Thank you very much, K-H.! I got lucky to be able to spot that behavior.
birdied wrote:
Great shot Joshua.
Another from Arizona - Lake Powell
Birdie
Thank you very much, Birdie! That’s a great image from near Wahweep Marina and you put a great foreground for that.
Ronny Olsson wrote:
Hi Stephen
I miss your post sry
I'm not so impressed by 24-105
it's ok and pretty sharp but I can agree with you on rendering
it draws pretty flat
I think my prime and contax 100-300 are better at this
but a zoom is so smooth on travel and not having to change lenses or trying to move back or forth which is usually not so easy in the field .. as i said I am not completely satisfied .. see in the future maybe I switch back to primes instead again maybe loxia 35-50-85 will see
just in that picture it was good light and good conditions .. otherwise it was very bad conditions on the whole last Icelandic trip, which surely reflected how the pictures became overall
I probably say that my Icelandic pictures from this trip don't have the same quality as my other two trip from Iceland
My thoughts
but sure the lenses are important also and on this trip I use 24-105 and 100-400 for 95% off the pictures
I think 100-300 contax is better for landscape then 100-400 also
but 100-400 GM is so much better at other things and motives and so good to have AF etc.
Ronny, that comes as a complete surprise. Your images for sure tell otherwise. I enjoy both lenses a lot and used them for my landscape needs in Tuscany earlier in the year. I couldn’t tell the difference between images taken with the zoom and prime at f/8 to f/11.
Ronny Olsson wrote:
Thank you Jim for a better analysis and I agree with you 100% : )
Should be interesting to hear what you think about 14-24 sigma
is a lens that I thought about and maybe replace sony zeiss 16-35 f4
I wrote to Joshua a while ago
sigma has very interesting lens for sony nowadays
14-24 and 35 f1.2 and also coming 24-70 which I think will be good also
and 105 1.4 really good lenses to sony , but they are big and heavy
but they are very interesting nonetheless
I did not get any PM from you, Ronny. Would you send it again, please?
AGeoJO wrote:
Thank you very much, K-H.! I got lucky to be able to spot that behavior.
Thank you very much, Birdie! That’s a great image from near Wahweep Marina and you put a great foreground for that.
Ronny, that comes as a complete surprise. Your images for sure tell otherwise. I enjoy both lenses a lot and used them for my landscape needs in Tuscany earlier in the year. I couldn’t tell the difference between images taken with the zoom and prime at f/8 to f/11.
I did not get any PM from you, Ronny. Would you send it again, please?
Should not say that it is in all the pictures I think it is noticeable that the conditions also come into play
but i think for example the structure of the mountains and the details get a little worse with the zoom? have not so many shots to show but the ground and surroundings becomes more flat and the mountains will be like more edgy .. hard to describe .. maybe just it's just a feeling
edgy ?
Sony A7R III + Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
A comparison
not exact conditions and 24mm vs 21mm f11
Some might like 24-105 more? or Loxia?
Sony A7r III + Zeiss Loxia 21mm f/2.8 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
Sony A7R III + Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
LBJ2 wrote:
Lot of fun to explore this image. Took me a minute to figure out what was going on. Very cool. Would love to walk that sand dune one day and get that photo too 😀
Thank you! Seeing the dunes of Sossusvlei is a must while visiting Namibia. One doesn’t regret getting there even if a 4 A.M. wake up is required. Colors change by the minute, and it gets hot very quickly
Ronny Olsson wrote:
Hi Stephen
I miss your post sry
I'm not so impressed by 24-105
it's ok and pretty sharp but I can agree with you on rendering
it draws pretty flat
I think my prime and contax 100-300 are better at this
but a zoom is so smooth on travel and not having to change lenses or trying to move back or forth which is usually not so easy in the field .. as i said I am not completely satisfied .. see in the future maybe I switch back to primes instead again maybe loxia 35-50-85 will see
just in that picture it was good light and good conditions .. otherwise it was very bad conditions on the whole last Icelandic trip, which surely reflected how the pictures became overall
I probably say that my Icelandic pictures from this trip don't have the same quality as my other two trip from Iceland
My thoughts
but sure the lenses are important also and on this trip I use 24-105 and 100-400 for 95% off the pictures
I think 100-300 contax is better for landscape then 100-400 also
but 100-400 GM is so much better at other things and motives and so good to have AF etc.
Thank you for sharing your insight, Ronny. I am glad to see your response as I was worried maybe I had offended by commenting on flat rendering of that one picture. I love your work! I agree re 100-400 versus Zeiss 100-300. I bought and sold quickly the 100-400. I just recently sold my 100-300 though and perhaps that was a mistake, lol. Your Iceland shots are always terrific! I think you are too hard on yourself. Thanks again for your comments and for sharing your lovely work.
Hi Ronny, unsolicited comment here, but i think its lighting and conditions than the lens. On the Lox image there is light falling on water and foreground grass. Zoom has different composition and faces flat light.
I think your latest set has different weather conditions in Iceland, that’s all. Also there is some repetition.
Its perhaps not the lens.
Ronny Olsson wrote:
Should not say that it is in all the pictures I think it is noticeable that the conditions also come into play
but i think for example the structure of the mountains and the details get a little worse with the zoom? have not so many shots to show but the ground and surroundings becomes more flat and the mountains will be like more edgy .. hard to describe .. maybe just it's just a feeling
Looking at a maple tree backlit in Autumn color.
Tripod mounted A7r and Minolta CLE MC 40mm f2 M-Rokkor lens.
ISO 400, f8?, 1/80 second.
Exposure corrected +0.24 Stops.
October 19, 2019
At the top of the Trexler Nature Preserve, Schnecksville, PA.
