I told my wife I needed her portrait for a scientific study of bokeh balls. She gave me a funny look! She's a good sport . . .especially when it comes to photography! I didn't quite nail eye focus here but this was to meet the request for some specular highlights.
As for bokeh balls, they're round in the center and give cats eyes on the edges. I kind of like the look.
Before this kits lost in the sauce. You folks are doing a excellent job of showing us the way. I know I appreciate it very much and I'm sure others do as well. Great samples and with that I may add no BS attached. Awesome
GMPhotography wrote:
Before this kits lost in the sauce. You folks are doing a excellent job of patching the way. I know I appreciate it very much and I'm sure others do as well. Great samples and with I may add no BS attached. Awesome
Aside from the cat-eye shape towards the corners (similar to Batis 85), bokeh balls look very clean -- probably because of the absence of aspherical elements. There is noticeable color fringing even at this image size.
GMPhotography wrote:
Before this kits lost in the sauce. You folks are doing a excellent job of showing us the way. I know I appreciate it very much and I'm sure others do as well. Great samples and with that I may add no BS attached. Awesome
Jman13 wrote:
It's so nice to see actual photos from photographers rather than the early samples from hands on by many reviewers that are more tech-minded than photography minded. The sample images I saw before release looked fine in most cases, but not great. Put it in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, such as here, and suddenly the lens looks a lot better. Mine should be here within the hour, so I hope I can contribute something useful soon.
Never was a truer word spoken. I've totally given up on looking at lens sample images from either reviewers or the other usual suspects. Now I just wait until FM members receive their copies and proceed to demonstrate what the lens is actually capable of. The results we've seen on the last few pages -- from Matt Kerby, Invi2003, absolutic, Jman13, rji2goleez -- provide show exactly how the FE 85/1.8 renders a wide range of subject matter. Thanks to everyone for their pictorial contributions. I'm sold.
I'm sold as well. It's not my GM 85 in some ways but it's also better at faster AF and the correct way that I need. Missing shots is not a good thing when something has a limit on it. I still see some good fall off in the transition zones which I think gives you that nice separation.
You can see a lot of the green fringing in the most recent bokeh balls.
It's basically that, lower w/o contrast (by not bad at all!), and flare that seem to differentiate this from the Batis. Maybe color signature. All minor things.
In trade you get marginally lighter and smaller, af/mf + custom button-- and at half the price,
Jman13 wrote:
Beautiful shot, Bob! (though probably clone out that little dust squiggle at the bottom left, that's repeated a few times due to the pano)
Thanks Jordan. Next time, I'll wait until I've had sufficient morning coffee!
rji2goleez wrote:
And yet there's so much that's good about this lens . . . every lens has it's good and bad . . .
Actually that is the only real gripe I have about it so far. CA's are average, but there are other performers that are much worse (Zeiss MP100 for example).
Jannik Peters wrote:
Actually that is the only real gripe I have about it so far. CA's are average, but there are other performers that are much worse (Zeiss MP100 for example).
Fred Miranda wrote:
For the FE 85/1.8, perhaps CA, flare, ghost?
Are both flaring and ghosting issues that can be overcome with lens coatings?
If so, it's a bit of a bummer that Sony doesn't invest in their own formula (do they have anything they use on G or GM lenses?) or always partner with Zeiss to use theirs - even though this lens isn't on my RADAR, it seems be a phenomenal optic for the price. How much can some coatings cost?
ecarlino wrote:
Are both flaring and ghosting issues that can be overcome with lens coatings?
If so, it's a bit of a bummer that Sony doesn't invest in their own formula (do they have anything they use on G or GM lenses?) or always partner with Zeiss to use theirs - even though this lens isn't on my RADAR, it seems be a phenomenal optic for the price. How much can some coatings cost?
Not entirely. High quality coating is only a part of the equation. Optical design plays a big role on flare/ghosting performance. It's all a big compromise and the new FE 85/1.8 seems to do very well resolution-wise.
ecarlino wrote:
Are both flaring and ghosting issues that can be overcome with lens coatings?
If so, it's a bit of a bummer that Sony doesn't invest in their own formula (do they have anything they use on G or GM lenses?) or always partner with Zeiss to use theirs - even though this lens isn't on my RADAR, it seems be a phenomenal optic for the price. How much can some coatings cost?
Anyone can grind glass, but not everyone can coat that glass effectively.
