For the past few years, we have seen many manufacturers push for a lot more resolution. With sensor ISO performance pretty much leveling across the field on most cameras, manufacturers are now pushing to increase the resolution to differentiate new cameras from their predecessors and the competition. Except in some cases, as it turns out, increasing camera resolution is pretty much pointless if lenses do not have enough resolving power to be able to provide enough detail.
While testing lenses, I have been able to compare a number of DSLR lenses from Nikon and other third party manufacturers on both 36 MP and 45 MP sensors. As I expected, I found most Nikon F lenses unable to resolve over 36 MP, sometimes even over 24 MP (for many zoom lenses). That’s nothing new, considering that Nikon has previously issued different lists of recommended lenses for high-resolution cameras like D810 and D850. However, even many of the recommended lenses for the Nikon D850 turned out to be not good enough for 45 MP sensors, as I demonstrate below.
Table of Contents
Prime Lenses
Below is Nikon’s list of recommended prime lenses for the D850, along with my remarks on each lens’ performance on both D810 and D850 camera bodies:
- PC NIKKOR 19mm f/4E ED (exceeds 36 MP at f/5.6)
- AF-S NIKKOR 20mm f/1.8G ED (exceeds 36 MP at f/2.8)
AF-S NIKKOR 24mm f/1.4G ED(resolving power less than 36 MP)AF-S NIKKOR 24mm f/1.8G ED(resolving power less than 36 MP)PC-E NIKKOR 24mm f/3.5D ED(resolving power less than 36 MP)- AF-S NIKKOR 28mm f/1.4E ED (sharpest Nikon F tested, exceeds 36 MP at f/2)
AF-S NIKKOR 28mm f/1.8G(unable to resolve past 36 MP)AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.4G(unable to resolve past 36 MP)- AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G ED (exceeds 36 MP at f/4)
PC-E Micro NIKKOR 45mm f/2.8D ED(unable to resolve past 36 MP)- AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4G (barely over 36 MP at f/4)
- AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED (not lab tested)
AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G(resolving power less than 36 MP)AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.8G(resolving power less than 36 MP)- PC-E Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/2.8D (exceeds 36 MP at f/5.6)
- AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4E ED (exceeds 36 MP at f/2)
AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED(unable to resolve past 36 MP)AI AF DC-Nikkor 105mm f/2D(resolving power less than 36 MP)- AI AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2D (not lab tested)
- AF-S NIKKOR 200mm f/2G ED VR II (not lab tested)
- AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II (exceeds 36 MP at f/4)
- AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR (exceeds 36 MP at f/4)
- AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR (exceeds 36 MP at f/4)
- AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4G ED VR (exceeds 36 MP at f/5.6)
- AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4E FL ED VR (exceeds 36 MP at f/4)
- AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4E FL ED VR (exceeds 36 MP at f/4)
- AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR (exceeds 36 MP at f/5.6)
As you can see, even Nikon’s list of recommended lenses for the D850 isn’t ideal. Many of the lenses weren’t able to resolve more than 36 MP, with some lenses like the Nikon 24 MP f/1.4G ED, PC-E 24 MP f/3.5D and DC 105mm f/2D being quite poor in resolution, even when stopped down. Other lenses like the Nikon 58mm f/1.4G barely made it, with only one sample out of three demonstrating solid sharpness at f/4, but at the huge expense of the corners due to heavy field curvature. The exotic super telephotos obviously shine, but surprisingly, some of the older lenses like the Nikon 400mm f/2.8G VR, or the Nikon 600mm f/4G VR were already not good enough for 45 MP sensors.
Take a look at the below MTF charts for the Nikon 24mm f/1.8G, measured both on Nikon D810 and D850:
Note: For the above results, I provided “the best” potential results from 3 different samples when testing them on both D810 and D850 bodies. That’s why the corner results, as well as results at some apertures like f/2.8 are different.
As you can see, while the D850 has noticeably more resolution, the MTF numbers for both cameras hover around the 3300 range at f/4 and they never actually increase. This shows that the Nikon 24mm f/1.8G is simply incapable of resolving past 36 MP. So if you were to mount this lens on the D850, you would never be able to reach the resolution potential of the camera, and the camera would always out-resolve the lens.
Let’s see another example, this time from the Nikon 85mm f/1.8G lens. Here are the two test charts from Imatest, using the same copy of the lens:
Once again, we see a very similar situation – the Nikon 85mm f/1.8G does not improve drastically on the D850, which shows that the lens does not have enough resolving power to take advantage of the 45 MP sensor. In fact, compared to the 24mm f/1.8G, it shows inferior center performance at similar apertures, so it is not even able to take full advantage of the 36 MP sensor.
Now compare the above charts to those of the newer Nikon 28mm f/1.4E ED lens:
It is very clear that the Nikon 28mm f/1.4E is an absolute beast when it comes to resolving power. While its performance on the D810 was impressive, it was able to get much higher MTF numbers with the D850, showing that it can take advantage of a 45 MP sensor. This is the type of performance difference you want to see between 36 MP and 45 MP cameras.
Unfortunately, this is not the case for most Nikon F and even third party lenses. There are exceptions for third party lenses, of course. The exotic Zeiss Otus lenses were able to achieve exceptionally high resolution numbers, while some of the recent releases from Sigma, Tamron and Voigtlander also did quite well in tests. The Sigma Art-series primes were excellent overall when compared to other brands.
What about Nikon’s classics? I tested a few Ai-S lenses, such as the 28mm f/2.8 Ai-S, 35mm f/2.8 Ai-S, 50mm f/1.2 Ai-S, 50mm f/1.4 Ai-S and NOCT-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 Ai-S, as well as some very old Nikkors. Most of them did not do well. The exception were the 50mm f/1.2 Ai-S, 50mm f/1.4 Ai-S and NOCT-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 Ai-S lenses that resolved past 36 MP, but would probably struggle with anything over 45 MP. This means that some of the very finest classics should be able to provide enough resolving power to exceed 36 MP, maybe even 45 MP. However, most of them were designed for film cameras and look quite bad in the corners.
Zoom Lenses
Next, we will take a look at zoom lenses. Here is the list of recommended zoom lenses from Nikon for the D850:
- AF-S Fisheye NIKKOR 8-15mm f/3.5-4.5E ED (not lab tested)
- AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED (exceeds 36 MP at f/4 @ 14mm)
AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR(resolving power less than 36 MP)- AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED (exceeds 36 MP at f/2.8 @ 24mm)
- AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR (barely exceeds 36 MP at f/4 @ 24mm)
AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR(resolving power less than 36 MP)AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED(resolving power less than 36 MP)AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II(unable to resolve past 36 MP)- AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR (exceeds 36 MP at f/4 @ 135mm)
AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR(resolving power less than 36 MP)AF-S NIKKOR 80-400 f/4.5-5.6G ED VR(resolving power less than 36 MP)AF-S NIKKOR 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II(resolving power less than 36 MP)- AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR (barely exceeds 36 MP at f/5.6 @ 300mm)
As you can see, the list of zoom lenses is even shorter, and many of the recommended lenses did not make the cut. Not sure what Nikon was thinking while including the 16-35mm f/4G or the 24-120mm f/4G – neither of these lenses can resolve even 36 MP, let alone 45 MP.
Nikon included the older 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II in this list, which couldn’t resolve past 36 MP, whereas the newer 180-400mm f/4 VR did much better, clearly providing more detail than its predecessor, even wide open at 180mm. Nikon should update the above list (last updated in August of 2017) and include the newly announced lenses, including the AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/5.6E PF ED VR and the AF-S Nikkor 120-300mm f/2.8E FL ED SR VR. Both should provide sufficient resolving power over 36 MP.
Third party lenses also did poorly, with most lenses (even high-end Sigma Art series) failing to provide sufficient resolving power to take advantage of over 36 MP of camera resolution. There were some exceptions though – the Tamron SP 15-30mm f/2.8 and the Tokina 24-70mm f/2.8 AT-X PRO FX did quite well, although just barely over 36 MP. Sadly, most others that I tested resolved below 36 MP.
Compared to Nikon Z
Nikon has been quite busy in the past couple of years making lenses for the new Nikon Z mount system. As expected, each one of the Z mount lenses has been specifically designed to yield very high resolution. Based on my lab tests of the current Nikon Z lenses, every single one of them (including zoom lenses) can resolve up to 45 MP and beyond. This shows that the newer lens designs have been specifically optimized to provide exceptional amount of detail, something most Nikon F lenses cannot do. This has to do with modern vs older design – new lenses for both mounts are specifically made to take advantage of high resolution, whereas any lenses released prior to the Nikon D810 are going to suffer.
Conclusion
With less than 30 total Nikon lenses that are actually able to take advantage of the modern 45 MP sensor on the Nikon F mount, one would wonder why Nikon should even try to go beyond 45 MP sensors at this point. In fact, although a number of lenses in the above lists were able to resolve more than 36 MP of detail, some of them did that barely, only at very small apertures. Zoom lenses were mostly poor, only shining at very specific focal length and aperture combinations. If I were to exclude those lenses, the list would have been even smaller. Some of the modern third party lens options can surely fill the resolution gap, but that’s for those who are willing to do the research in order to find the very finest, or alternatively, shell out a lot of money to get the exotic Zeiss Otus lenses.
Sony has released its A7R IV with a 60 MP sensor, but the company has more glass that is optimized for such high resolution, because it is simply more recent. Whereas Nikon (and I am sure other companies like Canon and Pentax) have many older lens designs that are simply not good enough to take advantage of modern high-resolution cameras.
Personally, I see no reason for Nikon to continue the megapixel race for its DSLR cameras. Even 45 MP is overkill with the current stable of Nikkor lenses, as evidenced by this article. This is another reason why Nikon is pushing for its Z mirrorless cameras, since it is developing each lens from scratch, specifically aiming to create lenses that can take advantage of the latest high-resolution sensors. Whether we like it or not, Nikon will be forced to transition to the Z system in the future, if it wants to stay competitive with other camera manufacturers…
To me, going with ultra high-resolution sensors is not very meaningful when there is limited glass to support it. Instead of the next 60 MP sensor on the next Nikon DSLR, I would love to see a camera with a 36-45 MP sensor, but have the ability to stack and average images in-camera. A camera that can properly do focus stacking, pixel shift and other important advancements that are actually useful for us in the field. These to me are far more meaningful than another bump in resolution.
1. You only need one lens to benefit from the additional resolution to make it worth it to some. Anyone with the 500 mm FP lens will want a sensor to take advantage of it. I’m planning to get that lens, but wouldn’t bother if the pixel density were not up to it.
2. The pixel density of 36 MP on a FF sensor corresponds to 16 MP on a DX, 5 MP on an RX100, and less than 1 MP on iphones and many video cameras.
There’s no question these other sensors benefit from higher pixel density, so why not a FF? The DX and FX even share many lenses. Of course these other cameras only need the resolving power over a smaller area, but still a FF camera would benefit for cropped photos.
3. I’m skeptical of your results because in my comparisons of cheapo lenses (Nikkor 70-300 AF-P, Sigma 150-600) with a D850, I can easily see the individual pixels degrading resolution (in favorable situations). This is true even with the kit (18-50) lens of a Z50 (which has similar pixel density).
The diffraction limit at F/4 doesn’t limit resolution until about 1 micron, which would correspond to 1 GP on a FF camera. And the effective resolution is not determined by the worst contribution when they have comparable magnitudes. They will all contribute.
4. This is anecdotal, but switching from a 24 MP D610 to the D850 made a very noticeable difference in sharpness of my pictures. (Even if I correct for rationalization due to money spent:)
5. Even if the higher pixel density does not benefit sharpness, more pixels gives higher dynamic range: 4 pixels effectively adds 2 bits of dynamic range compared to one pixel 4 times bigger.
To clarify the comparison between the D610 and D850, what I mean by noticeably better sharpness is really more cropping latitude. In fact, when I had the D610, I kept a DX camera (D7000) for additional reach, because it has a higher pixel density. Using a DX with the same lens is just cropping the same image, but if the pixel density is higher, you can crop even more before the pixels are visible.
The pixel density of the D850 is similar to that of the D7000, so I sold the D7000.
First of all thanks Nasim for publishing value based facts. One question regarding the performance of 24 mm focal length. The Nikon 24 1.8 is equal or slightly better at the D850 compared to the D810 regarding sharpness. The 24-70 VR is worse than the 24 1.8 when reading your tests of These lenses. At the D850 however the 24-70 VR seems to outperform the 24 1.8 (@ 24 mm and w.r.t. sharpness).Can you Share the MTF data that supports that ? I’m still struggling with a Zoom beeing sharper than a Prime ….. Best Regards and Thanks
And then there’s noise.
Gordon Laing’s YouTube review of the A7R IV with its bonkers 61 mpix shows that over 400 ISO the resolution advantage over the 42 mpix R III is lost in noise.
JANUARY 29, 2020 AT 10:59 AM
i have a D810 and many of the lenses on your list that meet or exceed 36mp performance. I am only confused on one choice. I have the 24mm f1.8G and purchased this because it out performs the 20mm f1.8G based on many review sites including yours. Center sharpness is about the same for either, but the 24 gives better mid frame and corners. So why is the 20 recommended over the 24 on your list above?
Steve
I am new to this but it seems to me pixel density is the real issue. If that is the case, then I wonder about APS-C cameras with 20+mp sensors since upscaling to full-frame would yield a sensor of around 50mp which is above anything you tested. In other words, it seems like the sensor density of APS-C is even “harder” on lens resolution. Don’t know if this makes sense, but again, I am new to camera technology and its inter-relationships.
I tried and could not find your list of recommended lenses for D800E. Do you have one? For some reason, that will be my top digital body.
Or maybe your or other readers know about such lists from others, please share. I know Nikon’s list and Thom.
Thanks!
Marcel
Just out of curiosity, how many MP did you find the Ai-S to resolve?
Dear Nasim, the head of this article reads:
“Why Nikon Should Not Make DSLRs Over 36 MP”
However, the expressed assumption is misleading.
First; there is no lens that fails to resolve all the pixels from a D850 that yields worse results on a D850 than a camera with less resolution. If a lens fails to resolve all the detail, it is because it lacks the capability of high resolution. A superzoom or a so-so zoom like the 24-120mm 4.0 will not yield the best possible results on a camera with lower resolution either.
The issue is therefore not the high resolution of the camera, but the failure of some lenses to resolve sufficient detail in order to fully utilize the high-MP cameras like the D850. Nikon does have many DSLR lenses that demonstrably can resolve sufficient detail to do so, and there are other manufacturers that also offer lenses with high resolving power.
The point is that for the best possible technical results, the lenses have to be chosen carefully. That would apply to all cameras.
Slightly off topic…
Stay with the native Z lenses.
I have the Z7. And, I can definitively state there is a difference with the native Z lenses and 3rd party lenses. Sometimes subtle sometimes major.
At the moment, I have a Sigma 135mm 1.8, Nikkor Z 24mm 1.8s and Nikkor Z 50mm 1.8s. All good—more in a moment.
But I just recently had a Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 G2 and a Sigma 14-24mm 2.8.
The native lenses completely knock it out of the park! The difference makes me feel good about the purchase of the Z7. (I really danced around between a Sony or older Nikon large body—so glad I didn’t make that mistake.)
Oh and I realize it’s been beaten to death, but the resolution and sharpness on the Z 50mm 1.8 is the best I have seen on ANY lens in my life with only one exception: Fuji medium format 45mm. The Nikkors are astounding! (I’ll eventually fork over the $$$ for the Z 70-200mm and 24-70mm). Maybe. I’m starting to think how great a prime 20mm or prime 135mm Z would do on my Z7!
My 2 cents.
Hi Nasim,
Sorry if this is a naive question for the level of discussion taking place here, but could you please give me some counsel related to this topic? I have a three-part question, and I’m hoping your answers gives me some practical advice as well as clarifying my understanding of this whole issue. I’m really just looking for
the simplest possible answers here.
First, if using a “middling” quality F mount lens (such as a 24-120 f/4, or 85 f/1.8) on a Z7, would there be any benefit to image quality in reducing the camera’s sensor resolution down from Large (45mp) to Medium (25mp)?
Secondly, would that same F mount lens produce a superior image, in any way, if placed on a
D750 set to its top resolution of 24 mp? Assume I’m shooting the same scene.
Finally, does the answer to either question depend upon the available light of the scene (low light vs. more light)?
I enjoy this website, and appreciate the amount of work you must be putting into it. Thanks.