carl hervol Loc: jacksonville florida

Sounds to me it a bunch of bull

carl hervol Loc: jacksonville florida

It must have ben on a bath room wall.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

My 50mm f1.4 Nikkor is very sharp.
No complaints, I believe some one had to be messing with your head.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Boulderdash!

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

Absolutely a false claim...... Your sensor determines the size of the photo. let's just say as long as you use lenses design for your camera they will be great. you have a full frame camera use full frame lenses we won't get into the discussion of DX lenses for now, but your sensor determines the megapixels of your picture not the lens. And the d850 can absolutely handle a fast lens.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

As I explained in my earlier post on this thread, Perceptual Megapixels is a metric developed by DXOMark, to rate lens-camera combinations. If a camera is 50mp, and they report that a particular lens on that camera has 25 PmP, that does not mean that it is reducing megapixels. If you look at another lens, like the Sigma Art 50mm F1.4, it may have 45 pmp on the same camera body. That means that if you are looking for a good lens for that body, the Sigma Art will be about as good as it gets. PmP is actually a percentage when considering sharpness. Mind you, sharpness is a completely qualitative, perceptual and subjective concept - there is no number that one can attach to the notion of sharpness - there are far too many variables involved in judging sharpness.

But a lens that shows 45 PmP on a 50mp sensor is returning 90% of the camera's "sharpness". A lens that shows 25 PmP only 50%. A theoretically "perfect" lens would return 50 PmP. When you take such a fuzzy concept and someone like Tony Northrup turns it into word salad because he doesn't quite grasp or just wants to be controversial to drive up the click count on his website and youtube channel, it's not hard to come to the conclusion that a lens can reduce pixel count.

This well written article explains it nicely:

http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/lens-articles/what-is-sharpness.html

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

Gene, I may have read something into the ops post, ie size, which had been brought up before.

You are right about sharpness.... It does matter......

SuperFly48 Loc: NE ILLINOIS

Have 4 Nikkor manual focus lenses from my film days, all those lenses were made in Japan. Glad I did not sell them off. All 4 did OK on a D7100; however they all do very nicely on a D850. The 28mm f/2.8 does nice work in low light and after dark. Also have a 50mm f/1.4; 55mm f/2.8 Macro and 200mm f/4 with built in sun shade. I like them all.

tsca Loc: USA

Me too

DaleHarper

I was very interested in the comments following this article as I too have heard similar. What I would like to add to the discussion is the variable of F-Stop and optical quality of the lens.

I have come to the conclusion that as the D850 is such a large mpx sensor (even when you used the mRaw 24mpx setting), a lot more things are visible; noise, camera shake and imperfections on the lens. The camera is very unforgiving.

With my Nikon 50mm 1.4 (on my D850), anything below 3.2 is soft, below F2 is absolute mush - even when using the EVF.

Do other people find this the case or do I have some other type of issue? BTW - At 3.2+ the camera is sensationally Sharp!

Bill_de Loc: US

I use a Nikkor AF 50mm F/1.4D on my D850. It was one of three lenses I bought with my first Nikon, an F100. It has been used on at least a half dozen camera leading to the D850. Never have I found the performance lacking.

---