p.8 #1 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
Gunzorro wrote:
Certainly looks innovative! Now to see the test shots and find out the price. . .
Yes, that's what matters. I love shooting with my CV 12, CV 15 and Loxia 21 but this lens has the potential to replace all of them. It could be a good complement to my Loxia 25.
Once I get my hands on one, I will test it out and compare to my lenses sharing the same FL.
p.8 #3 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, that's what matters. I love shooting with my CV 12, CV 15 and Loxia 21 but this lens has the potential to replace all of them. It could be a good complement to my Loxia 25.
Once I get my hands on one, I will test it out and compare to my lenses sharing the same FL.
p.8 #4 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
kdrk888 wrote:
The sun star, the sun star, the sun star...
They are trying to design it with a 5-straight-blade aperture, which would translate to a similar 10 point sunstar we see with the CV and Loxia/ZM lenses. I'm sure it won't be the same but could be ok.
p.8 #5 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
Fred Miranda wrote:
They are trying to design it with a 5-straight-blade aperture, which would translate to a similar 10 point sunstar we see with the CV and Loxia/ZM lenses. I'm sure it won't be the same but could be ok.
I might be wrong but I don't think it is just a matter of number of aperture blades but probably also how sharp they are or something else. Lenses with the same number don't behave necessarily the same.
I think that Voigtlander and Zeiss clearly do something to enhance this effect they consider as a feature. The blades of the Loxia aren't even fully retracted to have sunstars wo.
p.8 #6 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
With regard to filters, have they said that they would definitely not offer a front-filter solution like they do for the Laowa 12mm?
As for rear filters, it's great that they will offer a series of NDs. Fred, could you suggest to your contact that they also offer a series of dark polarizers (from regular to 10-stop)? As it appears that it won't be possible to stack rear filters, it seems like having such a series would be extremely useful. And as others have mentioned, presumably linear polarizers would be fine since there is no AF to be concerned about, and any potential AE errors should be comparatively simple to compensate for.
p.8 #7 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
bellapete wrote:
I might be wrong but I don't think it is just a matter of number of aperture blades but probably also how sharp they are or something else. Lenses with the same number don't behave necessarily the same.
I think that Voigtlander and Zeiss clearly do something to enhance this effect they consider as a feature. The blades of the Loxia aren't even fully retracted to have sunstars wo.
You are correct. It's not just the number of apertures that matters. The design, shape and manufacturing tolerance play a role on how sunstars render. Let's see what Laowa comes up with but like I wrote, it likely won't look similar to sunstars from Cosina but could be nice as well.
p.8 #8 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
Resolution, microcontrast, field curvature, bokeh, coma, lat and long chromatic aberrations, vigneting, distortion, weight, volume, filter thread, built quality, af, astigmatism, MFD, and now, sunstars.
Suddenly some strange but seemingly very important parameter plays a main role in lens reviews.
I've been 35 years in professional photography and never considered sunstars as a sine qua non feature. I still got too much to learn.
Meanwhile, I'll be happy if this lens has, in this order:
resolution, microcontrast, no field curvature, low vigneting, low distortion, and is light and small.
p.8 #9 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
luismanibarro wrote:
Resolution, microcontrast, field curvature, bokeh, coma, lat and long chromatic aberrations, vigneting, distortion, weight, volume, filter thread, built quality, af, astigmatism, MFD, and now, sunstars.
Suddenly some strange but seemingly very important parameter plays a main role in lens reviews.
I've been 35 years in professional photography and never considered sunstars as a sine qua non feature. I still got too much to learn.
Meanwhile, I'll be happy if this lens has, in this order:
resolution, microcontrast, no field curvature, low vigneting, low distortion, and is light and small.
Yeh, I'm not a big sunstar fan. I would definitely put your attributes ahead of sunstars.
p.8 #10 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
chez wrote:
Yeh, I'm not a big sunstar fan. I would definitely put your attributes ahead of sunstars.
To me, sunstar rendering is definitely not more important than resolution, contrast, flare and aberration control. However I would think it's more important than aspects that can be easily be corrected like moderate distortion and vignetting. I would be using the 10-18mm lens for landscapes only though.
p.8 #11 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
Fred Miranda wrote:
To me, sunstar rendering is definitely not more important than resolution, contrast, flare and aberration control. However I would think it's more important than aspects that can be easily corrected like moderate distortion and vignetting. I would be using the 10-18mm lens for landscapes only though.
True with this lens.
But more important to me is filter thread, this slot in filter system won't allow to use gradient filters... and I'm not willing to invest in 150mm filters.
p.8 #12 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
luismanibarro wrote:
True with this lens.
But more important to me is filter thread, this slot in filter system won't allow to use gradient filters... and I'm not willing to invest in 150mm filters.
Agreed. Flare resistance, compactness and ability to use filters are more important to me also. But since it is a zoom that does not have contacts, distortion, CA and vigneting may be more important than for other lenses.
By the way, how to use polarizer with rear filters ?
p.8 #18 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
Fred Miranda wrote:
I have no clue how they would compare optically but it will be smaller, filter-friendly (at least NDs) and probably cheaper.
but the laowa will be slower..5.6 at the narrow end. and 4.5 at widest. It may not be the best thing for shooting night skies...but with the a7iii you may get away with it at iso6400....hopefully. SInce I'm eyeing that combo over my 6d2/laowa 12mm 2.8 uwa.
p.8 #19 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
pointbob wrote:
but the laowa will be slower..5.6 at the narrow end. and 4.5 at widest. It may not be the best thing for shooting night skies...but with the a7iii you may get away with it at iso6400....hopefully. SInce I'm eyeing that combo over my 6d2/laowa 12mm 2.8 uwa.
Not really the right lens for astro or nighscapes. The 12-24/4G does well for nightscapes with low coma wide open but it's still a bit slow for this application.
p.8 #20 · Official: Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 FE Zoom at 496 grams
Fred I'm heading to a dark(er) sky next week and fully intend to use the 12-24 on the Milky Way if I get a break in cloud and fog. I'm taking the Laowa 15/2 as well but since I'll have the Ioptron tracker I can easily make up for the extra stops.
This is my only Milky Way with the FE12-24 but at F4 you are spot on in that it is nearly coma-less. I'm also looking forward to way way lower ISOs in a true dark sky than used in this shot.
Sony ILCE-9
FE 12-24mm F4 G
ƒ/4.0 12.0 mm 15 12800
