GMPhotography wrote:
Okay lens in hand. First blush looks very very very promising. Full Big Bronco test in morning. Just playing around 105 looks amazing at F4. Okay not going crazy here see what the tests bring. If its like the loaner I will be thrilled. Just working on my hood. Trying to get two blank 77mm filter rings but its starting to vignette
Guy, can you try a quick snap @ 105mm f/8 in AF-S mode, just for another sample point? Thanks!
Yea I’m almost finished with fixing the house. My sons dog a year ago went nuts and chewed up my laundry door trim and a bunch of baseboard molding. Yea I’m the maintence crew for everything around here. This is what happens when you build custom homes. Your the Guy. Lol
GMPhotography wrote:
Would houses looking down the street work
Any random shot will do - if it has the issue then it'll be immediately obvious. Again, needs to to be AF-S though so that it focuses wide-open even though the shot is @ f/8.
Everything seems fine. Every shot pops in focus and stays there. All sharp. Ill process them as soon as C1 frees up. Im reprocessing about 2400 images at the moment
I'll work on this some more but the 24-105 at 40mm compared to the VC 40mm is interesting at F4 the VC is sharper on center but losses out in the corners. So far I'm a little shocked by the 24-105 I BOUGHT its beating the Loaner at 24/28/35/50 but losses slightly at 68mm. But 105mm looks good
At 105mm its great F5.6 than the loaner was at 5.6 . Looks like I picked up a stop of sharpness
GMPhotography wrote:
I'll work on this some more but the 24-105 at 40mm compared to the VC 40mm is interesting at F4 the VC is sharper on center but losses out in the corners. So far I'm a little shocked by the 24-105 I BOUGHT its beating the Loaner at 24/28/35/50 but losses slightly at 68mm. But 105mm looks good
At 105mm its great F5.6 than the loaner was at 5.6 . Looks like I picked up a stop of sharpness
The lens performs well but it's exceptional from 40-65mm. It makes sense though since it's well corrected and has much more elements than smaller primes. In today's world, more elements = better IQ.
Here are a couple quick comparison shots between the Sony 24-105G and the original Canon 24-105L.
My copy of the Canon seems excellent and has never failed to deliver. The Sony is very slightly (but noticeably) sharper on the sides and just about a wash in the center, which means in my experience that the Sony is an outstanding lens.
With the same PP on both images, differing only in adjustment for exposure and WB, to my eye the Canon has more "pop" in contrast and color. No huge differences in sharpness or overall "look" from either lens -- both very good.
I have more examples and can also make some 100% crops, if anyone is interested.
According to Rogers test, the 24-105mm appears to have great QC in terms of copy variation, especially compared to some other Sony lenses. Has anyone here encountered any issues with decentering or poor sharpness? If so, did you exchange it and receive a better copy?
Mine has been fine, more than fine, despite my caution and suspicions. Testing and use confirm it is a very useful lens and has more than adequate IQ for my needs.
I just can't believe I've spent over $3k on two Sony zoom lenses in the last 8 months or so. But it's certainly been worth it, getting the set of 12-24G and 24-105G -- and bought new, not used, as I'm normally obliged to do.
Gunzorro wrote:
Mine has been fine, more than fine, despite my caution and suspicions. Testing and use confirm it is a very useful lens and has more than adequate IQ for my needs.
I just can't believe I've spent over $3k on two Sony zoom lenses in the last 8 months or so. But it's certainly been worth it, getting the set of 12-24G and 24-105G -- and bought new, not used, as I'm normally obliged to do.
How are you liking the 12-24mm? That's the exact combo I'm thinking of getting since I'm a bit tired of constantly changing lenses and missing shots. Do you find yourself using it at 12-15mm often? Any optical issues you've noticed? Thanks
AlphaPhotography wrote:
How are you liking the 12-24mm? That's the exact combo I'm thinking of getting since I'm a bit tired of constantly changing lenses and missing shots. Do you find yourself using it at 12-15mm often? Any optical issues you've noticed? Thanks
The 12-24G is actually better, and by a considerable amount. For example, there is little need to use my Loxia 21 a that focal length. The Loxia is better by a margin, but lacking AF and all the other focal lengths, plus the outstanding IQ, the 12-24 becomes an obvious choice and the Loxia often gets left home.
Yes, I find myself using the widest end quite frequently, especially for building interiors and exteriors that I carefully level then crop to vertical in PP, allowing me to avoid my Canon TS-E 17 and 24 unless I have a specific architectural assignment. Even then, I would probably carry the 12-24 on a second mounted camera to shoot the same scenes for more options.
I like two cameras when possible and not changing lenses, or keeping it to a minimum. I am most concerned about dust, which Sony cameras are not as good at handling as Canon and Nikon, and fumbling -- nothing would ruin my day worse than dropping an expensive lens! So I do everything I can to insure clean images and intact equipment.
Optical issues on the 12-24 are mainly well known such as ring (green) when shooting into the sun. This is seldom a factor, and when it is, I just live with it. Sometimes the flare ring can add to the drama or uniqueness of the scene. But not mechanical or optical failures, which is what you are getting at.
I'm very happy to have this two lens foundation for my photography.
Gunzorro wrote:
Mine has been fine, more than fine, despite my caution and suspicions. Testing and use confirm it is a very useful lens and has more than adequate IQ for my needs.
I just can't believe I've spent over $3k on two Sony zoom lenses in the last 8 months or so. But it's certainly been worth it, getting the set of 12-24G and 24-105G -- and bought new, not used, as I'm normally obliged to do.
Ditto for me too! I sold my 24-70GM for the 24-105 and I don't regret it. My use of the zooms have mostly been for travel and while f/2.8 is useful with the GM, I'll usually carry one prime anyway. Right now that's the Voigtlander 40/1.2. So my travel kit consists of the FE12-24, FE24-105 and the Voigtlander.
The combination of 3-4 lenses in bag (to cover the same range and speed of 24-70 GM) would be heavier than just 24-70 GM alone . I guess not many people realize this. The size and weight of 24-70Gm is okay for me as far as I carry only one lens and it does make excellent images, fast enough and give me enough shallow DOF.- Having one lens only 24-70 Gm + one good flash, I can shoot everything I want in a day and night without getting dusts into my A7R3 sensor. I believe people having 24-70 GM are ones that want to have a combination of a convenient zoom and fast speed. I will buy 24-105 and more primes someday but I'm not going to sell my 24-70 Gm. I bought many f4 lenses and end up sold all of them, just keep one for now, that's 16-35/4- an excellent copy.
I've only taken a few shots with it, but I'm noticing I'm adding contrast in Capture One to my 24-105 images. It's not unusual for me to add contrast, but I noticed right away that all of the images I took with it, needed more. Am I just used to what I get out of the Batis 85 and 135?
umsl12 wrote:
The combination of 3-4 lenses in bag (to cover the same range and speed of 24-70 GM) would be heavier than just 24-70 GM alone . I guess not many people realize this. The size and weight of 24-70Gm is okay for me as far as I carry only one lens and it does make excellent images, fast enough and give me enough shallow DOF.- Having one lens only 24-70 Gm + one good flash, I can shoot everything I want in a day and night without getting dusts into my A7R3 sensor. I believe people having 24-70 GM are ones that want to have a combination of a convenient zoom and fast speed. I will buy 24-105 and more primes someday but I'm not going to sell my 24-70 Gm. I bought many f4 lenses and end up sold all of them, just keep one for now, that's 16-35/4- an excellent copy....Show more →
I'm pretty happy with my 24-105 and find its value entirely for travel (weighting in at only 663 g) . The 24-70 2.8 (which I own) weighs 886 grams and is the camera I use when using a zoom around home, traveling around in a car. My kit for an upcoming trip will (unless I change my mind again) be: Laowa 15 2, Sony 24-105, and Sony 70-300 F4. The last one is the most dubious one...I may skip it and carry a fast prime....either my Loxia 21 or 35. I considered buying the Batis 135 to carry instead of the 70-300, but have resisted so far.
. I guess not many people realize this. The size and weight of 24-70Gm is okay for me as far as I carry only one lens and it does make excellent images, fast enough and give me enough shallow DOF.