5, rather than the unequivocal 5 for both the 24 and 85mm. 

 

Bjørn, what is the reason for the slight downgrade?  I have been thinking that the 45 would be a compromise and also better suited to stitching landscapes, less distortion and approximating a wide field similar to the 24mm.  (Interesting that the 45mm. tends to be about 10% cheaper at retail compared to the 24mm.)


Eb Mueller
British Columbia, Canada
http://www.pbase.com/emueller

#10 nfoto

nfoto

    Fierce Bear of the North

  • Administrators
  • 16,649 posts
  • LocationOslo, Norway
  • Edit my pics?:No

Posted 09 November 2013 - 22:44

A 4.5 rating is still indicative of "pro" quality ... Not having access to field notes at present, but as I recall there was some slight CA issues involved.
Bjørn

#11 Airee

Airee

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 2,073 posts
  • LocationLille
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 09 November 2013 - 23:03

that's also what I observed (reddish fringes). I do not have the 85, but I do have the 24 which is better than my 45. The 45 is nevertheless very good, and beats the 55 micro nikkor in every respect (but distortion) for general photography - so it must be good. Did not compare them close up.


Edited by Airy, 10 November 2013 - 08:01 .


#12 Eb Mueller

Eb Mueller

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 1,269 posts
  • LocationChilliwack, BC, Canada
  • Edit my pics?:Yes

Posted 10 November 2013 - 00:20

Thanks, Bjørn and Airy, that explanation helps!  Now, what a dilemma for me, in considering either the 24 or the 85!  Last year, this time, I was about to pull the plug on the 24.  But, unexpectedly, I had to put the money into a new computer.  Either lens, would cover peaks in my historical usage pattern.  In usage of my main general purpose lenses (14-24, 24-70, 70-200) the peaks reside at 24mm and 70mm.  I'm going to give the 85 good consideration.  It will also be useful for my macro applications, focus stacking, etc.


Eb Mueller
British Columbia, Canada
http://www.pbase.com/emueller

#13 JohnBrew

JohnBrew

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 929 posts
  • LocationFolly Beach, SC

Posted 10 November 2013 - 02:43

I rented a 45 and was quite taken with it. So I bought one, but it had color casts and red fringes and I returned it. I've also shot the 24 which is great for architecture but not so good stitching. I have the 85 1.4G, which I have been using for stitching and I must say it has produced some of my sharpest images. I will have to think about the 85 PC-E for a while...

But I appreciate everyone's input on these lenses.



#14 Airee

Airee

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 2,073 posts
  • LocationLille
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 10 November 2013 - 08:04

peak usage at 24 and 70 may only signal that you had the wrong zoom mounted, but did not bother changing it ;)



#15 Eb Mueller

Eb Mueller

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 1,269 posts
  • LocationChilliwack, BC, Canada
  • Edit my pics?:Yes

Posted 10 November 2013 - 16:09

That has the ring of truth!  24-70 is main lens and I only switch if the extremities don't work for me.


Eb Mueller
British Columbia, Canada
http://www.pbase.com/emueller




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users





An appeal to all Fotozones visitors: please help me to keep this site going by starting your gear purchases using any one of the affiliate links shown below:

Amazon.com | Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.de | Adorama.com | thinkTank Photo | DigitalRev.com | OWC | B&H or Donate via PayPal

Starting your shopping here doesn't cost you anything more, but by using the links above (or any others found on the site) you are advising the affiliate that you support this website. This results in a small commission that helps with the running costs. If your preferred outlet isn't among those listed above you can also support the site by making a donation of any amount via PayPal (no PayPal account required). Any donation will be most appreciated.