Here is an image taken with the FE 24-70/2.8GM @ 24mm.
I took two images, one at f/8 for the tufas and mountains in the background and another at f/14 for the lake and foreground rocks. Basically I needed more DOF and smoothness for the water. These two images were later combined in post in a very simple process. (The exif will show f/8 only though)
The full size image is very sharp center to edges. At 24mm, this zoom performs like a prime lens with great colors and contrast.
DavidBM wrote:
Although it's the same reviewer, I'm not sure those graphs are comparable. It looks as though the Batis has been put though MTF with an out of camera JPEG (which will be sharpened) and the GM has an unsharpened RAW conversion.
That's correct, but if you mouse over the graph on the Batis review, it gives you the unsharpened RAW. The difference certainly isn't as big between the lenses then, but according to just those graphs, the Batis should be sharper.
1) As aperture gets smaller different lenses become increasingly similar. The Zeiss Otus lenses are impressive because of their performance wide open at f/1.4. That's where you see the differentiation. Stop down to f/2.8 or more and lenses at a fraction of the price will start to look similar.
2) As Roger shows in his MTF with variance data, there's enough variability such that a good copy of a "worse" lens can easily surpass a bad copy of a "better" lens.
Comparing the Batis and zoom at f/2.8, a relatively slower aperture, and factoring in variation could make the performance pretty close. I own the Batis 25mm but not the 24-70 GM so I'm only speculating here.
Moroni wrote:
You find that GM 24-70 to be sharper than the Batis 25mm? Did I read that right? I'd be rather surprised if that's the case, however I open to the possibility.
GMPhotography wrote:
Have to say I really wonder about that because in our testing Fred's and mine the zoom at 24mm is outstanding. I loved the Batis 25 but I can't find my darn wall test on it to compare.
First of all, thanks for all your testing (Fred also)!!
I need to test more this weekend... I really need to search a brick wall for this testing...
How much meters are you removed from your test wall?
My corners @24 seem more soft than your of Fred's copy. At 5.6 they sharpen up better...
Maybe my test was not 100% correct so I will test again on tripod and steadyshot disabled the next days...
The pictures shown here in this topic are gorgeous
**sorry for my bad english**
Fred Miranda wrote:
Here is an image taken with the FE 24-70/2.8GM @ 24mm.
I took two images, one at f/8 for the tufas and mountains in the background and another at f/14 for the lake and foreground rocks. Basically I needed more DOF and smoothness for the water. These two images were later combined in post in a very simple process. (The exif will show f/8 only though)
The full size image is very sharp center to edges. At 24mm, this zoom performs like a prime lens with great colors and contrast.
That is super great!!
I think Sony should pay back the lens to you as your pictures in this topic are better than a very expensive commercial break
How do you get such big dof in your pictures? where do you focus on to get this?
Guy, I use an alternative lens hood on some prime lenses. And the best looking generic hood is the vented on the Sony FE 55mm f/1.8. But for GM zoom, I world rather stick with the OEM hood.
p.32 #10 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Dorkooken wrote:
That is super great!!
I think Sony should pay back the lens to you as your pictures in this topic are better than a very expensive commercial break
How do you get such big dof in your pictures? where do you focus on to get this?
Thank you! I basically combined two images at different apertures (f/8 and f/14). I prefer aperture stacking to focus stacking as I get more natural results.
All the best,
Fred
p.32 #11 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Yes I think most would . I'm trying to keep it as small as possible for my Tenba Copper 13 slim bag. Which everything fits pretty good but I hate those hoods. Lol
AGeoJO wrote:
Guy, I use an alternative lens hood on some prime lenses. And the best looking generic hood is the vented on the Sony FE 55mm f/1.8. But for GM zoom, I world rather stick with the OEM hood.
p.32 #12 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thank you! I basically combined two images at different apertures (f/8 and f/14). I prefer aperture stacking to focus stacking as I get more natural results.
All the best,
Fred
First time I've heard of this technique instead of focus stacking. You always learn something new, even on gear threads. Thanks Fred!
p.32 #13 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thank you! I basically combined two images at different apertures (f/8 and f/14). I prefer aperture stacking to focus stacking as I get more natural results.
All the best,
Fred
Fred, my understanding is from reading your post somewhere, you actually do both, right? You do stack images captured using different apertures and different focusing planes or do you strictly do image stacking captured using different apertures only?
p.32 #15 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
kkcy wrote:
First time I've heard of this technique instead of focus stacking. You always learn something new, even on gear threads. Thanks Fred!
It's also very easy to do on the field. Just change the aperture and you are done!
---------------------------------------------
AGeoJO wrote:
Fred, my understanding is from reading your post somewhere, you actually do both, right? You do stack images captured using different apertures and different focusing planes or do you strictly do image stacking captured using different apertures only?
Focus stacking is definitely a great technique but usually needs 3 ,4 or more pictures for focus transitions when shooting at f/8. It takes much longer and sometimes lighting is changing fast. After using it for a while, I started to dislike how focus stacking renders a scene. In some cases, it's unnatural to have a landscape tack sharp everywhere with zero fall-off.
I'm not sure if stacking apertures is a known technique. I discovered by experimenting with bracketing different apertures to ensure enough DOF and then realized it would be better to actually combine both apertures as a stack.
I first decide what the scene's main focal point element is. Then, I manual focus on that area using usually f/8 (sometimes even f/5.6 depending on the lens). Then I calculate the best aperture for greater DOF. (Usually from f/13 until f/18). Merging the 2 shots is sometimes very easy in Photoshop using a simple mask or with more complicated scenes, I use Zerene Stacker to do the job for me. Photoshop has its own stacking script and it's also worth a try.
Thanks for your comments!
Fred
p.32 #16 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Also have to be Leary of wind with focus stacking. 4 shots can be a real issue sometimes and I agree it can look a little fake. We as humans do not see perfectly in focus from close up to infinity as we focus as well.
Fred would photomerge in PS work with the aperture stack. Never tried combining them but I would think it work
I actually need to do focus stack with product shots this week. I always used Helicon but my license ran out. Never tried Zerene
OT but on the subject . I worked in the Aerospace industry fora number of years as the chief photographer and I would shoot a lot of black boxes. Problem is you can't get enough DOF from front to the back of the boxes with a mid zone lens like a 85. So tethered I would focus on front, than middle than back and focus stack them. Great technique for these kinds of things , so a very handy way to get the DOF needed , something to think about when your doing stuff like this. It's also a pretty fast way to go about it. End tip of the day. Lol
p.32 #17 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
GMPhotography wrote:
Also have to be Leary of wind with focus stacking. 4 shots can be a real issue sometimes and I agree it can look a little fake. We as humans do not see perfectly in focus from close up to infinity as we focus as well.
Fred would photomerge in PS work with the aperture stack. Never tried combining them but I would think it work
I actually need to do focus stack with product shots this week. I always used Helicon but my license ran out. Never tried Zerene
OT but on the subject . I worked in the Aerospace industry fora number of years as the chief photographer and I would shoot a lot of black boxes. Problem is you can't get enough DOF from front to the back of the boxes with a mid zone lens like a 85. So tethered I would focus on front, than middle than back and focus stack them. Great technique for these kinds of things , so a very handy way to get the DOF needed , something to think about when your doing stuff like this. It's also a pretty fast way to go about it. End tip of the day. Lol...Show more →
Hi Guy,
Zerene is supposed to the best unlesss something has changed. You do have to pay a premium for Zerene if you are going to use it professionally.
p.32 #20 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Funny thing is the building is not in focus in center. You may have missed focus and looks very windy. Maybe get in front of a brick wall and just do a dead on shot and see where you are at than try the infinity. Are you on tripod
