This topic is in the 2016 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2016Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
p.19 #1Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
MID-FIELD AREA:
CY 28/2.8 (LEFT)
FE 28/2 (RIGHT)
CY 28/2.8 (LEFT)
FE 28/2 (RIGHT)
 |
||
 |
||
|
Apr 27, 2016 at 04:26 PM
p.19 #2Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
DavidBM wrote:
I have all in-camera corrections turned "off".
I didn't not correct for CA, vignetting or distortion for these crops.
The FE 28/2 has much bigger distortion. From the crops you can see the difference in FL. I would say about 2mm uncorrected.
To me, the CY 28/2.8 has better resolution and contrast. The FE 28/2 looks a bit fuzzy on this area.
I took about 5 images from the FE 28/2 and they all look the same. This is surprising to me. The Contax could even be better than the GM at f/8 because the FE 28/2 and GM were pretty close.
Contax 28 left and FE 28 right (extreme edges at f/8)
LR sharpening: 40, 0.7, 25, 0 (No color or exposure changes)
BTW: The Contax infinity was just a tiny tad before the hard stop and surprisingly the entire image field looks good at that position. (center, mid and corners)
This was using my Novoflex adapter -- now flocked
I think it would be fair to remove the CA for the Distagon as well. The Sony's CA are removed automatically and you can't suppress that correction (at least with LR). Btw: was the Distortion of the FE 2/28 corrected?
On the 24MP a7 I can see a small advantage or the Distagon at around r=18mm but I am surprised how significant the difference is in your comparison. The annoying thing about the Distagon is that the extreme corners are plain soft because of field curvature and they are quite good with the FE 2/28. Because of the extreme corners I prefer the Pentax K 3.5/28 for my landscape photography.HI Fred.
Are the crops you have posted the corners or the edges?
If it's the corners, the copy of the contax you have is a lot better there than the one Philip tested - and maybe the FE worse!
About a year ago I tested by Zuiko 28/3.5 and found slightly better corners at f8 than my FE (but only slightly)
I will go look for those crops...
They were the extreme edges of the frame: (r=18 until 21.5mm)
Both of my copies of the CY 28 and FE 28 are well centered.
It's interesting to note that the GM is only slightly better than the FE 28 at the extreme area (f/8). The Distagon 28/2.8 seems to be noticeably better. There is big difference from f/5.6 to f/8 towards the corners for the Distagon 28. (ala 35-70/3.4)
As you know there are lens variances out there. I can only compare the copies I have.
Fred Miranda wrote
Hi Philip,I have all in-camera corrections turned "off".
I didn't not correct for CA, vignetting or distortion for these crops.
The FE 28/2 has much bigger distortion. From the crops you can see the difference in FL. I would say about 2mm uncorrected.
Phillip Reeve wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
To start, here is the extreme edge area. (both at f/8)To me, the CY 28/2.8 has better resolution and contrast. The FE 28/2 looks a bit fuzzy on this area.
I took about 5 images from the FE 28/2 and they all look the same. This is surprising to me. The Contax could even be better than the GM at f/8 because the FE 28/2 and GM were pretty close.
Contax 28 left and FE 28 right (extreme edges at f/8)
LR sharpening: 40, 0.7, 25, 0 (No color or exposure changes)
BTW: The Contax infinity was just a tiny tad before the hard stop and surprisingly the entire image field looks good at that position. (center, mid and corners)
This was using my Novoflex adapter -- now flocked
On the 24MP a7 I can see a small advantage or the Distagon at around r=18mm but I am surprised how significant the difference is in your comparison. The annoying thing about the Distagon is that the extreme corners are plain soft because of field curvature and they are quite good with the FE 2/28. Because of the extreme corners I prefer the Pentax K 3.5/28 for my landscape photography.
Are the crops you have posted the corners or the edges?
If it's the corners, the copy of the contax you have is a lot better there than the one Philip tested - and maybe the FE worse!
About a year ago I tested by Zuiko 28/3.5 and found slightly better corners at f8 than my FE (but only slightly)
I will go look for those crops...
They were the extreme edges of the frame: (r=18 until 21.5mm)
Both of my copies of the CY 28 and FE 28 are well centered.
It's interesting to note that the GM is only slightly better than the FE 28 at the extreme area (f/8). The Distagon 28/2.8 seems to be noticeably better. There is big difference from f/5.6 to f/8 towards the corners for the Distagon 28. (ala 35-70/3.4)
As you know there are lens variances out there. I can only compare the copies I have.
Apr 27, 2016 at 04:27 PM
p.19 #3Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Fred Miranda wrote:
[
It's interesting to note that the GM is only slightly better than the FE 28 at the extreme area (f/8). The Distagon 28/2.8 seems to be noticeably better. There is big difference from f/5.6 to f/8 towards the corners for the Distagon 28. (ala 35-70/3.4)
As you know there are lens variances out there. I can only compare the copies I have.
Of course!
Wow the Distagon looks better in the midfield too.
I gotta hope my Oly 25/3.5 looks similarly better than my FE when I retest, otherwise I can see more damn C/Y glass in my future...
[
It's interesting to note that the GM is only slightly better than the FE 28 at the extreme area (f/8). The Distagon 28/2.8 seems to be noticeably better. There is big difference from f/5.6 to f/8 towards the corners for the Distagon 28. (ala 35-70/3.4)
As you know there are lens variances out there. I can only compare the copies I have.
Of course!
Wow the Distagon looks better in the midfield too.
I gotta hope my Oly 25/3.5 looks similarly better than my FE when I retest, otherwise I can see more damn C/Y glass in my future...
Apr 27, 2016 at 04:36 PM
p.19 #4Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
The copy I have of the Distagon 28 is really excellent starting at f/4. However the extreme corners need f/11.
I will post the complete aperture crops for the extreme corners. It's an very good alternative if you like to carry a 28mm prime.
DavidBM wrote:
It's interesting to note that the GM is only slightly better than the FE 28 at the extreme area (f/8). The Distagon 28/2.8 seems to be noticeably better. There is big difference from f/5.6 to f/8 towards the corners for the Distagon 28. (ala 35-70/3.4)
As you know there are lens variances out there. I can only compare the copies I have.Of course!
Wow the Distagon looks better in the midfield too.
I gotta hope my Oly 25/3.5 looks similarly better than my FE when I retest, otherwise I can see more damn C/Y glass in my future...
I will post the complete aperture crops for the extreme corners. It's an very good alternative if you like to carry a 28mm prime.
DavidBM wrote:
Fred Miranda wrote
[It's interesting to note that the GM is only slightly better than the FE 28 at the extreme area (f/8). The Distagon 28/2.8 seems to be noticeably better. There is big difference from f/5.6 to f/8 towards the corners for the Distagon 28. (ala 35-70/3.4)
As you know there are lens variances out there. I can only compare the copies I have.
Wow the Distagon looks better in the midfield too.
I gotta hope my Oly 25/3.5 looks similarly better than my FE when I retest, otherwise I can see more damn C/Y glass in my future...
Apr 27, 2016 at 04:42 PM
p.19 #5Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
EXTREME-CORNER AREA:
CY 28/2.8 (LEFT)
FE 28/2 (RIGHT)
As Philip wrote, there seems to be automatic vignetting correction for the FE 28 even though my in-camera corrections are "off" and I didn't enabled any correction in Lightroom.
Before f/8 it's not good but at f/8 and especially f/11 it's actually amazing. At f/11 there a slight loss of micro-contrast in the center but it's the best landscape setting for this lens. (At least my copy)
CY 28/2.8 (LEFT)
FE 28/2 (RIGHT)
As Philip wrote, there seems to be automatic vignetting correction for the FE 28 even though my in-camera corrections are "off" and I didn't enabled any correction in Lightroom.
Before f/8 it's not good but at f/8 and especially f/11 it's actually amazing. At f/11 there a slight loss of micro-contrast in the center but it's the best landscape setting for this lens. (At least my copy)
|
||
 |
||
|
Apr 27, 2016 at 04:58 PM
p.19 #6Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
No contest. Okay I'm not a 28mm F2 fan at all anyway so maybe thats bias but at F8 the Sony still can't produce . Okay so can you get that out of your bag now. 
Apr 27, 2016 at 05:01 PM
p.19 #7Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Here is the GM @28mm versus CY Distagon 28/2.8 (extreme corners)
As I wrote, the GM is a modern lens and performs much better at wider aperture towards the corners.
However, at f/8 and f/11, the CY Distagon 28 competes very well.
CY Distagon 28 (left), GM at 28mm (right)
As I wrote, the GM is a modern lens and performs much better at wider aperture towards the corners.
However, at f/8 and f/11, the CY Distagon 28 competes very well.
CY Distagon 28 (left), GM at 28mm (right)
|
||
 |
||
|
Apr 27, 2016 at 05:15 PM
p.19 #8Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
There's a fair bit of the extreme corner that doesn't clear up with the Distagon at f8, and at f11 there is a tiny bit.
It really depends how much that last mm matters I guess. Not much in practice, but it's pretty iteresting.
Be nice to see how the PentaxSMC that Philip is keen on does in that region, and revisit the Zuiko 28/3.5
The GM (and the FE 28) seem to have a kind of contrast (especially in the shadows) which I prefer to the older glass.
It really depends how much that last mm matters I guess. Not much in practice, but it's pretty iteresting.
Be nice to see how the PentaxSMC that Philip is keen on does in that region, and revisit the Zuiko 28/3.5
The GM (and the FE 28) seem to have a kind of contrast (especially in the shadows) which I prefer to the older glass.
Apr 27, 2016 at 05:46 PM
p.19 #9Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
DavidBM wrote:
There's a fair bit of the extreme corner that doesn't clear up with the Distagon at f8, and at f11 there is a tiny bit.
It really depends how much that last mm matters I guess. Not much in practice, but it's pretty iteresting.
Be nice to see how the PentaxSMC that Philip is keen on does in that region, and revisit the Zuiko 28/3.5
The GM (and the FE 28) seem to have a kind of contrast (especially in the shadows) which I prefer to the older glass.
Aside from using the GM zoom at 28mm, I would only bring the Distagon 28/2.8 for landscapes at f/11 or smaller. (From my tests it looks best at f/11 towards the edges of the frame)
I have been using the FE 28/2 at f/8 or f/11 and the Distagon is a better choice at his aperture IMO. (center, mid and corners) - see crops below..
What I really love about the FE 28/2 is flare resistance though. I wonder how the Distagon will perform in the field.
See crops below at f/11: (Distagon on the LEFT)
There's a fair bit of the extreme corner that doesn't clear up with the Distagon at f8, and at f11 there is a tiny bit.
It really depends how much that last mm matters I guess. Not much in practice, but it's pretty iteresting.
Be nice to see how the PentaxSMC that Philip is keen on does in that region, and revisit the Zuiko 28/3.5
The GM (and the FE 28) seem to have a kind of contrast (especially in the shadows) which I prefer to the older glass.
Aside from using the GM zoom at 28mm, I would only bring the Distagon 28/2.8 for landscapes at f/11 or smaller. (From my tests it looks best at f/11 towards the edges of the frame)
I have been using the FE 28/2 at f/8 or f/11 and the Distagon is a better choice at his aperture IMO. (center, mid and corners) - see crops below..
What I really love about the FE 28/2 is flare resistance though. I wonder how the Distagon will perform in the field.
See crops below at f/11: (Distagon on the LEFT)
|
||
 |
||
|
Apr 27, 2016 at 06:12 PM
p.19 #10Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
GMPhotography wrote:
No contest. Okay I'm not a 28mm F2 fan at all anyway so maybe thats bias but at F8 the Sony still can't produce . Okay so can you get that out of your bag now.
I think I will swap the FE 28/2 for the Distagon 28/2.8 until we get a Loxia.
No contest. Okay I'm not a 28mm F2 fan at all anyway so maybe thats bias but at F8 the Sony still can't produce . Okay so can you get that out of your bag now.
I think I will swap the FE 28/2 for the Distagon 28/2.8 until we get a Loxia.
Apr 27, 2016 at 06:14 PM
p.19 #11Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Yep. Distagon rules the FE at f11.
I'm awfully tempted by the GM zoom.
But I know I won't multiday hike with it.
At home or roundabout home I'm more likely to use the primes in the range
So It's down to plane/car travel (including landscape where you don't walk more than a few hours from the car): I really don't mind, and quite enjoy, taking a set of primes (Batis Lox and FE). But the GM would weigh less than that set, and avoid lens changing. But also not give the opportunity for the occasional shallower DOF image.
I think probably there is no fact of the matter as to what is better -- just different benefits. And since I can't see how to specify in advance for a trip that it is better to have the GM or have a set of primes, there's not point having both.
So the conservative strategy is to stick with the primes. For now!
I'm awfully tempted by the GM zoom.
But I know I won't multiday hike with it.
At home or roundabout home I'm more likely to use the primes in the range
So It's down to plane/car travel (including landscape where you don't walk more than a few hours from the car): I really don't mind, and quite enjoy, taking a set of primes (Batis Lox and FE). But the GM would weigh less than that set, and avoid lens changing. But also not give the opportunity for the occasional shallower DOF image.
I think probably there is no fact of the matter as to what is better -- just different benefits. And since I can't see how to specify in advance for a trip that it is better to have the GM or have a set of primes, there's not point having both.
So the conservative strategy is to stick with the primes. For now!
Apr 27, 2016 at 06:23 PM
p.19 #12Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
DavidBM wrote:
Yep. Distagon rules the FE at f11.
I'm awfully tempted by the GM zoom.
But I know I won't multiday hike with it.
At home or roundabout home I'm more likely to use the primes in the range
So It's down to plane/car travel (including landscape where you don't walk more than a few hours from the car): I really don't mind, and quite enjoy, taking a set of primes (Batis Lox and FE). But the GM would weigh less than that set, and avoid lens changing. But also not give the opportunity for the occasional shallower DOF image.
I think probably there is no...Show more →
I think it all depends what the lens will be primarily used for.
If you are using it for landscapes and usually shoot from f/8 to f/13, the CY 28/2.8 + CY 35-70/3.4 could give you even better IQ than the GM zoom, especially at the longer range. There is also the difference in rendering where the Zeiss combo has more micro-contrast. It also costs about 4 times less.
I see the 24-70GM as much more versatile lens and ready for future sensors. It can be used for landscape, portraits, street, events, anything really! It is native with fast, silent and accurate AF and it renders beautifully. Bokeh is amazing for a mid-range zoom. The downside is price and size but once you start adding all the primes in its range, it starts to add up.
I just like to confuse FMers with alternatives!
Yep. Distagon rules the FE at f11.
I'm awfully tempted by the GM zoom.
But I know I won't multiday hike with it.
At home or roundabout home I'm more likely to use the primes in the range
So It's down to plane/car travel (including landscape where you don't walk more than a few hours from the car): I really don't mind, and quite enjoy, taking a set of primes (Batis Lox and FE). But the GM would weigh less than that set, and avoid lens changing. But also not give the opportunity for the occasional shallower DOF image.
I think probably there is no...Show more →
I think it all depends what the lens will be primarily used for.
If you are using it for landscapes and usually shoot from f/8 to f/13, the CY 28/2.8 + CY 35-70/3.4 could give you even better IQ than the GM zoom, especially at the longer range. There is also the difference in rendering where the Zeiss combo has more micro-contrast. It also costs about 4 times less.
I see the 24-70GM as much more versatile lens and ready for future sensors. It can be used for landscape, portraits, street, events, anything really! It is native with fast, silent and accurate AF and it renders beautifully. Bokeh is amazing for a mid-range zoom. The downside is price and size but once you start adding all the primes in its range, it starts to add up.
I just like to confuse FMers with alternatives!
Apr 27, 2016 at 06:37 PM
p.19 #13Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm awfully tempted by the GM zoom.
But I know I won't multiday hike with it.
At home or roundabout home I'm more likely to use the primes in the range
So It's down to plane/car travel (including landscape where you don't walk more than a few hours from the car): I really don't mind, and quite enjoy, taking a set of primes (Batis Lox and FE). But the GM would weigh less than that set, and avoid lens changing. But also not give the opportunity for the occasional shallower DOF image.
I think probably there is no fact of the matter as to what is better -- just different benefits. And since I can't see how to specify in advance for a trip that it is better to have the GM or have a set of primes, there's not point having both.
So the conservative strategy is to stick with the primes. For now!I think it all depends what the lens will be primarily used for.
If you are using it for landscapes and usually shoot from f/8 to f/13, the CY 28/2.8 + CY 35-70/3.4 could give you even better IQ than the GM zoom, especially at the longer range. There is also the difference in rendering where the Zeiss combo has more micro-contrast. It also costs about 4 times less.
I see the 24-70GM as much more versatile lens and ready for future sensors. It can be used for landscape, portraits, street, events, anything really! It is native with fast,...Show more →
I agree: the GMis tempting for general travel which sometimes involves a little landscape but not primarily. The alternative for me is my current travel kit of Loxia/Batis/FE/Batis. I think I'm happy with sticking wiht that kit, but I can imagine weakening. But I don't want to give up any of those primes, and I can't justify both!
For landscape on long hiking trips, I've got the CY3570 based on your tests. My copy is waiting for me at home (spend three days at our pied-à-terre in the city for work each week) for testing, along with the S100!
For landscape on dedicated trips by car or bike with not more than a few hours walking, I'm happy with primes too.
DavidBM wrote
Yep. Distagon rules the FE at f11.I'm awfully tempted by the GM zoom.
But I know I won't multiday hike with it.
At home or roundabout home I'm more likely to use the primes in the range
So It's down to plane/car travel (including landscape where you don't walk more than a few hours from the car): I really don't mind, and quite enjoy, taking a set of primes (Batis Lox and FE). But the GM would weigh less than that set, and avoid lens changing. But also not give the opportunity for the occasional shallower DOF image.
I think probably there is no fact of the matter as to what is better -- just different benefits. And since I can't see how to specify in advance for a trip that it is better to have the GM or have a set of primes, there's not point having both.
So the conservative strategy is to stick with the primes. For now!
If you are using it for landscapes and usually shoot from f/8 to f/13, the CY 28/2.8 + CY 35-70/3.4 could give you even better IQ than the GM zoom, especially at the longer range. There is also the difference in rendering where the Zeiss combo has more micro-contrast. It also costs about 4 times less.
I see the 24-70GM as much more versatile lens and ready for future sensors. It can be used for landscape, portraits, street, events, anything really! It is native with fast,...Show more →
I agree: the GMis tempting for general travel which sometimes involves a little landscape but not primarily. The alternative for me is my current travel kit of Loxia/Batis/FE/Batis. I think I'm happy with sticking wiht that kit, but I can imagine weakening. But I don't want to give up any of those primes, and I can't justify both!
For landscape on long hiking trips, I've got the CY3570 based on your tests. My copy is waiting for me at home (spend three days at our pied-à-terre in the city for work each week) for testing, along with the S100!
For landscape on dedicated trips by car or bike with not more than a few hours walking, I'm happy with primes too.
Apr 27, 2016 at 06:51 PM
p.19 #14Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Just need to find one cheap at some point. I only want it for when I'm not taking the zoom. Bottom line here we are not going to beat the zoom in most cases. If you have a Choppy, a lovely Loxia 21 , GM 85 and the GM 24-70 you can stop right there and have the best in class for Sony cams right now. I have the Loxia 50 and if I add a nice 28mm than its a better travel package without the zoom. Dare I say a big kit that can be divided into two kits. At this point that's all I'm after and I think it would be a great kit for a lot of folks. The big trick here is simply this and I feel the pain but you have to get over the size and weight of the zoom. It's too damn freaking good a lens to ignore and folks I'm not the friendliest zoom person. But I realize how damn stinking good it is at 24,28,35 and 50 too plus you get a very decent 70 not killer but very good and honestly if you did the match with some primes the zoom is really not that bad. That's kind of my final conclusion and you all know how much I debate this still internally. I feel very comfortable right now on how I got to this point. Tomorrow Zeiss or Sony may announce something new but I can't shoot the future I can only shoot what I have in my hands. Man that was just to logical
Fred Miranda wrote:
I think I will swap the FE 28/2 for the Distagon 28/2.8 until we get a Loxia.
Fred Miranda wrote:
GMPhotography wrote
No contest. Okay I'm not a 28mm F2 fan at all anyway so maybe thats bias but at F8 the Sony still can't produce . Okay so can you get that out of your bag now.Apr 27, 2016 at 06:57 PM
p.19 #15Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
GMPhotography wrote:
Just need to find one cheap at some point. I only want it for when I'm not taking the zoom. Bottom line here we are not going to beat the zoom in most cases. If you have a Choppy, a lovely Loxia 21 , GM 85 and the GM 24-70 you can stop right there and have the best in class for Sony cams right now. I have the Loxia 50 and if I add a nice 28mm than its a better travel package without the zoom. Dare I say a big kit that can be divided into two kits....Show more →I think I will swap the FE 28/2 for the Distagon 28/2.8 until we get a Loxia.
The CY 28/2.8 is very nice. The manual focus is so smooth and a pleasure to use. We can really nail peak focus.
There is moderate field curvature though (inwards). I don't think it's as bad as the ZE version but it's something to keep in mind. My copy is slightly decentered in one axis.
Here are crops showing the best extreme corners this lens can give when focused on that area. (At expense of considerable center resolution) - It's also shot with better lighting. I think that when focused on that area, f/8 looks really good.
Just need to find one cheap at some point. I only want it for when I'm not taking the zoom. Bottom line here we are not going to beat the zoom in most cases. If you have a Choppy, a lovely Loxia 21 , GM 85 and the GM 24-70 you can stop right there and have the best in class for Sony cams right now. I have the Loxia 50 and if I add a nice 28mm than its a better travel package without the zoom. Dare I say a big kit that can be divided into two kits....Show more →
Fred Miranda wrote
GMPhotography wrote
No contest. Okay I'm not a 28mm F2 fan at all anyway so maybe thats bias but at F8 the Sony still can't produce . Okay so can you get that out of your bag now.The CY 28/2.8 is very nice. The manual focus is so smooth and a pleasure to use. We can really nail peak focus.
There is moderate field curvature though (inwards). I don't think it's as bad as the ZE version but it's something to keep in mind. My copy is slightly decentered in one axis.
Here are crops showing the best extreme corners this lens can give when focused on that area. (At expense of considerable center resolution) - It's also shot with better lighting. I think that when focused on that area, f/8 looks really good.
|
||
 |
||
|
Apr 27, 2016 at 07:12 PM
p.19 #16Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
So, Fred, it seems you can simply focus-bracket on tripod, then merge the two frames for edge-to-edge sharpness. Landscape is amenable to such methods.
Apr 27, 2016 at 10:28 PM
p.19 #17Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
rico wrote:
So, Fred, it seems you can simply focus-bracket on tripod, then merge the two frames for edge-to-edge sharpness. Landscape is amenable to such methods.
I was going to suggest that! And/or aperture bracket (f11 for corners, something wider for the centre)
So, Fred, it seems you can simply focus-bracket on tripod, then merge the two frames for edge-to-edge sharpness. Landscape is amenable to such methods.
I was going to suggest that! And/or aperture bracket (f11 for corners, something wider for the centre)
Apr 27, 2016 at 10:41 PM
p.19 #18Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Yes, it's possible or just compromise. (Focus in the middle of the 2 marks) or the mid-field area.
Apr 27, 2016 at 11:09 PM
p.19 #19Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Like Fred I have both FE 28 and C/Y 28/2.8 and my findings mirror his exactly. I like my FE for people photography and close-ups, but for landscapes I much prefer the C/Y. There's not a big difference in sharpness between mine, but the photos from the C/Y come out more vivid, detailed and clear. It's apparent on my screen even without pixel peeping.
Apr 28, 2016 at 12:56 AM
p.19 #20Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
I definitely consider the FE 28mm f/2 a reportage-prime. It's fast-ish, centrally sharp at wider apertures, small, light, versatile.
It's definitely not a pure landscape tool for those who want low distortion, sharp corners, and willing to work on a tripod w/ remote release. That's not to say it can't deliver in those situations... just that if you're willing to work for that diminishing result regime, it's not lens choice #1.
I love the lens. I just prefer 35mm, so I'm hoping for a similar AF option at that FL.
It's definitely not a pure landscape tool for those who want low distortion, sharp corners, and willing to work on a tripod w/ remote release. That's not to say it can't deliver in those situations... just that if you're willing to work for that diminishing result regime, it's not lens choice #1.
I love the lens. I just prefer 35mm, so I'm hoping for a similar AF option at that FL.
Apr 28, 2016 at 01:28 AM