Fred Miranda wrote:
I think I am able to answer your question Adam. I just tested this today and instead of using my usual slanted infinity framing, I kept the horizon level just like we would do in the real world.
I thought it was an interesting question because there is actually no increase in astigmatism on this area when stopping the lens down from f/4 to f/8. At the very extreme corners, I see that happening slightly.
In fact, when checking the edge area instead of extreme corner, there is actually a very slight increase in resolution.
Here are the results here at 35mm (f/4 and f/8). Feel free to post your thoughts....Show more →
Thanks for posting these Fred. I agree, the edges don't appear to exhibit the degradation @ f/8 vs f/4 that the corners are. This is a relief for how I intend to use the lens. This matches what I see on some other lenses such as the Zeiss 50mm MP (at least in terms of the corners never becoming sharp, although they don't degrade stopping down).
Very nice tests Fred... first I need to buy a 100-400... but probably in the future I will buy one those and sell my 24-70 GM, looks like this lens fits better for my stile of shooting...
See it's posts like this that make me re-evaluate everything
This is dangerous territory
Makes me want to sell all my primes (except for Laowa, obviously) and just pony up for this. Makes a good argument against the Loxia 50 that I've been loving so much as well. Probably would miss the contrast & sunstars too much though.
Fred, any chance you can test the bokeh against some of the more portrait-oriented lenses? I'm thinking the Zony 35 1.4 ZA, Sony 55 1.8, and Batis 85. If it's even comparable at all to those, this lens becomes the best all-arounder E-mount lens for the money IMO.
jwhatts wrote:
See it's posts like this that make me re-evaluate everything
This is dangerous territory
Makes me want to sell all my primes (except for Laowa, obviously) and just pony up for this. Makes a good argument against the Loxia 50 that I've been loving so much as well. Probably would miss the contrast & sunstars too much though.
No doubt. I'm trying to summarize in my head the image value benefit of primes in this focal range. Fortunately for me I own this lens :-).
jwhatts wrote:
See it's posts like this that make me re-evaluate everything
This is dangerous territory
Makes me want to sell all my primes (except for Laowa, obviously) and just pony up for this. Makes a good argument against the Loxia 50 that I've been loving so much as well. Probably would miss the contrast & sunstars too much though.
Fred, any chance you can test the bokeh against some of the more portrait-oriented lenses? I'm thinking the Zony 35 1.4 ZA, Sony 55 1.8, and Batis 85. If it's even comparable at all to those, this lens becomes the best all-arounder E-mount lens for the money IMO. ...Show more →
Now you know why I'm picking one up . . . when I find one available!
jwhatts wrote:
See it's posts like this that make me re-evaluate everything
This is dangerous territory
Makes me want to sell all my primes (except for Laowa, obviously) and just pony up for this. Makes a good argument against the Loxia 50 that I've been loving so much as well. Probably would miss the contrast & sunstars too much though.
Fred, any chance you can test the bokeh against some of the more portrait-oriented lenses? I'm thinking the Zony 35 1.4 ZA, Sony 55 1.8, and Batis 85. If it's even comparable at all to those, this lens becomes the best all-arounder E-mount lens for the money IMO. ...Show more →
jwhatts, I didn't test much for OOF rendering wide open.
However, I took the lens to the park with my son and snapped a few shots under very harsh lighting. Here are a few for you. It may give an idea of what to expect but I'm afraid they are mostly 105mm samples:
jwhatts wrote:
See it's posts like this that make me re-evaluate everything
This is dangerous territory
Makes me want to sell all my primes (except for Laowa, obviously) and just pony up for this. Makes a good argument against the Loxia 50 that I've been loving so much as well. Probably would miss the contrast & sunstars too much though.
Fred, any chance you can test the bokeh against some of the more portrait-oriented lenses? I'm thinking the Zony 35 1.4 ZA, Sony 55 1.8, and Batis 85. If it's even comparable at all to those, this lens becomes the best all-arounder E-mount lens for the money IMO. ...Show more →
Looks like you can get some subject isolation but I don't think you can expect to get the same bokeh and/or 3D pop that these other lenses give. I think it's evident in the few samples provided by Fred. When I can find one, this will become my travel lens along with my 12-24G . . . two lenses covering 12-105 with great image quality . . . not too shabby.
Well it's a f/4 lens so not much blur unless shooting at very close distance. It also lacks micro-contrast, so we should not expecting much pop either.
To be fair, the lighting was very harsh and the background was very complex with lots of foliage under the sun...not a good combination for any lens.
This for me at least compliments my primes. But a very solid showing. Bokeh is really not bad to be honest. It’s a F4 lens not many F4 lenses have great bokeh anyway but it looks above average looking at Fred’s shots in the Park. Honestly I want bokeh I’m reaching for 1.8 or faster lenses in my bag. Now this may replace some 2.8 lenses you may have. Certainly not going to replace my CV 40 1.2 for sure . So I would look at this more as a zoom lens with very nice IQ that’s convenient and fun to use. For 90 percent of users it’s perfect for us nut cases that scream bloody murder to get every last drop out of our sensors (guilty) than it it fills some gaps, makes it a nice travel package or a grab and run out the door lens. I’ll use this for event work. No question it actually did a nice job for me in LA shooting stage lighting awards stuff. Actually surprised as we shot most of it at F4.5
This lens checks every box I have when I think about what I want out of a 24-105 f/4 lens. I'm not expecting 24-70 f/2.8 GM performance and capabilities because, you know what, it's not a 24-70 f/2.8 GM.
The image quality is outstanding for a 24-105 f/4.
Honestly, this will likely end up being the lens I take the most pictures with as most of my photography is documenting my family. I'll still use my 35/1.4, Batis 85, 100 STF, and Batis 135 for subject isolation and/or ultimate IQ as well as low light work, but I'm thinking this will be on the camera most of the time, ready to go.
f/4: The 55/1.8 ZA is an exceptional landscape prime. Although I prefer the Loxia 50/2's colors, sunstar rendering and contrast, the 55/1.8 is just as amazing across the field. The 24-105/4 G however managed to perform very similarly and that's wide-open! It's hard to tell them apart. Let's see at f/5.6...
f/5.6: Not much to talk about. They both improve a tiny bit. Outstanding performance for the zoom pretty much matching one of the best primes for the Sony E-mount.
Here is how bokeh balls and OOF rendering behave a closer distances at several focal lengths:
Rendering is smooth at close distance including the transition zone.
Specular highlights, although not totally clean, are not so busy (with onion-pattern) like some primes such as the 55/1.8 or 35/1.4 ZA.
GMPhotography wrote:
I thought with the loaner lens 28 and 50 where the best focal lengths at least on that copy of it
I feel like this lens has no weak focal lengths. Some are better wide open and others need a stop down. It's not a prime killer by any means but it puts up a fight against the best we have.
On your Big Bronco test, 24mm and 28mm were pretty much identical at center. The difference was the corners and that was due to a slightly higher field curvature at 24mm.
Fred at 24mm after the lens profile correction are you still seeing vignetting which looks like a hard vignette. The Big Bronco test I can see it in top right corner.
I agree no real bad focal lengths but 28 and 50 looked like it did not need stopping down. Now all that may change with different copies.
I am curious if everyone is seeing this hard vignette at 24mm with the lens profile applied.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Here is how bokeh balls and OOF rendering behave a closer distances at several focal lengths:
Rendering is smooth at close distance including the transition zone.
Specular highlights, although not totally clean, are not so busy (with onion-pattern) like some primes such as the 55/1.8 or 35/1.4 ZA.
Wow the bokeh balls look darn good. No onion ring. My kind of lens, I hate onion rings. Plus they are pretty much round
