ManuelLaMantia wrote:
Thanks Bob. I asked because my feeling is different between FE55 and FE16-35: much better with the 16-35 but maybe it is for the focal lenght... not sure if there is a technological reason. I'm a bit old style so IMO a good mechanical lens is incomparable.
Manuel
I haven't noticed a difference between the 16-35 and 55 myself. Maybe it's because I've been shooting MF so much that any AF seems good to me. In any case, I can say that the Batis 25 is quite accurate.
Three with the 35 Loxia, which I got in today to review while I wait for the Batis 85. I have to say, so far, I'm kind of underwhelmed. We'll see if that changes after I put a few hundred frames through it.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Queenstown, New Zealand.
Taken with Sony A7R, Canon 24-70L and ND Throttle.
Nice Job Fred...great job with even exposure throughout the frame.You gotta love the Dynamic range of the Sony Sensors
Great pictures folks! Keep those Batis pics coming too !
Fred, I'd like to see more NZ pictures! I'd been there in 2010 and that place is definitely one among several places which one could call a Nature/Landscape photographer's paradise !
Another place I have a soft spot for and can't seem to get enough is the Pacific NorthWest!
Anyway, here are the last couple of pictures from Mt. Hood, Oregon before I move on to another set. First one is with A7r and ZM 35 1.4. Second one is with the 21 Distagon.
Bob, I think Manuel was asking about the "manual" focus of your Batis 25
ManuelLaMantia wrote:
René, Bob, can you tell us how is the experience with manual focus on Batis? Thanks!
Manuel
rji2goleez wrote:
I haven't noticed a difference between the 16-35 and 55 myself. Maybe it's because I've been shooting MF so much that any AF seems good to me. In any case, I can say that the Batis 25 is quite accurate.
Fred...Awesome image!!
Jordan...give the Loxia 35 a few weeks...it's a pretty sweet lens, IMHO, but it does have its quirks.
Abhijeeth...Really cool shots with the 2 lenses. I like both!
Here are a few fun shots with the FE 28 on the A7rM, with my wife grabbing the shots!!
Love the images on the last few pages! Appreciate the diversity of lenses. Very instructive! Every time I think I feel determined to get down to three lenses one of you will cause me to slow down in selling my lens collection.
The Pacific Northwest is experiencing drought and while this shot looks like it might rain, it didn't. The sun came out instead. A7rM with my highly under-rated Sony FE 24-240mm wonder lens. This image f/10 at 24mm 1/200 ISO 100
ebookman wrote:
The Pacific Northwest is experiencing drought and while this shot looks like it might rain, it didn't. The sun came out instead. A7rM with my highly under-rated Sony FE 24-240mm wonder lens. This image f/10 at 24mm 1/200 ISO 100
@ Jon, it's infrared Color Efex
@ Manuel , MF works very well . Depending on modem speed rotating the focus ring . But very similar to the FE lenses . Must still more " test " and fantastic Images on this page!
@ Gregg, apologize for Giovanni
@Ebookman the 24-240 looks very great!
@Bob the Batis 25 makes a very good great performance .but I do not need it
@Werner, the 90 Macro in your Hands, wow!
@Fred, Ronny wonderfull as always
ebookman wrote:
.... Every time I think I feel determined to get down to three lenses one of you will cause me to slow down in selling my lens collection.
This was taken last evening, moments before sunset near the top of the Trexler Nature Preserve, Schnecksville, PA with my tripod mounted "new" Canon new fd 500mm f4.5 L lens and my Sony A7r camera. Image processed in LR6.
I don't think so. There's nothing wrong with it, it's sharp and even across the frame. No obvious aberrations...I just hate the bokeh. That, and while sharp, it's really about the same as my FD 35/2 in sharpness. (See blind test thread in Alt forum). That's not a bad thing, as the FD 35 is quite a good lens, but it doesn't scream "worth anywhere near $1300" to me.
ManuelLaMantia wrote:
Jordan, defective copy?!? Maybe...
Manuel
