Jochenb wrote:
Yes, 42MP certainly is not forgiving for any flaws and it will only get worse when we get those even higher resolution sensors in the future.
It's a pity that so many users never notice things like decentering (I'm not talking about the FM members). Because of that the manufacturers just keep shipping out a big amount of crappy products. I'm not paying a lot of money for faulty items. I'm sorry if I'm sounding like a broken record.
Before buying the FE 85/1.8 today I also played with both the 85 and 24-70 GM lenses again. They seem to be really nice, but I'm hesistant to spend that kind of money on Sony lenses (because of all what I said in this and previous posts).
BTW, switching between the FE 1.8 and 1.4 GM was interesting. The GM feels huge and heavy in comparison. It's also a lot louder. You can hardly hear any sound coming from the 1.8. The AF speed is another big difference: the 1.8 is quite a bit faster.
Just to give you guys an idea of how bad my 85/1.8 is, here is a comparison between two corners:
From the same lens shoot earlier . . . Sony upper left corner vs. lower right wide open.
Upper left corner wide open is fantastic in my book, not so much the lower right (or the upper right too).
And, just to show you that it's not just a problem in the corners, here's a comparison of the left side vs. right side wide open. Clearly the right side has issues . . .
Yes, it appears the sharpness starts falling off noticeably about the last right 1/4 of the image. I now can see this in some other pics I took of my daughters.
No need to test again - it's going back to the store on Monday (closed tomorrow).
Hopefully I won't have to go through 4 copies to get a decent one like I did with some of my AF Nikkors . . ..
jhinkey wrote:
What's amazing to me is that the 85/2.4 Lox was even better in the corners at f/4 than my ZM!
John,
The Loxia is stepped down more than a stop at f/4 so that's expected.
Isn't it amazing that corners can get even better than the ZM's wide open? I've seen some lenses like the Loxia 85, Batis 85 and GM 85 doing better especially with very fine detail. However, at around f/5.6-6.3, the ZM 85 hits its sweet spot and becomes hard to beat.
The same happens with my Loxia 50/2. Many lenses are better than it wide open and at f/4 but once it hits f/5.6-6.3, it's an amazing lens at infinity.
I took it back out again tonight and re-took the images this time w/o the protective filter on (B+W MRC Clear) just in case it was causing problems. Nope - same problems.
But, I found that in fact I could get the blurry right side in sharp focus by refocusing for that side or corner. Of course when I did that the opposite side was way out of focus. So, if I manually focused in the center of the image, then went to the bad corner or bad border to check the focus, I needed to significantly turn the focus ring to get that section into focus. So it appears that it's a general misalignment of the optics with the sensor plane - by a lot.
Below is the Upper Left Corner that in previous postings was shown to be very sharp wide open, but with the lower right corner focused for sharpness - as you can see the sharpness is swapped. These are at f/4.
Still going back to the shop to be swapped out.
Upper Left Corner, Lower Right Corner Focused (f/4)
Lower Right Corner, Lower Right Corner Focused (f/4)
Fred Miranda wrote:
John,
The Loxia is stepped down more than a stop at f/4 so that's expected.
Isn't it amazing that corners can get even better than the ZM's wide open? I've seen some lenses like the Loxia 85, Batis 85 and GM 85 doing better especially with very fine detail. However, at around f/5.6-6.3, the ZM 85 hits its sweet spot and becomes hard to beat.
The same happens with my Loxia 50/2. Many lenses are better than it wide open and at f/4 but once it hits f/5.6-6.3, it's an amazing lens at infinity.
Actually, what I meant to say is that the Lox 85 wide open is as good or a bit better than the ZM wide open. It's then fantastic at f/4 all over (and less vignetting than the ZM at f/4 as one would expect).
jhinkey wrote:
Actually, what I meant to say is that the Lox 85 wide open is as good or a bit better than the ZM wide open. It's then fantastic at f/4 all over (and less vignetting than the ZM at f/4 as one would expect).
My copy of the FE 85/1.8 shows no signs of decentering. It's a pity that getting a good copy of a Sony FE lens seems to be such a crapshoot. Over the next few days I'll do some comparisons of the FE 85/1.8 and the Loxia 85/2.4. Might be time to sell the 85/4 ZM.
John (or anyone else with both) would you mind showing the 85/1.8 next to the ZM for a size comparison? ZM mounted on a dumb adapter if you have. No front or back caps.
nampramos wrote:
John (or anyone else with both) would you mind showing the 85/1.8 next to the ZM for a size comparison? ZM mounted on a dumb adapter if you have. No front or back caps.
Thanks a bunch!
Yeah, later on today I can do that before I put the 85/1.8 back in its box!
Well, I am an 80 year old amateur, and get so much help here, I am trying to contribute. My copy seems to be stellar. I hope I did these right, and I will try to post two over all shots, then two centers, and all four corners all shot hand held at f8, using auto focus, focused on the center of the scene.
Thanks all
Dave
dgurtch wrote:
Well, I am an 80 year old amateur, and get so much help here, I am trying to contribute. My copy seems to be stellar. I hope I did these right, and I will try to post two over all shots, then two centers, and all four corners all shot hand held at f8, using auto focus, focused on the center of the scene.
Thanks all
Dave
Dave,
This test should be done wide open. (or close to it)
Thanks Fred, I did not think of that, as I usually shoot at small apertures for landscape work, and I replicated the way I shoot most times. BTW, I used ACR to process the RAW files. It stated that "Built -in profile applied: FE 85mm f1.8-Click for more information". When I clicked, it said the RAW file contains built in lens profile for correcting CA and was auto applied to this image. I thought JPEGs used auto corrections, but was surprised the built in profile was applied to my RAW images, which is fine with me. I usually use DXO Optics, but there is not a profile yet (coming this month)
Best and thanks all.
Dave
