I have also Sony EF 28/2 at home for testing.What I like about it is size ,weight and price.Sharpness out of the center below f5.6,whooping distortion,mediocre microcontrast and bland colour rendition however,are not the features I like.
Distagon ZE 28/2 still wins with the last 4 respects.I think I will return the lens.
Looking at a Tricolored Heron and Reflection.
Fairly Heavily Cropped, tripod mounted 200-600mm G set to 600mm and A7rIII; silent shutter.
ISO 500, f8.0, 1/2000 second.
Exposure corrected +1.27 Stops.
January 2, 2020
Along Black Point Wildlife Drive, Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge, FL.
Peire wrote:
I have also Sony EF 28/2 at home for testing.What I like about it is size ,weight and price.Sharpness out of the center below f5.6,whooping distortion,mediocre microcontrast and bland colour rendition however,are not the features I like.
Distagon ZE 28/2 still wins with the last 4 respects.I think I will return the lens.
Your evaluation exactly mirrors my conclusions.
It is a great little lightweight lens, and I think I've gotten the most out of it for subject choices and exposure. Some of my shots look pretty good unless you zoom in at 100%, then you lose critical details and sharpness.
Still, I reckon it against earlier lenses from the 80's that were considered decent quality for film, and in that regard the 28/2 is not so bad.
I will probably sell my copy later as it is redundant. But its small size makes that a hard decision.
What do you think of the Sony 85mm 1.8 lens? BTW, I agree with what you said elsewhere about the Sony 28mm f2 lens.
Peter
Sony FE 85/1.8 is very decent.Compact,solid,quick autofocus with manual override,fast enough,sharp enough,very good colours,contrast and not expensive.Top notch 85mm lenses for Sony E are a tad sharper and contrastier overall,but much more expensive.I like it very much.
Peire wrote:
I have also Sony EF 28/2 at home for testing.What I like about it is size ,weight and price.Sharpness out of the center below f5.6,whooping distortion,mediocre microcontrast and bland colour rendition however,are not the features I like.
Distagon ZE 28/2 still wins with the last 4 respects.I think I will return the lens.
---------------------------------------------
Gunzorro wrote:
Your evaluation exactly mirrors my conclusions.
It is a great little lightweight lens, and I think I've gotten the most out of it for subject choices and exposure. Some of my shots look pretty good unless you zoom in at 100%, then you lose critical details and sharpness.
Still, I reckon it against earlier lenses from the 80's that were considered decent quality for film, and in that regard the 28/2 is not so bad.
I will probably sell my copy later as it is redundant. But its small size makes that a hard decision.
I think that the strengths and weaknesses of the 28/2 dispose it toward documentary and environmental portrait photography more than for landscapes, which is perhaps why it is often not praised on the forum. On the other hand, Philllip Reeve has often shown lovely landscapes taken with the lens. Very useful as a travel lens. I do prefer its look and rendering and colors to the 35/2.
I just realized how long it's been (for me) since my last post . . . not sure why. Anyway, here's one from this past weekend visiting Tofte, MN on the north shore of Lake Superior.
