Chuck Coyne wrote:
They both look good at the smaller jpg sizes you posted above but when I take the full sized jpgs into LR and do a little pixel peeping the GM 24 shows more resolution and more detail in the corners and shadow areas compared with the 24-105.
I posted the left corners to show the difference. it is obvious from these crops that the GM 24 has more resolution and sharper in the corner and look at the shadow detail in comparison.
Still the 24-105 is no slouch by any means. The convenience of carrying such a verstile zoom can be just what is needed at times. I think you will see a bigger difference between the two with some infinity shots at f/5.6, f/8, f/11 in the mid zone and extreme corners. I tested my 24-105 which is a well centered good copy against my Loxia 25 and GM 24 and the primes were noticably sharper and had more resolution in the mid frame and extreme corners. The Loxia was the overall winner with the GM 24 a very close second.
Lighter lens (24 1.4) shot at 1/80, heavier lens (24-105) shot at 1/60...Is that a mast you were shooting? Was the attached boat afloat? Could some of the difference be motion blur?
Neurad1 wrote:
Lighter lens (24 1.4) shot at 1/80, heavier lens (24-105) shot at 1/60...Is that a mast you were shooting? Was the attached boat afloat? Could some of the difference be motion blur?
I wasn't the original poster. But if you look back at the two full size images that Eyal posted it looks to be some type of mask or support structure on the land or dock. Besides this doesn't look like motion blur more like astigmatism in the far corner of the 24mm shot.
Chuck Coyne wrote:
I wasn't the original poster. But if you look back at the two full size images that Eyal posted it looks to be some type of mask or support structure on the land or dock. Besides this doesn't look like motion blur more like astigmatism in the far corner of the 24mm shot.
It’s why I posted the corner shots of my tests to give a idea what to expect from these two lenses in the corners. Given the lighting he may have been on tripod.
GMPhotography wrote:
It’s why I posted the corner shots of my tests to give a idea what to expect from these two lenses in the corners. Given the lighting he may have been on tripod.
Guy it is amazing how sharp the 24 GM is in the corner wide open! Although the Loxia 25 at infinity is even a little bit better performer but who can honestly complain about these results with a f/1.4 lens!
Neurad1 wrote:
Lighter lens (24 1.4) shot at 1/80, heavier lens (24-105) shot at 1/60...Is that a mast you were shooting? Was the attached boat afloat? Could some of the difference be motion blur?
It's a crane for moving boats into/out of water. I don't believe this is motion blur.
Chuck Coyne wrote:
Guy it is amazing how sharp the 24 GM is in the corner wide open! Although the Loxia 25 at infinity is even a little bit better performer but who can honestly complain about these results with a f/1.4 lens!
Agree Chuck it’s actually shocking how good the corners are wide open. I mean at F2 is down right perfect. I’m trying to figure how to get it in both my AF and MF kit. It’s that good.
After shooting sunrise, I headed up State Street to historic downtown Marblehead (don't call it 'old town' or the old timers will yell at you). I shot Old Town House (built in 1727) at f/1.4 not knowing how much bokeh/subject isolation to expect from the 24mm at this distance. It's not a marked amount but is quite interesting in its subtlety. The lens did very well in capturing detail in the yellow building and the color on a muted morning.
And then I turned back towards State Street. This one is at f/8 and is very impressive for the lack of any distortion on the buildings. Still not sure I'm a 'prime guy' but this lens is very impressive...
After shooting sunrise, I headed up State Street to historic downtown Marblehead (don't call it 'old town' or the old timers will yell at you). I shot Old Town House (built in 1727) at f/1.4 not knowing how much bokeh/subject isolation to expect from the 24mm at this distance. It's not a marked amount but is quite interesting in its subtlety. The lens did very well in capturing detail in the yellow building and the color on a muted morning.
And then I turned back towards State Street. This one is at f/8 and is very impressive for the lack of any distortion on the buildings. Still not sure I'm a 'prime guy' but this lens is very impressive...
Eyal, very nice shots. I checked out your website and the book you did on Kickstarter is very impressive. Marblehead, MA is such a great place to live and beautiful town.
Chuck
GMPhotography wrote:
So wide open both the 24 and the 24-105 on tripod too
No - 24-105 wide open at f/4; 24/1.4 also at f/4 (so not really fair comparison but, like I said, was rushing to catch the light so forget to try for both at f/8 from this spot)
Okay well F4 is basically the same as F2 on the 24. It does not really get any better. Maybe a little. But you get a good idea. Keep shooting the 24 you will get used to it. Fun lens
Has anyone tried the lens for starry skies?
Some have claimed that coma is practically absent wide open but in this video @ 8:50 performance seems just ok and not that different from say the 1635 GM
Chuck Coyne wrote:
I wasn't the original poster. But if you look back at the two full size images that Eyal posted it looks to be some type of mask or support structure on the land or dock. Besides this doesn't look like motion blur more like astigmatism in the far corner of the 24mm shot.
eyal wrote:
You're right Chuck - the detail in the corners was far more impressive with the prime. But, as you said, the zoom was no slouch.
Guess I expected an epiphany level difference with some of the examples posted here. Not done playing with the prime and will enjoy it on vacation so can post more examples then.
Still debating bringing the zoom with me but that's a different thread...
I'm not sure if this will be more of a help or hindrance, but here is an album I shot not too long ago in Tuscany. Many (not all) of the shots were made with the Sony 24-105. It will probably be obvious to you that the greatest weakness in the production chain was the operator, but it may give you some feel for "travel photography" with this lens. BTW, I am still a generation back, shooting the A7RII.
Neurad1 wrote:
I'm not sure if this will be more of a help or hindrance, but here is an album I shot not too long ago in Tuscany. Many (not all) of the shots were made with the Sony 24-105. It will probably be obvious to you that the greatest weakness in the production chain was the operator, but it may give you some feel for "travel photography" with this lens. BTW, I am still a generation back, shooting the A7RII.
That is a very nice set of shots from Tuscany. I showed them to my wife and she really enjoyed them too. We met in the Navy and were stationed for two years in Naples, Italy. We loved traveling all over Italy and the surrounding countries. No question that the 24-105 is a very nice and versatile lens for travel or landscape photography. I have a very good copy of this lens and will often use it as a one lens kit. I would not hesitate to use this lens for any of my photography. However, I do like changing it up a bit with primes of various focal lengths. Some manual focus and some auto focus. I find the rendering of the primes more appealing at times and I do like to print large so the additional resolution and crisper corners do come in handy occasionally. But I have some very nice prints that were made using the 24-105 as well.
