Well after the 24-70 test I am back at Big Broncos testing the 85 this morning . It was cloudy but I did find some break in the clouds to do a quick run through and make sure the lens is a good copy and it certainly is and it clearly is a outstanding lens but it has a few caveats as well. Now either I am going to start paying rent at this place or they are going to have to pay ME to advertise their store.
Here we go. Full shot. My test included 1.4 and 1.6 and their is a very good reason for this at 1.4 as you will see their is veiling flair which on every 1.4 lens I have had going back years ago its always the same case. Its extremely rare I shoot at 1.4 but more at 1.6 or 1.8 and honestly your not giving up much bokeh at all and if you even notice it. Its just a cleaner , sharper looking image at 1.6 which is the case with this GM 85 and your going to see it mostly on center. Also you will see CA until about 2.8
Really gets going in the corners at 2.8 the CA is gone and its really getting sharp. You could almost say optimum at F4 its that good
Lets move onto the crops from the building and a side building. Really watch 1.4 and 1.6 you will see the veiling flare on the 1.4. Now there is nothing wrong with 1.4 if your are doing something that you may want more artistic looking for lack of a better word. Say its a childs face you may want that to look very soft but the beauty here is at 1.6 its really sharper so you kind of get 2 lenses in one. This is very common in 1.4 lenses and you just need to know what a lens will do to avoid it or use it.
So for landscape shooters even 2.8 to the corners would be good but I think F4 or lower would be safer. Portrait folks could care less about corners
Lens vignettes to about 2.8 than clears up nice and its a nice vignette.
I do have one small issue that has been reported and I have a metal to metal noise it sounds like from 3m to infinity both in AF and MF modes. To me its sounds like a grease issue but I did read somewhere it cleaned up after about 500 shots. Mine is not going back regardless.
I know the first question here better than the Batis and its a great question because I was impressed by the Batis 85 no question. I think its the better lens overall as I think it renders better both bokeh balls and onion rings but I need to do more testing on them. It is built beatifully and for ME the weight and bulk is far less a concern than my GM 24-70 which I do feel its on the camera.
Please if you would like to join in here with your tests than please do so as we did in the GM 24-70 thread. I would love to see Fred include his infinity test at some point
Just got my copy. There has to be an issue with it as it is super loud when focusing. Well here's a YouTube video I just took to show what I'm talking about.
I have seen that difference between f/1.4 and f/1.6 in some earlier sample raw shots out there, so I think your copy is fine. I did however not find the f1.4 to look soft, more like smooth on those portrait samples I saw. What is your take on that, Guy?
In general, longer lenses are less prone to decentering issues. Or maybe it has more to do with the fact that we are taking pictures more of 3-dimensional target rather than landscape or flattish interiors or something like that. Unless it is a macro lens, we care less about the outer corners being a little out of calibration. Yes, we are paying more attention to beautiful (or is that sexy) bokeh, which this lens seems to show plentiful.
Its really going to depend on what your after. Old days i had a Leica 80mm 1.4 summilux which is a Mandler design and 1.4 on that lens was really ghosty looking and for some effects on people shots you may just want that and the look is very pleasant. I do think its overused sometimes and I do like a little more crispness. But bottom line its a option to use either way. I do like having it especially on a 85 because thats where most headshot are using that lens. No nothing wrong with this copy but folks need to be aware of what 1.4 really does. Sometimes you hear well I spent yada yada amounts of money and its soft. Well it is at 1.4
Now this 85 its far better than that old 80 summilux. Now maybe a Otus 85mm 1.4 may not have it but most lenses do at 1.4
AGeoJO wrote:
In general, longer lenses are less prone to decentering issues. Or maybe it has more to do with the fact that we are taking pictures more of 3-dimensional target rather than landscape or flattish interiors or something like that. Unless it is a macro lens, we care less about the outer corners being a little out of calibration. Yes, we are paying more attention to beautiful (or is that sexy) bokeh, which this lens seems to show plentiful.
Guy, how is the AF noise on yours again?
On a lens like this its not really going to be about the corners but I did want to show them as folks like me will take this on a landscape excursion and nice to know F4 is getting me there. But people shooting who cares and actually to softer the corners the better. The bokeh on this is extraordinary and thats what your really paying for per say. Its sharp as heck. Notice I did not even bother with F8 in the corners or after F2 on center. It would just have been a waste of time . Its screaming sharp even at F2 on center. Thats damn good and maybe even a case at 1.6 as well.
Its going to be a great lens folks and your going to have to pony up to the bar and drop some real money. The weight/size and all that is totally not even a conversation when you look at what the results are. But don't go by me i hand held 200mm F2 lens half my career. Even shot aerials with a 4x5 out of a helicopter.
Joshua I missed your question. Im getting noise from around 3m to almost infinity. I can hear it no question. I think we just need to break it in but lets keep a eye on this folks if it starts sounding worse than we have a issue. Im not concerned at this point but I would like to hear the reason for sure.
Guy, thank you! I am sure Sony will take care of it, if it is coming down to it. Regardless, I don't think the noise would be a big issue; it is just annoying...
Crispyeaterson wrote:
Just got my copy. There has to be an issue with it as it is super loud when focusing. Well here's a YouTube video I just took to show what I'm talking about.
That said...I do like canon 85mm L mk2 f/1.2 bokeh @ 1.2 perhaps more. Too bad EyeAF not yet available with that.
I decided to shot a very high contrast subject to check for different types of CA, both focus area and bokeh.
I'm surprised how well the lens handled this test. I think it looks good at f1.4 and it's quite clean already by f2.0.
Then again, A7II is of course a bit more forgiving than the A7RII.
I just checked these crops on my phone. As far as I can see, very strong performance.
Thanks for posting Guy!
I will analyze the RAWS tonight and do some infinity tests tomorrow.
Best,
Fred
I decided to shot a very high contrast subject to check for different types of CA, both focus area and bokeh.
I'm surprised how well the lens handled this test. I think it looks good at f1.4 and it's quite clean already by f2.0.
Then again, A7II is of course a bit more forgiving than the A7RII.
That's quite a bit of purple fringing there on the crop of the ship's name, and not only at f/1.4...
I have read elsewhere that the focusing noise can be due to the fact the latest A7 firmware is not installed. Link here
This may not be the case here, but it is worrying that many are complaining of the same noisy issues.
I have got to say I'm very impressed with what I've seen so far form those lucky enough to have the lens in their hands. I frustrated by the lack of delivery date from a UK supplier, but it seems some members form Switzerland and Sweden have theirs so hopefully delivery to UK resellers is imminent.
I am also a little surprised by the amount of CA or purple fringing I'm seeing in some of the images, I was lead to believe it was practically non existent in this lens ...
