More from the desert junk yard. A7RII with Canon EF 85/1.8 and Leica WATE at 16 mm.
And finally an extreme crop, (which I might call a bumper crop.) Not a very interesting photo but it does demonstrate the tremendous resolution possible on the A7RII. About 20% of the image.
Jannik Peters wrote:
"East and West" - Wartburg is a former east german car manufacturer. My luck, that the ship was parking right in front of the VW power plant.
Jannik, I remember that your Loxia was decentered. Have Zeiss/your dealer replaced it?
These are of, and from, Pilsdon Pen Iron Age Hill Fort. Also occupied during the Bronze Age and I think I read somewhere that it was subsequently used by the Romans for horse racing.
Paul Mo wrote:
In your estimation how is it compared to other autofocussing macros you've used?
Thinking of liquidating my EF 100 f2.8L IS.
Paul,
I've only had two other AF macro lenses, the EF 100mm f/2.8 non "L" and the most current Tamron 90mm f/2.8 w/ VC in Nikon mount.
Speed
Out of all three (Sony, Canon & Tamron) macro lenses, I feel that the Tamron was the fastest of the bunch. However, I was using the Tamron on the D4s, D810 & D750 at the time. The Canon and Sony macros weren't slouches, but just that the Tamron seemed to lock on almost instantaneously. I used the Canon on a 5DMkIII and 7D "Classic" bodies. The Canon was peppy, but not as peppy compared to the Tamron. I believe that was due to the differences in DSLR bodies.
Haptics
From lightest to heaviest: Tamron -> Canon -> Sony
I do recall the Tamron being definitely smaller and lighter than the Sony. Not so much compared to the Canon. The Sony is larger and heavier, but feels a bit more rugged than the other two macros. With the Sony grip on my A7II, the Sony balances out real nice! The Sony also has a PUSH/PULL barrel to initiate AF and MF focusing which I find to be very convenient.
IS/OSS/VR
Since the Tamron and Sony only have stabilization out of the three, I feel that with the IBIS and internal stabilization of the Sony system, I could get more in focus shots handheld at much slower shutter speeds than I could with the Tamron. If you don't use stabilization with your macro lenses, then the stabilization does add a bit of heft and size of the lens. I shoot handheld 95% of the time with the Sony despite having a tripod (but no lighting setup at the moment).
IQ, etc...
This is going to be tough as I am not a pixel peeper. I thought all lenses are super macro lenses IQ wise. For me, one of the most important aspects of choosing a macro lens came down to how it felt in hand. I really loved the way the Tamron felt on my Nikon system. Without having to use adapters, the Sony 90mm FE was my only choice. It's definitely not cheaper, but it does balance well with the A7II.
It's a tossup really if you want to sell your Canon to possibly migrate over to the Sony macro. I'm sure optical tech has improved since the Canon was originally released, as I'm inclined to believe the Sony has advancements in its optical properties (coatings, glass, materials, design, etc.) over that of the Canon.
If I still had my Nikon setup, I would have never purchased the Sony macro as the Tamron was a solid piece of glass in my kit. While I owned both the A7II and the Nikon cameras concurrently, the A7II was used for Leica R and M lenses only. The Sony macro is my only AF lens. Since I sold my Nikon setup, I needed a macro lens, which is why I went with the native Sony macro.
However...I will be receiving the Zeiss 50/2 Milvus macro (in Nikon mount!) early next week...that is another story for another time.
I hope I was able to help you a bit without veering off the rails too much!
Today's hike with my 2 kids. After looking at the keepers -- I really need a 24-70 f/2.8 I never thought I'd say that (as *mentally* I consider it a boring lens) but my keepers always end up from 24mm to around 75mm, and then 100mm, then about 200mm. (but I'm not carrying those primes).
Glad I brought the FE 55 on this one, as I love how it renders.
One I found as I was looking for 55/1.8 samples for another thread -- I don't know why I never processed it, probably just overlooked as I was culling!
I had someone ask me earlier to post some samples of my new A7RII I just charged the battery on. Most of these shots were taken in very low light around the house with just the 24-240 lens at the long end at f6.3. I haven't had the time to even mess with the factory set controls yet as it took 4 hours to get the battery charged Excuse the resize job as they are all brought down to 1920x1080. At this rate I see it working very nicely for me. We'll see. Tomorrow I'l have a chance to fire up the 55mm f1.8 and see what it will do.
