Very interesting (and indeed impressive). If you don't have the budget for the ZA24/2 and you want 24mm with sharp corners, get the Minolta AF 2.8/24mm!
Thanks Edward!
Very interesting, I didn't know the 24-70 was that bad in the corners, even at f5.6.
Would be interesting to see the lens tested against a converted cz 21.
To be fair, I have to say the 24-70 is not that bad in the corners. It can be that bad in the corners in some situations.
The test photo has been taken at such an angle so that both center and extreme lower left corner are at true infinity. The field curvature of the 24-70 at 24mm FL will produce such bad result. However, if the camera is set horizontally, as one would normally do in such shot, the foreground and consequently the lower corners would be much better due to the field curvature.
In fact the field curvature will cause something similar to the Scheimpflug tilt, giving an extended DOF that would not normally be possible with a well corrected lens. I have posted in the past on this and other forums several examples that show this effect.
I would think resolution wise the 24/2, 25/2.8, and 24-70 are very similar at distance stopped down to f8.And with the asph element and FLE much better wide open and up close and without the large field curvature that the 25/2.8 has.
That test makes the 24/2 look so much better than the initial test images from dpreview. The Dpreview set was kind of disappointing but these look like the lens is the bees knees for sure.
At least for distant shots, but I'd like to see more close up shots, wide open as well as stopped down before I am convinced.
kosmoskatten wrote:
That test makes the 24/2 look so much better than the initial test images from dpreview. The Dpreview set was kind of disappointing but these look like the lens is the bees knees for sure.
At least for distant shots, but I'd like to see more close up shots, wide open as well as stopped down before I am convinced.
kosmoskatten wrote:
That test makes the 24/2 look so much better than the initial test images from dpreview. The Dpreview set was kind of disappointing but these look like the lens is the bees knees for sure.
At least for distant shots, but I'd like to see more close up shots, wide open as well as stopped down before I am convinced.
Interesting, are you going for it Ed?
Same here, Henrik. I need to see what this lens can do better than my new ZS 25. For infinity shots, the performance seems to be quite similar. There could be an advantage at close range though, so I'll wait before making my decision.
The f/2 and AF are not important for the main usage of this lens, landscapes. I don't shoot much reportage style in low light. I can see one advantage for the ZS, which is the high microcontrast as observed also with the ZS 35 and 50. I am not sure about the ZA though. We'll need to see more samples.
The weather has been awfull since I got the ZS 25 last week, I didn't have any chance to seriously test it. This morning I tried to emulate Steve's test shot to put both center and extreme left corner at infinity. This was shot at f/8, hand-held, and used default ACR sharpening (while Steve used 50/0.5/50 which I guess is a bit more aggressive). As you can see the 25/2.8 is at least as good, possibly even better than the ZA at infinity. So the decision to get the ZA 24 or not depends solely on its close up performance.
Please note the last crop is the very extreme lower left corner, no pixels left whatsover
edwardkaraa wrote:
The weather has been awfull since I got the ZS 25 last week, I didn't have any chance to seriously test it. This morning I tried to emulate Steve's test shot to put both center and extreme left corner at infinity. This was shot at f/8, hand-held, and used default ACR sharpening (while Steve used 50/0.5/50 which I guess is a bit more aggressive). As you can see the 25/2.8 is at least as good, possibly even better than the ZA at infinity. So the decision to get the ZA 24 or not depends solely on its close up performance.
Please note the last crop is the very extreme lower left corner, no pixels left whatsover
If you haven't already, it would be interesting to see how the ZS 25 performs in the corners when set to either a hyperfocal distance or even just shy of infinity. It does look like it gives that typical zeiss "pop" due to the high micro-contrast.
If you haven't already, it would be interesting to see how the ZS 25 performs in the corners when set to either a hyperfocal distance or even just shy of infinity. It does look like it gives that typical zeiss "pop" due to the high micro-contrast.
You are absolutely right. I did try to focus for the extreme corners and they seem to have their optimal sharpness just beyond the 2 meters setting on the focusing scale (probably somewhere around 3-4 m.). However, the field is so surprisingly flat on most of the frame that it would be a pity to lose even a fraction of the sharpness there just to get better corners, which as you see are already great at f/8. Unfortunately I have already deleted the test shots.
kosmoskatten wrote:
AhamB: the shot Edward posted was at f8, it says. Are you thinking it was shot at f2.8?
Now THAT would have me sold, hook, line and sinker...
Yes, that was at f/8. But at f/2.8 there is only a loss of contrast but the resolution seems to be almost intact. There was strong atmospheric haze as is usual for this time of the year, probably the results would be better on a sunny day. But here is the same photo at f/2.8. Since it was handheld, the position of the camera has shifted slightly but you get the general idea
As you can guess, I'm very pleased with this lens at infinity. It is actually better than both the 50/1.4 and 35/2. Now the ZA better have something exceptional at close distances, otherwise I'm sticking to the 25
