I have heard some people say that the new 25 f2 from Zeiss is only good for close up work. I respectfully disagree. I snapped this shot today just to see how well it does on far away subjects.
I certainly agree that it performs well on far off objects over most of the frame, but who said it doesn't? Since when has a non-macro lens been optimized for other than infinity?
Sorry, why people hate this lens? There are not enough pictures make it deserve BAD reputation yet. Why so negative here?
This focal length is not my priority but does it make it a bad lens? The op's pic is in cloudy day without any extra effort in editing to bring out the contrast and color, he want to show the sharpness of the lens, which I think it did showing it is good. Which corner we are talking about?
F5.6 with 25mm may not enough to keep everything sharp, especially with 12M picture, I think the photo will be benefit more with f8 or so before diffraction kick in.
Plus, I never think modern day Zeiss has any obvious advantage in sharpness compare new Nikon and Canon offer. Say a 35mmf1.4, comparing Canikon offerm it is not sharper. But people still love it. Why this lens get treated totally different??
+1... how can we judge the corners from such a small picture?
The 50 MP struggles a tad in the the extreme corners, doesn't make it any less brilliant as a package. I feel this is similar, nice allrounder with few weaknesses.
Lloyd has been raving on and on about it, doubt he'd put his reputation on the line for a dud.
I don't see the dullness being referred to. The only flaw I see is the tilting edges but this is a 25mm.
The first crop is of the bottom right corner and it looks sharp and full of detail. Look at the tree limbs in the far distance and the window trimmings. You must have a bad monitor. Look at the well defined brick work on the white building all of which is at the bottom right corner crop.
As far as the 2nd crop of the left side with the green lift, that was in the foreground and I woud expect that to be softer. But if you look inside the windows to the fer left edge you can see the individual slats of the blinds.
Again, you must have a bad monitor or I must have super human eyes.
Here are the extreme corners. You can even see the individual legs of the pigeon that is walking.
Jorge Torralba wrote:
I don't see the dullness being referred to. The only flaw I see is the tilting edges but this is a 25mm.
The first crop is of the bottom right corner and it looks sharp and full of detail. Look at the tree limbs in the far distance and the window trimmings. You must have a bad monitor. Look at the well defined brick work on the white building all of which is at the bottom right corner crop.
As far as the 2nd crop of the left side with the green lift, that was in the foreground and I woud expect that to be softer. But if you look inside the windows to the fer left edge you can see the individual slats of the blinds.
Again, you must have a bad monitor or I must have super human eyes.
Here are the extreme corners. You can even see the individual legs of the pigeon that is walking.
Looks pretty average given how close those subjects are to the camera, to me at least. The criticism of the lens was for the corners at further distances such as might be seen in a landscape vista. The weakness is shown in multiple tests thus far. Does not make it a "bad" lens at all, just means it's use might not be ideal for all subject matter.
