I tested the 12 24 gm together with the 12 24 g the 18 batis the 21 loxia and the 24 gm .. it is not at all easy to make comparisons especially for the different conformation of the lenses every time the focus is moved on the tripod even if manual and the focal plane can change slightly .. to do this kind of test you have to do more sessions and draw conclusions pondering what to keep and what to leave .. it is not easy at all ... then we all know that in real use the most shots they are done freehand and everything is useless .. here a little test
I have briefly checked if the edges of the optics are okay .. but I must say that I have never checked all my optics .. this one seems quite okay in case I ever notice something serious a tour in assistance costs nothing
rather known a dismantling in afc the fire goes back and forth as happened with the 24 gm but firse need a firmware update
Stefano 1967 wrote:
I tested the 12 24 gm together with the 12 24 g the 18 batis the 21 loxia and the 24 gm .. it is not at all easy to make comparisons especially for the different conformation of the lenses every time the focus is moved on the tripod even if manual and the focal plane can change slightly .. to do this kind of test you have to do more sessions and draw conclusions pondering what to keep and what to leave .. it is not easy at all ... then we all know that in real use the most shots they are done freehand and everything is useless .. here a little test
I have briefly checked if the edges of the optics are okay .. but I must say that I have never checked all my optics .. this one seems quite okay in case I ever notice something serious a tour in assistance costs nothing
rather known a dismantling in afc the fire goes back and forth as happened with the 24 gm but firse need a firmware update...Show more →
Fred Miranda wrote:
This is subjective though. For example, astrophotography may benefit from a symmetric and optimal lens. But, is it crucial for f/8-11 stopped down landscapes? Probably not...but everyone has their level of what's acceptable for them.
I have to confess that after testing 61MP vs 42MP, most of the improvement was at center and that will be true for higher megapixel sensors as well (like 200MP+). So it looks like we really need new sensor tech (like curved sensor) to start seeing off-axis advantages from shooting with even higher megapixel sensors. With the current sensor tech (or shape), it looks like the discrepancy between center and corner resolution will be even higher with higher megapixel sensors....Show more →
Sony has apparently committed to making at least one more round of higher res sensors: so 200MP for Phase One, 135 for Fuji, and 90 odd for full frame. As some have already pointed out, more resolution is always a good thing in the context of reducing digital artifacts and noise by down-ressing. I presume when you interpolate your 60MP images down to 42MP Fred, that the spatial sharpness discrepancy between center and corner diminishes also?
I shudder to think how complex an engineering task and how tight the tolerances would need to be to manufacture a curved sensor. I suspect the only way it may be achievable at a realistic price point is with fixed-lens prime cameras, where every single lens is individually calibrated to its own sensor; and even then, asking people to buy an expensive separate camera for each focal length is a big ask - probably only justifiable in the wide angle range, which would benefit most from such technology.
Fred Miranda wrote:
What's a high resolution camera? 10 years ago it was 20MP? 10 years from now it could be 200MP! My point is, get the highest resolution cam you can get for your detailed images in order to be as future proof as possible. Right now, the best bang for the buck is the A7R IV in my opinion. (Especially used)
Has anybody seen the behavior described by Lloyd Chambers regarding the 12-24:
"confirm the pronounced forward focus shift — so strong that even 3 stops of depth of field cannot compensate—absurdly damaging. "
"huge outer-zone peripheral forward focus shift, such that even f/8 cannot come close to compensating for—f/8 is much worse than f/2.8, so severe is the shift."
"most outrageous focus shift I have ever seen in a lens in this range."
Holger wrote:
Has anybody seen the behavior described by Lloyd Chambers regarding the 12-24:
"confirm the pronounced forward focus shift — so strong that even 3 stops of depth of field cannot compensate—absurdly damaging. "
"huge outer-zone peripheral forward focus shift, such that even f/8 cannot come close to compensating for—f/8 is much worse than f/2.8, so severe is the shift."
"most outrageous focus shift I have ever seen in a lens in this range."
Look at the resolution crops posted here and here. I focused the subject manually and wide open for both infinity and MFD tests.
Holger wrote:
Has anybody seen the behavior described by Lloyd Chambers regarding the 12-24:
"confirm the pronounced forward focus shift — so strong that even 3 stops of depth of field cannot compensate—absurdly damaging. "
"huge outer-zone peripheral forward focus shift, such that even f/8 cannot come close to compensating for—f/8 is much worse than f/2.8, so severe is the shift."
"most outrageous focus shift I have ever seen in a lens in this range."
Yes, I have noticed some pretty obvious focus shift for the corners when comparing wide open and stopped down behavior at infinity with this lens too. At least that's the case for my fourth copy, which is the least decentered one I've tried so far. However it does have some swing that after more careful testing turns out to be evident even stopped down to f6.3 at the extremes of its range. I have #5 on its way to me, so if by any stroke of luck it has decent corner symmetry across the whole range I'll report back on its focus shift.
Looks quiet good the improved design. I just want the filter kit without any glass as i already have haida 150mm cpl and gnd filters. If they fit (which it should) all i need is like a 6 stop nd filter and I am set. I may just wait to see if lee filters just releases the adapter for the sw150 mark ii but doesn't look like they will release it for quiet some time. They are def on the slow end in catching up with new lenses.
Looks quiet good the improved design. I just want the filter kit without any glass as i already have haida 150mm cpl and gnd filters. If they fit (which it should) all i need is like a 6 stop nd filter and I am set. I may just wait to see if lee filters just releases the adapter for the sw150 mark ii but doesn't look like they will release it for quiet some time. They are def on the slow end in catching up with new lenses....Show more →
Nisi Australia have informed me that they are expecting to start selling the S6 adapter only, rather than complete kit, at the end of the month. Presumably they will then also sell the attachement for rectangular filters.
Note they also have a round CPL+6ND filter that doesn't require the added attachment and allows you to keep the filter mounted in the adapter with a lens cap.
Wish they added a CPL + 3ND option along with the 6.
rvh23 wrote:
Nisi Australia have informed me that they are expecting to start selling the S6 adapter only, rather than complete kit, at the end of the month. Presumably they will then also sell the attachement for rectangular filters.
Note they also have a round CPL+6ND filter that doesn't require the added attachment and allows you to keep the filter mounted in the adapter with a lens cap.
One thing I liked about my Sigma 14-24 DN was that it was reasonably parfocal, so regardless of the focal length I was using, best infinity focus for example was always at the same known 'distance' as indicated in camera.
So far with the Sony GM lens samples I've tested this is substantially not the case, which makes focus stacking harder because I have to remember different distances for each focal length. On my current copy, best corner infinity focus at F7.1 is for example when the sliding rectangle is 2-3 notches before the left side of the infinity symbol, whereas at 14mm it is almost in the middle of the infinity symbol, which is a fairly large range. And compromising by setting the lens to the middle of these two positions for all focal lengths results in much softer corners.
For those who believe they have a well-centered copy of the GM, do you still see the same behavior that I do, or is it fairly close to parfocal?
Alternatively if you own a well centered copy of the Sigma DN that is clearly not parfocal, that would be of interest too.
tsdevine wrote:
Wish they added a CPL + 3ND option along with the 6.
I'd like to see them make some NDs without CPL in a round form factor. Much quicker and easier to use than the rectangular systems because you can have the filter preloaded in the adapter.
I do a lot of waterfall photography, and I like have some polarization. For my other lenses, I have a set of CPL, CPL+3ND, CPL+6ND.....and that's usually all I Need. But I hear you, the Nisi with screw in filters is really nice, not having to deal with the rectangular holder. If you don't need polarization, it would make things really nice (assuming you don't need grads, just straight ND.)
-Tim
rvh23 wrote:
I'd like to see them make some NDs without CPL in a round form factor. Much quicker and easier to use than the rectangular systems because you can have the filter preloaded in the adapter.
tsdevine wrote:
I do a lot of waterfall photography, and I like have some polarization. For my other lenses, I have a set of CPL, CPL+3ND, CPL+6ND.....and that's usually all I Need. But I hear you, the Nisi with screw in filters is really nice, not having to deal with the rectangular holder. If you don't need polarization, it would make things really nice (assuming you don't need grads, just straight ND.)
-Tim
For waterfalls when ND6 is too much (e.g. due to wind motion in the trees) I just use the CPL without ND, and if needed include a stopped-down shot in my focus stack to smooth the water flow. But if you are aiming to use just a single shot, I can see that CPL+3ND would make sense.
Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but in case not Haida have recently released a magnetic front-mount alternative to the Nisi S6 filter system for this lens.
With regards to my pursuit of a satisfactory copy of the lens I have now tried 5 copies, and unfortunately none are good by my standards across the whole range at wider apertures. The best one I've found is well centered between 14 and 24mm (each corner sharpens up nicely if focused on in turn), but does have mild swing in opposite directions at 24mm and 14mm. At 12mm one side is mildly decentered, as seems to be common.
I can confirm from having tested corner focus shift on three of the copies now that it is indeed substantial, and manifests all the way across the apertures I use i.e. f2.8 to f8. It is so strong that you simply can't focus wide open and stop down and expect your corners to stay well focused, especially at the wide end of the zoom range.
For me persoanlly, the bigger drawback of the focus shift is that for focus stacking you have to know where infinity is not only for different focal lengths, but also at each aperture My approach will be to have a table of best infinity in-camera focal distances at F2.8 (astro) and 7.1 (landscapes). Another FM member suggested a while ago I try focus peaking instead but it's totally useless wiht a lens this wide, and even more so in low contrast conditions.
On the plus side though, stopped down to my typical landscape aperture of 7.1, and using my known distances the focus stacked results I'm getting with this lens now are very sharp across the entire frame. Even at 12mm the results are very nice, albeit not quite as good as the rest of the zoom range in the extreme corners, and certainly way better than the CV12.
GMPhotography wrote:
5 copies that's just sad. Sorry bud
Thanks Guy. Yes it's dissappointing, but not entirely unexpected with these complex UWA zooms. I've decided to use the best one I found for now and wait until we're out of lock-down so I can maybe try a few more copies in-store. Fortuntaely the one I have does produce excellent results under most real-world conditions I would encounter (although yet to confirm it can satisfy my astro needs).
10 years from now it could be 200MP! My point is, get the highest resolution cam you can get for your detailed images in order to be as future proof as possible. Right now, the best bang for the buck is the A7R IV in my opinion. (Especially used)
My approach will be to have a table of best infinity in-camera focal distances at F2.8 (astro) and 7.1 (landscapes). Another FM member suggested a while ago I try focus peaking instead but it's totally useless wiht a lens this wide, and even more so in low contrast conditions.