molson wrote:
And this is why I gave up on Sony... same reason I stopped buying lottery tickets.
You think its any better with Canon , Nikon, Leica than that is truly wishful thinking. Ive been through every dang system and its the same thing. I will NEVER go back to DSLR stuff. Frankly I would go back to Medium Format with all its limitations before i would by any other 35mm system. This is the end of the road for me.
GMPhotography wrote:
You think its any better with Canon , Nikon, Leica than that is truly wishful thinking. Ive been through every dang system and its the same thing. I will NEVER go back to DSLR stuff. Frankly I would go back to Medium Format with all its limitations before i would by any other 35mm system. This is the end of the road for me.
I agree. I’m bugged about this current lens issue but I won’t pretend I haven’t had issues in other systems. Not having to deal with micro-focus adjustments since leaving the DSLR world has been refreshing.
GMPhotography wrote:
You think its any better with Canon , Nikon, Leica than that is truly wishful thinking. Ive been through every dang system and its the same thing. I will NEVER go back to DSLR stuff. Frankly I would go back to Medium Format with all its limitations before i would by any other 35mm system. This is the end of the road for me.
Well, in my personal experience, it's been much better with Canon, slightly worse with Nikon, and I've never bought a Leica. However, like you, I have no desire to stick with DSLRs; I just hope the rest of the mirrorless ecosystem (besides Sony) matures enough to adequately replace them before the whole camera industry implodes.
cswinton wrote:
I agree. I’m bugged about this current lens issue but I won’t pretend I haven’t had issues in other systems. Not having to deal with micro-focus adjustments since leaving the DSLR world has been refreshing.
Agree and I truly feel bad for folks that are going through this but I have had my share for sure. It sucks but when it comes to zooms given the complexity of the lens elements , zooming and lens groups its a pretty common to find a bad lens in any brand. Zooms are the worst offenders of copy variance. We have seen it in even the GM 24-70 and GM 70-200 and of course the 12-24 and now here with the 24-105. I just retested mine since you folks got me so spooked and I'm fine. i was testing to do some video so thought Id check again.
With so much input over 43 pages, a bit here and a bit there, I've lost grasp of exactly what "the problem" lenses are doing wrong, or does it vary? Is it with MF or AF or both. Could someone please write up succinctly, what the problem is...if it is just one problem that is?
molson wrote:
Well, in my personal experience, it's been much better with Canon, slightly worse with Nikon, and I've never bought a Leica. However, like you, I have no desire to stick with DSLRs; I just hope the rest of the mirrorless ecosystem (besides Sony) matures enough to adequately replace them before the whole camera industry implodes.
Ive had terrible luck with Nikon and Leica but its been the bodies more than the lenses. I mean really bad stuff with Leica M8 to be exact. My two bodies spent 6 months in Germany for repair. Now thats horrific
Here as i said early above we are dealing with zooms so nothing surprises me. They are just sloppy builds
timballic wrote:
With so much input over 43 pages, a bit here and a bit there, I've lost grasp of exactly what "the problem" lenses are doing wrong, or does it vary? Is it with MF or AF or both. Could someone please write up succinctly, what the problem is...if it is just one problem that is?
timballic wrote:
With so much input over 43 pages, a bit here and a bit there, I've lost grasp of exactly what "the problem" lenses are doing wrong, or does it vary? Is it with MF or AF or both. Could someone please write up succinctly, what the problem is...if it is just one problem that is?
Problem: If you acquire focus at f/4 in MF or AF-S mode, then stop down without refocusing, images are out of focus.
AF-C is fine, as the camera will acquire focus at working aperture (stopped down).
AF-S is a problem, even if you have live preview on, as the camera briefly opens up to f/4 to acquire focus, then stops back down to working aperture for the actual exposure.
In MF, you need to refocus after an aperture change to ensure sharp images (with live view setting on, you are focusing at working aperture so all good. But with live view setting off, it is actually focusing at f/4, stops down when you press the shutter, and will be out of focus if your working aperture is below f/4).
So you can get in focus images below f/4 via MF (live view off, refocus every aperture change) or AF-C, but AF-S won't work.
darrellc wrote:
Problem: If you acquire focus at f/4 in MF or AF-S mode, then stop down without refocusing, images are out of focus.
AF-C is fine, as the camera will acquire focus at working aperture (stopped down).
AF-S is a problem, even if you have live preview on, as the camera briefly opens up to f/4 to acquire focus, then stops back down to working aperture for the actual exposure.
In MF, you need to refocus after an aperture change to ensure sharp images (with live view setting on, you are focusing at working aperture so all good. But with live view setting off, it is actually focusing at f/4, stops down when you press the shutter, and will be out of focus if your working aperture is below f/4).
So you can get in focus images below f/4 via MF (live view off, refocus every aperture change) or AF-C, but AF-S won't work....Show more →
On my A7r2 I have always on live settings and it still had problems with crisp, sharp photos on F number higher than 4.
GMPhotography wrote:
Agree and I truly feel bad for folks that are going through this but I have had my share for sure. It sucks but when it comes to zooms given the complexity of the lens elements , zooming and lens groups its a pretty common to find a bad lens in any brand. Zooms are the worst offenders of copy variance. We have seen it in even the GM 24-70 and GM 70-200 and of course the 12-24 and now here with the 24-105. I just retested mine since you folks got me so spooked and I'm fine. i was testing to do some video so thought Id check again. ...Show more →
We could all just go back to shooting film -- or even the sensors of just a few years ago -- and we wouldn't be able to see any of these first world problems!
[Hmmmm, Sony could just rebadge this an "F4-F4" and call it good...]
RCicala wrote:
I'm done testing my 10 copy samples, but instead of writing it up I'm back here analyzing one that misfocuses to see if I can find something out about that problem. Hopefully have it out this week? It takes longer to write it up than it does to test it. . . .
I don't suppose 'it's really good' is going to satisfy anyone, huh?
FWIW, I really appreciate your diligence -- on top of the incredibly useful lens info you regularly provide -- to ensure that there isn't some other problem that photographers actually using the lens on a camera in the field (as opposed to a test bench in a lab) might encounter. Thank you, thank you; so very much!
I am having trouble nailing sharp focus with my copy of the 24-105. If I have the OIS turned on as well as IBIS, is that a possible cause? It's becoming quite frustrating/disheartening. I don't think this is the focus shift issue. I simply can't seem to get tack sharp focus either manually or in DMF or AF-S modes.
timballic wrote:
With so much input over 43 pages, a bit here and a bit there, I've lost grasp of exactly what "the problem" lenses are doing wrong, or does it vary? Is it with MF or AF or both. Could someone please write up succinctly, what the problem is...if it is just one problem that is?
Just read the separate FOCUS SHIFT thread where the problem is explained on page 1 of that thread and includes a link to an example.
I've been getting a little less rainy weather, so took the 24-105 out in the drizzle for some general scenics of the local area, comparing it against my recent Canon acquisition, the 35/1.4L at middle apertures.
Here are two comparisons shots, showing the Sony holding up pretty well to this fine Canon lens. The Canon has the advantage in sharpness and DR, the Sony is better on CA and zoom choices.
I've attempted to PP them to similar color and exposure, but that is only approximate, not intended to be scientific -- accidentally gave the Sony a DOF advantage in the first shot with a smaller f/stop of f/10.0 vs. 7.1 for the Canon. Full PP in LR, including lens profiles and CA correction (+5 for the Canon). Used AF-S on focus setting for each a7R2 camera, small center AF point, hand held.
The Canon is consistently wider AOV at same setting -- not a huge difference, but noticeable.
Overall, I'd say the Sony zoom is holding up very well against primes for general photography.
