• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / Nikon Z6/7 / Nikon 58/0.95 Noct vs Zeiss Otus 55/1.4 on Z7, Siemens star, corner

Nikon 58/0.95 Noct vs Zeiss Otus 55/1.4 on Z7, Siemens star, corner

August 9, 2024 JimK Leave a Comment

In the last post, I compared on-axis performance of the two lenses. Inb this post, I’ll look at the lower left corner.

The particulars:

  • Edelkrone Tripod X Pro
  • Arca Swiss C1
  • Manual exposure
  • EFCS
  • ISO 64
  • Delay set to 5 seconds
  • Six shots per f-stop
  • Target centered
  •  f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8
  • Shutter speeds: 1/500, 1/250, 1/125, 1/60, 1/30, 1/15 seconds
  • Developed in Lr with default settings except for white balance and sharpening set to 0

Crops at 250% magnification:

Nikon 58/0.95 Noct corner at f/1.4

 

 

Otus 55/1.4 on Z7, corner, f/1.4

The Noct is much sharper. The Otus has much more astigmatism and light falloff.

Nikon 58/0.95 Noct corner at f/2

 

Otus 55/1.4 on Z7, corner, f/2

The Noct has much more contrast. The Otus astigmatism is much reduced, but is still apparent. It is most obvious when focusing on the star with peaking turned on. You can see the sharp region rotate around the star as you move the focusing ring.

Nikon 58/0.95 Noct corner at f/2.8

 

Otus 55/1.4 on Z7, corner, f/2.8

The Noct has much greater contrast still.

Nikon 58/0.95 Noct corner at f/4

 

Otus 55/1.4 on Z7, corner, f/4

Now they’re much closer, with the Noct still ahead.

Nikon 58/0.95 Noct corner at f/5.6

 

Otus 55/1.4 on Z7, corner, f/5.6

This pair looks quite similar.

Nikon 58/0.95 Noct corner at f/8

 

Otus 55/1.4 on Z7, corner, f/8

For some reason (aperture calibration?) the Otus seems less affected by diffraction here.

The main difference between the two lenses on the Z7 at common f-stops is that the Noct has much better corner performance when the lens is open wide. Of course, the Otus can’t make an f/0.95 exposure, but I didn’t need any testing to figure that out.

 

 

Nikon Z6/7

← Nikon 58/0.95 Noct vs Zeiss Otus 55/1.4 on Z7, Siemens star on axis Hasselblad XCD 135/2.8 vs Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar, Siemens star on axis →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • Štěpán Kaňa on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Štěpán Kaňa on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.