p.3 #1 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
I do hope these are proving interesting to some? The OM and FDn are both impressing me. Just wish the Canon had a nicer aperture ring movement!
This is the last series I'll upload before the new MD arrives. Again the VFC shows adapter issues, and the ZS forward focussing issues. Could this be an adapter issue too, after all? I wish adapters weren't nearly £100 to try another! (Kindai-Rayqual or Novoflex)
p.3 #3 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
tsdevine wrote:
I don't know, the X-Funjinon looks pretty impressive here...
-Tim
Yes indeed! As Peire said, more similarities than differences!
Of course there is another excellent 24mm that's missing from my selection...I've just remembered the Canon TS-E 24/2.8 II.
Too big and heavy for my requirements, and too expensive, but it is recognised as being probably the best manual focus 24mm around.
p.3 #4 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
I think they're interesting - thanks for sharing!
Just curious, what do you mean by "forward focusing" when talking about a MF lens like this?
Jan 26, 2015 at 09:10 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #5 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
timballic wrote:
Part of the reason for the above composition was to gauge difference in depth of field between the lenses, focussed at the same point, as accurately as I could, using LV magnified view and Hoodman Loupe. I don't know if there is focus shift with stopping down though.
Below, top, the OM with least depth of field behind the focus point, (Fuji very similar), and the ZS with the most, (FDn very similar). Top left corner. This is in keeping with what I observed using these lenses (OM and ZS) on the 5DII.
However, in the front corners, the result is reversed. Lower left corner.
(On flat brick wall with camera parallel to the wall, the corners are good on all, so I don't think this is an adapter issue.)
It is good to know that the OM probably curves focus forward and the ZS curves focus backwards, so maybe the purpose of this test was just to identify that pattern. In real use, however, why wouldn't you just focus the OM a little further back in the scene and the ZS a little further forward in the scene? That way you could perhaps get the whole scene with enough depth of field. Maybe it was implied that you would do it that way, but I would like to see the results if that were done so I would know how the lens optimally focussed for the scene would behave.
p.3 #7 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
arduluth wrote:
I think they're interesting - thanks for sharing!
Just curious, what do you mean by "forward focusing" when talking about a MF lens like this?
I mean that there's more in focus in front of the point focussed on compared to the other lens
Steve Spencer wrote
In real use, however, why wouldn't you just focus the OM a little further back in the scene and the ZS a little further forward in the scene? That way you could perhaps get the whole scene with enough depth of field. Maybe it was implied that you would do it that way, but I would like to see the results if that were done so I would know how the lens optimally focussed for the scene would behave.
I didn't know it was happening in this way, before these tests Steve. Now I do, I need to do tests doing just that!
sebboh wrote
possibly relevant, i did a test of my ø49mm minolta 24/2.8 focused at infinity in the center and the corner throughout the aperture range.
Those are brilliant! Such a lot of work involved. At f11 the ø49mm looks to be excellent. The corners are so sharp, when corner focussed from F2.8! Are the weaker edges due to a very strong curved field, or a mid zone dip? Pity mtfs aren't available.
As important, do you like it in use, and have you tried other 24mm's and if so how does it compare?
p.3 #8 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
The "new" MDII 24/2.8 arrived and although it looks as mint and unused as any lens I've ever bought, it is showing just as bad problems as the MC VFC! Focus variations across the frame. Left side slightly worse than right, but only really "crisp" in the centre. Below left edge 100% (Sharpened in Lr5 60, 1.0, 40) (No change when focussed for edge of frame, it doesn't seem to have a very curved field)
Centre frame MD F11 On original, I can just read the second line of the notice, which is as good as it gets with any of the 24mms (Says: MOBILE PHONE) MD 24/2.8 F11 100% centre by timballic2, on Flickr
I checked back to my 2012 tests (on 5DII) between the MC VFC and an MDI that I used to own, (Jim Buchanan conversion to EF), and I'm surprised to say the MDI also showed problems across the frame, though less obvious with the 5DII sensor.
Now Ive got a dilemma! Surely MC and MD (I & II) should all perform better than this, after all Leica chose this design!
So, have I had 3x poor examples, despite them all looking virtually unused?
Do I now have two adapter issues, (the VFC is on EF mount and EF adapter)? I checked the MD adapter and it is exactly the length it should be, and only varies by < 0.02mm measured by micrometer. (Which is as good as the other adapters)
It gets expensive to try another Kindai adapter! Or do I keep trying for a better copy of the lens
I really don't Think whether I can say to the seller that this one is faulty?
p.3 #9 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
timballic wrote:
The "new" MDII 24/2.8 arrived and although it looks as mint and unused as any lens I've ever bought, it is showing just as bad problems as the MC VFC! Focus variations across the frame. Left side slightly worse than right, but only really "crisp" in the centre. Below left edge 100% (Sharpened in Lr5 60, 1.0, 40) (No change when focussed for edge of frame, it doesn't seem to have a very curved field)
I checked back to my 2012 tests (on 5DII) between the MC VFC and an MDI that I used to own, (Jim Buchanan conversion to EF), and I'm surprised to say the MDI also showed problems across the frame, though less obvious with the 5DII sensor.
Now Ive got a dilemma! Surely MC and MD (I & II) should all perform better than this, after all Leica chose this design!
So, have I had 3x poor examples, despite them all looking virtually unused?
Do I now have two adapter issues, (the VFC is on EF mount and EF adapter)? I checked the MD adapter and it is exactly the length it should be, and only varies by 0.05mm measured by micrometer.
It gets expensive to try another Kindai adapter! Or do I keep trying for a better copy of the lens
I really don't know whether I can say to the seller that this one is faulty or not....Show more →
I think it is the lens design, not you copy. I have a MC 2.8/24 in for a review and it's corner performance is disappointing as well. On mY Nex-5n I had 4 or 5 copies of the older 2.8/24 design and all performed worse than the SEL1855.
p.3 #10 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
This is edge rather than corner though Phillip!
This is at F2.8, I don't think I can return as faulty for the slight left:right difference, which could just as easily be the adapter, (you can see a larger file by clicking through on Flickr)
Again this is sharpened Lr5 60. 1.0, 40 Focussed on the telephone wire bend near centre.
Everyone says what good edges and corners this MD ø55mm design has cf the MDIII ø49mm, If this IS representative, I don't like to think what the newer one is like!
p.3 #11 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
I agree that it's the lens design of the late (last optical version) MD 24/2.8. I have a copy and it performed similarly - not uniformly sharp across the frame and my copy also showed odd softness on the left side in the mid zone but not on the right side. Changing the adapter did not improve things.
p.3 #13 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
timballic wrote:
This is edge rather than corner though Phillip!
This is at F2.8, I don't think I can return as faulty for the very slight left:right difference, (you can see a larger file by clicking through on Flickr)
Again this is sharpened Lr5 60. 1.0, 40 Focussed on the telephone wire bend near centre.
Everyone says what good edges and corners the MD ø55mm design has cf the MDIII ø49mm, If this IS representative, I don't like to think what the newer one is like!
I don't see a full size version on Flickr but that actually looks good to me for F2.8.
p.3 #14 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
Tariq, it's 3200px if you click on "other sizes". I didn't load full 6000px as it takes SO long to download ;o)
Surprisingly though, even at F11 the left side is a tad worse than the right:
p.3 #16 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
timballic wrote:
It's 3200px if you click on "other sizes". I didn't load full 6000px as it takes SO long to download ;o)
Yeah, I saw the 3200 version. So, if I'm understanding correctly, there is no improvement at the borders and corners going from wide open 2.8 to F11? The wide open version above seems to look better than the F11 version.
p.3 #17 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Yeah, I saw the 3200 version. So, if I'm understanding correctly, there is no improvement at the borders and corners going from wide open 2.8 to F11? The wide open version above seems to look better than the F11 version.
The corners improve by F11 ;o) But the centre is very good wide open.
p.3 #19 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
On some of these MD 24/2.8's (at least on the last version), the floating element focusing design can get wonky so that the lens does not perform the same every time it's focused. I saw that with my copy. It's fairly easy to notice in use as the image will slightly move (stutter up/down or sideways slightly) when you are focusing the lens. If you see that behavior, it's a defective lens.
p.3 #20 · Sony A7 24mm F2.8 Lens Comparison/shootout
Tariq Gibran wrote:
On some of these MD 24/2.8's (at least on the last version), the floating element focusing design can get wonky so that the lens does not perform the same every time it's focused. I saw that with my copy. It's fairly easy to notice in use as the image will slightly move (stutter up/down or sideways slightly) when you are focusing the lens. If you see that behavior, it's a defective lens.
Nope, the image stays rock solid on reversing focus. It feels lovely.
There is very slight shift with the FDn, that I mentioned at the beginning, but that has been a consistently good performer.
