All these shots are at f/11 (yes, diffraction and all...) on the Sony a7R. Note my c/y Zeiss is soft in the lower right corner, I assume it's some decentering. My Pentax is very slightly softer in the upper left hand corner. All the same processing applied (via Photo Ninja 1.2.4), except for balancing exposure and white balance. There is a link to the full size SooC JPEG as well (somewhat underexposed.) Focus was around the left corner of the porch roof, where it attaches to the house.
I've also found that some of the "better" adapters appear to be too "fat", to the point where edge performance suffers on the lenses, making them look worse than they are. The adapters used above are the "better" of the different adapters I have.
The Pentax is my go to prime now, but I feel pretty good about the FE 16-35 when I want to go lighter and just carry the zoom (at least at this focal length.)
Note, there are various versions of Pentax 28/3.5 lenses. For information about the specific one tested, refer to the following post.
I could post a comparison at another aperture if anyone is interested (like f/5.6 or WO.) I messed up the FE 16-35 shot at f/8...so I can't compare at f/8 (unless I drop the FE shot from the comparison.)
Not sure there is a lot of interest, but if so, let me know.
Thanks for the comparison Tim. This is really well done. To my eye the Pentax is clearly the best in these shots and the Zeiss C/Y follows not too far behind, as does the zoom. The Nikon lags a bit, but all do a quite nice job. I would love to see the same comparison at f/5.6 and a comparison of the primes at f/8. For me on a shot like this that f/5.6 to f/11 would be the apertures I would be most likely to consider. I know this is tough to get these right, so thanks again.
The softness shows in the lower right corner using both a cheapo adapter as well as Rayqual, I think it's the lens.
I have to say that I've gotten really nice shots with the Nikon....green just seems really lush with that lens. Also, mine seems pretty strong at infinity, which bucks conventional wisdom.
-Tim
Mescalamba wrote:
Hm.. Nikkor really isnt "legend" for nothing eh? Really good looking pic considering price..
C/Y my fav.. as usually, wonder how would much more expensive F2 fare in this..
You sure that decentering isnt just adapter?
At F11 most lens is pretty much good enough, but still if I should pick, its either C/Y or Nikkor. Pentax and Sony are just bit boring..
Have you used the FD 28/2.8? I'd love to know how it compares. I'm thinking of picking up an A7 II and using it as a digital FD body (I already have the FD 35/2, 50/1.4, 55/1.2, 85/1.8, 200/2.8 and 70-210/4 and 50-300/4.5L zooms. Just need a wide prime or two. ) Probably will get the 24/2.8, but also thinking of the 17 or 20 combined with the 28/2.8 since it's so cheap and has a great rep. I'm reviewing the a7II and 16-35 right now and like them both, but won't be investing too much in native lenses since it would be more for deliberate landscape shooting. My Fuji kit would remain my main daily carry.
Thanks Steve, I'm mostly done with the f/5.6 set...hopefully I'll have them up shortly. Thanks for the positive feedback!
-Tim
Steve Spencer wrote:
Thanks for the comparison Tim. This is really well done. To my eye the Pentax is clearly the best in these shots and the Zeiss C/Y follows not too far behind, as does the zoom. The Nikon lags a bit, but all do a quite nice job. I would love to see the same comparison at f/5.6 and a comparison of the primes at f/8. For me on a shot like this that f/5.6 to f/11 would be the apertures I would be most likely to consider. I know this is tough to get these right, so thanks again.
I did try the FDn 28/2.8, and it was decent. It wasn't quite as good as the Canon 28mm f/2.8 IS I had (stopped down of course, the EF lens is stronger at larger apertures.)
I thought the FDn 24/2.8 put up a stronger showing. It was very good in the corners, but a little jittery on the edges. I ended up liking a Nikon 24mm f/2.8 AI a little better due to its edges, it wasn't as good in the deep corners though.
I might be able to dig up some test shots....not sure I'll have anything to compare it to though, but it would give you an idea.
-Tim
Jman13 wrote:
Have you used the FD 28/2.8? I'd love to know how it compares. I'm thinking of picking up an A7 II and using it as a digital FD body (I already have the FD 35/2, 50/1.4, 55/1.2, 85/1.8, 200/2.8 and 70-210/4 and 50-300/4.5L zooms. Just need a wide prime or two. ) Probably will get the 24/2.8, but also thinking of the 17 or 20 combined with the 28/2.8 since it's so cheap and has a great rep. I'm reviewing the a7II and 16-35 right now and like them both, but won't be investing too much in native lenses since it would be more for deliberate landscape shooting. My Fuji kit would remain my main daily carry. ...Show more →
At 5.6, I'm rather impressed - overall - with how well the FE zoom performs. It does appear to me, when comparing the foreground and background between the FE zoom and the Pentax, that perhaps the Pentax was focused more towards the foreground and the FE zoom more towards the background as the foreground is sharper with the Pentax and background/distance with the FE Zoom. Sort of a shame we don't have F8 for the FE zoom just because the dof would probably be taken care of (and diffraction would be a hair less than at F11).
Yeah, unfortunately I don't have it. It was so "off" I just deleted it. Not sure what happened there.
The Pentax always seems to keep the foreground in focus at any given f stop...much more than the other primes. I think it's just the nature of the lens (or the interaction with the cover glass on the Sony.) I believe I was pretty close to the hard stop on the lens, using the "thinner" adapter that appears to give me better edge performance.
It seems to do well on scenic vista type shots though too, especially with the adapter used in this test.
tsdevine wrote:
Yeah, unfortunately I don't have it. It was so "off" I just deleted it. Not sure what happened there.
The Pentax always seems to keep the foreground in focus at any given f stop...much more than the other primes. I think it's just the nature of the lens (or the interaction with the cover glass on the Sony.) I believe I was pretty close to the hard stop on the lens, using the "thinner" adapter that appears to give me better edge performance.
It seems to do well on scenic vista type shots though too, especially with the adapter used in this test.
Did you pick the same spot(per the primes) and manually focus the FE zoom in these tests or did you rely on AF (which you mentioned could be a little wonky)?
That Pentax impressed me not only with distant/ scenic shots stopped down but even wide open at closer distances photographing people, etc. It's an over designed lens to be just F3.5 and it shows in the huge central sweet spot compared to other Alt lenses at brighter F-stops).
Here you go Jordan, not quite as controlled as the last set. This is from March of last year. The exposure was quite a bit different between the two lenses, I did have to bump up the contrast a little on the FD shots. Might be somewhat due to the exposures. I've included the full size JPEGs like for the others. These were taken at f/8.
I forgot how heinous the CA is on the Canon EF....hard to believe the FD bests it.
Maybe it's better I don't have that opportunity. :-)
One more with the Pentax, f/11 again. I did turn off the CA correction as it seems to reduce the sharpness along the edges (at least in Photo Ninja.) I also toned down the noise reduction....going for pure resolving power. See the American flag?
