Werner_Utsch wrote:
The lighting in this shot is only available light. It is very dark in the Dom. Camera on tripod and 2 sec at F4. The light comes from the windows, the candles and a spot light to the madonna. A little work in post, shadows/lights,whites, blacks, clarity and sharpening.
This FE16-35 is looking good at 16mm, however reports are saying it's not so good at 35mm, can you shed your light on this?
Thank you for all the alternative lens photos that you use and your comments. I've bought a few that you've recommended from Minolta (45, 135). Almost bought a Konica (58 or 135), as well. Still on the fence about the MD 35mm f1.8 and 24mm f2.8.
Killer shots Triton!! How the hell do you guys get onto the bridge where that shot was taken!
My humble contribution for tonight...A7 and CV Ultron 35 1.7 @f8
Gregg
Nice tree shot! How do you like the ZF 25mm f2.8? Reviews tend to emphasize the really close focusing, but tend to dismiss it for landscape. Todd
Thanks Todd. I've taken perhaps 40 shots in the city so far. With close ups the curvature of field is very noticable (which is usually not problematic in such shots), but this issue virtually disappears at distances of 2 meters plus. Then it is sharp from corner to corner (did not test wide open). Low distortion (some lenses always need correction, with this one it is nice to have) and low purple fringing. So I think it is very suitable for landscape. Only minor downside is the vignetting.
In the context of this thread, ideal companion for the A7. Smooth aperture ring, precise manual focussing. Balances well.
Btw I was shocked at the color difference with the Pentax 24mm. The Zeiss is rather cool, almost blueish. The Pentax's color is very warm, yellowish and a bit magenta. (I obviously kept the with balance constant.)
