Was able to get out and shoot some snaps tonight though I got home and realize I have taken all Jpegs which is strange because I am sure i had changed it to Raw&Jpeg... Anyway huge learning curve but i'm happy with the initial results. I have not tested this lens for corner softness or decentered focus and likely won't unless something really jumps out at me. So far i'm loving the feeling this lens provides and manual focus with the A7iii is amazing. Some color and curve adjustments in LR.
DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
Curious question for those who like auto magnify: are you doing (central) focus and recompose? I don't (mainly due to field curvature issues), and my point of focus is often somewhere far to one side.
As I'm still on the older bodies (a7RII) I pre-position the magnifier window with "focus setting" and the wheel. Recomposing is only used with AF-C (with a lock-mode) and back button focus.
KarmaKramer wrote:
The shadows lack contrast....? What?
I think he is pointing that the darkest point is hardly pitch black (see below "no clipping"). Even if the shot is very underexposed (see "missed ETTR"). But this lens shows a lot of details in the shadows too (see "blacks"). The same is with the very whites (see "whites"). It's one of the things I really like about this lens. Especially for foliage/skies in landscapes.
Haha, it's nice to see how much love this lens has. This thread generates about one page within two days (over ten months now). Only the "Sony FE images thread" has a slightly higher cadence.
KarmaKramer wrote:
The shadows lack contrast....? What?
When comparing the IQ to the Samyang 35/1.4 (my copy has excellent sharpness across the frame, as well as excellent contrast, from wide open), the shadow areas look muddy. Not terribly so, but not to the high standards of some other fine lenses I have. My Loxia 21 (and my old Loxia 35/2) comes to mind as having very good shadow area contrast, although most others are better than what I have seen with the CV40. My test scene was an outdoor scene with trees in muted sunlight at F8.The areas under the shade of the trees look muddy, apparently from lack of contrast. Conversely, the contrast in the lighter areas is excellent It seems to be part of what gives the lens its special look.
DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
Curious question for those who like auto magnify: are you doing (central) focus and recompose? I don't (mainly due to field curvature issues), and my point of focus is often somewhere far to one side.
Sometimes I focus and recompose, being careful to not stray too far within the intended scene, and always looking for contrasty areas on the same focal plane/distance.
Most commonly, I roughly frame the scene through observation, then look through the viewfinder (sometimes slightly OOF to get the graphic elements) with my focus target in the center, then simply focus on that point with adequate DOF to cover the other areas, near to far.
Shooting from tripod, I joystick around to check focus. I never use touch screens, and find them particularly annoying for hand held work, being set off by contact with chest and clothing.
Later, I'll do straightening and final crop in LR. But normally, I'm simply fixing perspective and "taking a little off the sides" for a more 3x4 or 5x7 format. (I would really like to have a larger MP sensor in 44x33.)
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's great and induced field curvature is even noticeable at these resized images.
Can you post a 1:1 crop showing the extreme edges comparing the E vs M mounts wide open?
These results could of course change depending on distance.
Sure. Here are the center, upper left corner, and upper right corner 1:1 crops of the FE and VM at f1.2. Fence is 13 feet from camera.
Do you think the VM is decentered enough to swap out? (I've been fairly lucky with prior lenses)
Here are the center, upper left corner, and upper right corner 1:1 crops of the FE and VM at f5.6 (which I believe is what Fred found as the optimum for FE). Fence is 13 feet from camera.
Looking on my iPhone which not the best viewing but the FE looks better overall but the VM is what I would expect in the corners as it has more FC. So it looks normal to me. I have the FE myself
scottsoapbox wrote:
Here are the center, upper left corner, and upper right corner 1:1 crops of the FE and VM at f5.6 (which I believe is what Fred found as the optimum for FE). Fence is 13 feet from camera.
Thanks for posting the crops!
These results are expected and I think both lenses are performing as they should.
They are optimum at f/5.6 but off-axis, the E-mount will perform better on the Sony body showing less field curvature. As you can see, the VM version is still very usable but perhaps not the best choice for applications where sharpness across the field is required.
Yes, I love stopping it down to f/5.6 or smaller and the convenience of focusing at the hard stop. So, for landscapes, it's basically a point and shoot...per se.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, I love stopping it down to f/5.6 or smaller and the convenience of focusing at the hard stop. So, for landscapes, it's basically a point and shoot...per se.
I have to back mine off from the hard stop. Can it be adjusted?
It seems to be part of what gives the lens its special look.
