Phew! Mine seems to be centered, too, after several (meaningless) test shots. So, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow would be time for me to put it through its paces but by taking real life images. Enough test shots for me! One thing that stands out, although only in test images, the bokeh is smooth and pleasing, at least to me eyes.
I would be interested to see comparison against SAL 24-70 f/2.8 zeiss zoom. It packs real kick in landscape use but has ugly bokeh. However I do not care about bokeh.
AGeoJO wrote:
Phew! Mine seems to be centered, too, after several (meaningless) test shots. So, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow would be time for me to put it through its paces but by taking real life images. Enough test shots for me! One thing that stands out, although only in test images, the bokeh is smooth and pleasing, at least to me eyes.
I'm with you on this . My wall test this morning than I'm done with testing it, looks killer already.
I'm going to wait for the 85 hopefully get it Friday and head out to my favorite junkyard in Jerome and give it a real run.
MJKoski wrote:
I'm waiting for Fred's (or anyone else for that matter) proper landscape shots with the lens. Random walls and trees will not budge for me.
Always a wise move!
On a side note, I don't shoot landscapes, but did notice when I tested my copy on a landscape that my copy is bitingly sharp right across the frame apart from the last 10% of right-side frame where its slightly softer @ f/2.8. But by f/5.6 its gone, and everything is pinners!
I did notice my UPS box was a little bashed on the corner AND the lens-cap was EXTREMELY tough to get off initially, it was as if the lens/box had been bashed in transit.
Never having returned a lens, I think I may return this, not because its bad, but 9/10th of the frame is actually so superb. I'm actually quite shocked how good that 9/10th are wide-open on the wide-end! ~Chris
MJKoski wrote:
I'm waiting for Fred's (or anyone else for that matter) proper landscape shots with the lens. Random walls and trees will not budge for me.
So a F8 image is basically what you are going to get. What does that tell you. Very strange comment to be honest. Your shooting at a lens sweat spot and learning nothing about close or mid range images only basically infinity. F8 on just about any lens at infinity will not tell you much. To each his own but I do find this a limiting request for quality.
GMPhotography wrote:
So a F8 image is basically what you are going to get. What does that tell you. Very strange comment to be honest. Your shooting at a lens sweat spot and learning nothing about close or mid range images only basically infinity. F8 on just about any lens at infinity will not tell you much. To each his own but I do find this a limiting request for quality.
The only test that counts is a test that mimics how you plan to use the lens. If you only use the lens for landscape at infinity stopped down to f8 - f11, you probably have zero interest how the lens behaves at close focus wide open...at least I would.
The same goes for cameras...I shoot my A7R from ISO 100-800, really don't care what the images look like at ISO 6400.
p.19 #10 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
stevesanacore wrote:
That's a lens that I need a serious comparison with before I become a believer.
The GM lens is reported to be slightly better but don't expect it to be like night and day: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1422959. That 4-year old Canon lens is excellent and holds its own. That Sony could surpasses the IQ of that lens, albeit not by much, is not a small feat.
p.19 #11 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
chez wrote:
The only test that counts is a test that mimics how you plan to use the lens. If you only use the lens for landscape at infinity stopped down to f8 - f11, you probably have zero interest how the lens behaves at close focus wide open...at least I would.
The same goes for cameras...I shoot my A7R from ISO 100-800, really don't care what the images look like at ISO 6400.
Honestly than you never need to read a mtf chart and can ignore all testing. F8 on any lens at infinity will work. Horses for courses . You won't even be able to tell if you have a bad lens. As most of the problems will most likely be in the sky. I'm sorry it's just very narrow minded. I mean your never going to take a shot of your family or anything like that. Maybe I did not have enough espresso this morning and what is proper mean. Well I'll go shoot my wall and anyone can ignore it but it's important to know what a lens can do regardless how you intend to use it. But whatever floats your boat.
p.19 #12 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
stevesanacore wrote:
That's a lens that I need a serious comparison with before I become a believer.
I shot the Canon a lot, for journalistic work and wide-open, it is lovely! But, from my limited testing, looking at things like OOF blur the Sony is more pleasing, and it certainly is sharper. I wouldn't EVER consider shooting the Canon, wide-open at 24mm for a landscape!
p.19 #13 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Three things:
1) F/8 is still a feat to get right with R2. Crappy lenses will not deliver even at f/8 with this body.
2) Yes, horses for the courses. If I want to play with shallow DoF I will use a T/S lens. No ordinary lens can touch the possibilities for smudging out the useless objects around the subject.
3) Lots of praise for new things, but very few artistic examples with these mega-lenses in actual use
SAL 24-70 delivers almost nasty contrast at f/8, perfect for landscape use if such focal length is the goal.
p.19 #14 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
GMPhotography wrote:
Honestly than you never need to read a mtf chart and can ignore all testing. F8 on any lens at infinity will work. Horses for courses . You won't even be able to tell if you have a bad lens. As most of the problems will most likely be in the sky. I'm sorry it's just very narrow minded. I mean your never going to take a shot of your family or anything like that. Maybe I did not have enough espresso this morning and what is proper mean. Well I'll go shoot my wall and anyone can ignore it but it's important to know what a lens can do regardless how you intend to use it. But whatever floats your boat. ...Show more →
I'd honestly say, the little (humor) 24-70 GM is the most pleasing looking lens I've seen on a Sony to date, superb image quality, great blur rendition and the first zoom I'd consider worthy of shooting wide-open at every focal length. Vignetting is far-far better than the old Canon too, I can hardly see any so LR corrections for me are not required.
It's a superb lens, and for anyone who chases quality, probably the best normal zoom I've ever seen, and better than most primes too.
p.19 #15 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
MJKoski wrote:
Three things:
1) F/8 is still a feat to get right with R2. Crappy lenses will not deliver even at f/8 with this body.
2) Yes, horses for the courses. If I want to play with shallow DoF I will use a T/S lens. No ordinary lens can touch the possibilities for smudging out the useless objects around the subject.
3) Lots of praise for new things, but very few artistic examples with these mega-lenses in actual use
SAL 24-70 delivers almost nasty contrast at f/8, perfect for landscape use if such focal length is the goal.
What do you expect reference 'artistic examples' most real users are still pulling the tape off of the UPS boxes. I wish most online commentators actually had websites or at least web galleries displaying their work so we better know what we're all relating to reference 'art & quality.'
p.19 #16 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
GMPhotography wrote:
Honestly than you never need to read a mtf chart and can ignore all testing. F8 on any lens at infinity will work. Horses for courses . You won't even be able to tell if you have a bad lens. As most of the problems will most likely be in the sky. I'm sorry it's just very narrow minded. I mean your never going to take a shot of your family or anything like that. Maybe I did not have enough espresso this morning and what is proper mean. Well I'll go shoot my wall and anyone can ignore it but it's important to know what a lens can do regardless how you intend to use it. But whatever floats your boat. ...Show more →
With today's high megapixel sensors, I'm not sure this is true anymore. Used to be that around f/8-f/11 there were only minor resolution differences between lenses except for rendering and aberration control (zooms or primes). That was the 10-20MP era.
Now, with 40-50MP+ and future 70-100MP+ sensors differences between lenses are very apparent even at f/8.
For landscape photographers, the most used apertures are f/8 or smaller, making the new 24-70GM excellent across the entire frame including extreme edges. However, I would not hesitate shooting a wider apertures.
My go to set-up is: Loxia 21/2.8, RX1RII (32mm uncorrected) and Loxia 50/2 but whenever changing lenses is not recommended, the 24-70GM will be my only lens. -- with the CV 15/4.5 on my pocket for ultra-wide emergencies.
p.19 #18 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Just making sure we have a good copy before our returns run out. This thing needs to sing before I put a client gig on the line
chrisgibbs wrote:
What do you expect reference 'artistic examples' most real users are still pulling the tape off of the UPS boxes. I wish most online commentators actually had websites or at least web galleries displaying their work so we better know what we're all relating to reference 'art & quality.'
p.19 #19 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
I'm sorry I'm a little pissy this morning too. My damn refund has not hit my paypal account and my GM 85 is in my dealers hand yesterday ready to ship. Now I have to ask my wife if I can borrow money out our checking account. That's going to cost me a 1200 dollar freaking purse. Lol
p.19 #20 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
GMPhotography wrote:
I'm sorry I'm a little pissy this morning too. My damn refund has not hit my paypal account and my GM 85 is in my dealers hand yesterday ready to ship. Now I have to ask my wife if I can borrow money out our checking account. That's going to cost me a 1200 dollar freaking purse. Lol
Damnit
no wonder you were a little short. And yes pun intended.
no wonder you were a little short. And yes pun intended.