Is it just me, or does the zoom seem stronger at the wide end, a bit behind at 70, and weakest at 50? That seems to me like a departure from typical zoom performance, where the best performance was always in the middle range.
Wow. Bokeh is lovely. I am sure if I looked for it, I would find some LoCa, but the smoothness really appeals. Thanks for the quick examples!
This lens' bokeh feels like a better corrected Minolta 28-70/2.8 G. That lens had some serious downfalls in usage, but the IQ was well rounded between bokeh, sharpness, and color. This lens really looks perfect for me. Meets my criteria is for "enough" sharpness (I couldn't care less about eyelashes that could stab me), balanced colors, excellent bokeh, and pleasant contrast. Really checks the boxes. Would I have to sell all of my lenses to get it? Almost.....
Real world shooting and this lens is quite amazing! It is not always about the absolute sharpness but the how the images feel. This lens will make for a great work horse for many.
Thank you Fred
No, taken minutes apart. I meant the lighting was better than on the previous crops. (First pages)
The RX1RII is still better but the zoom performed very well at 35mm.
DavidBM wrote:
Did the lighting change between the zoom and the rx1rii in the centre crops? The rx looks much contrastier..
So another forum member asked this already but any qualitative comparison between this and the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II adapted to the Sony. '
Also its really great to see all the shots and comparisons but I'm wondering if you would share a summary.
I just got my copy but it will take me a little while to catch up to the work you've done so I'm interested in your opinion.
I will start to do some comparisons this weekend against the Canon and then maybe the Batis 25.
Great going to look now besides this iPhone can't see anything. This focal length is important too me
Fred Miranda wrote:
No, taken minutes apart. I meant the lighting was better than on the previous crops. (First pages)
The RX1RII is still better but the zoom performed very well at 35mm.
For me that is kind of where I want it. I don't care after 50 per say
freaklikeme wrote:
Is it just me, or does the zoom seem stronger at the wide end, a bit behind at 70, and weakest at 50? That seems to me like a departure from typical zoom performance, where the best performance was always in the middle range.
Did not touch colors but lighting was really nice. Same sharpening and highlight control when needed. The bokeh smoothness and colors reminds me of the Sonnar 35/2
Vcize wrote:
Is there any processing in those bokeh shots? Colors look great.
swldstn wrote:
So another forum member asked this already but any qualitative comparison between this and the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II adapted to the Sony. '
Also its really great to see all the shots and comparisons but I'm wondering if you would share a summary.
I just got my copy but it will take me a little while to catch up to the work you've done so I'm interested in your opinion.
I will start to do some comparisons this weekend against the Canon and then maybe the Batis 25.
If I could find some faults:
* It is big (not as heavy as it looks though)
* It flares easier than I like (More testing needed)
* High vignetting wide open at the wider range (24, 28...)
* Some CA towards the edges of the frame at the wider range (completely removable in LR)
* I don't love the sunburst
The goods so far:
* High center and good edge resolution wide open
* Excellent performance across the frame at f/5.6
* At f/8, it's pretty much just as good as the best native primes
* Rich colors and high contrast
* Very low field curvature.
* Low astigmatism towards the edges (Huge for a zoom)
* Very well built and easy to MF, although still focus by wire
* AF fast and almost silent
* No focus shift
* Smooth bokeh and attractive rendering
I hadn't thought about the sunbursts. 11 blades always circular, isn't it? Yeah, that would never get pretty. Better than those old 6 blades, Maybe. But 11? The sunstars will be all over and thin. It may even look like flare.
I believe this lens has 9 blades. (18-point sunburst)
TheEmrys wrote:
I hadn't thought about the sunbursts. 11 blades always circular, isn't it? Yeah, that would never get pretty. Better than those old 6 blades, Maybe. But 11? The sunstars will be all over and thin. It may even look like flare.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Did not touch colors. Same sharpening and highlight control when needed. The bokeh smoothness and colors reminds me of the Sonnar 35/2
Actually it looks quite good here. I'm wondering if it performs better in the close to mid range over the infinity stuff. I will do my standard test next week in that range but so far I'm glad I bought it from what your posting Fred. Great stuff this really helps us. The bokeh I really like, I know that's personal for some folks but I'm seeing really good pop.
GMPhotography wrote:
Actually it looks quite good here. I'm wondering if it performs better in the close to mid range over the infinity stuff. I will do my sandal test next week in that range but so far I'm glad I bought it from what your posting Fred. Great stuff this really helps us. The bokeh I really like, I know that's personal for some folks but I'm seeing really good pop.
My infinity tests together with your "Big Bronco" classic location will make it or break this lens!
Agree Fred. Between yours and mine we will get a excellent idea what this lens can do. I'm feeling just from the last tests of the Sigma 24-35 the GM has a much nicer smoother look to it with really nice rendering. Your close ups are killer nice. I think this lens has a little lower contrast which makes the look a bit smoother and has better OOF by far. Not going to call it yet but I'm guessing this is more a look zoom than a clinical one. I'm liking that already.
