billsnature wrote:
Maybe it is just me, but I find the images in this thread much more compelling than the images in the 35mm GM thread. I expected the 35 GM or the CV 35 APO to blow me away and have me scrambling for the credit card, but based on images so far, I would be more likely to buy the 20mm despite being very happy with the 16-35GM.
Anyone else feel the same way?
I own both, and I agree with you that it is easier to compose compelling images with the 20mm. Very likely, when looking at the images you took with your 16-35, you find that those you prefer were taken in the range 16 to 24. At least that was my conclusion with my Fuji 10-24 (15-36 in FF equivalent).
That being said, the 35 GM has phenomenal resolution wide open and into the corners, and at all focusing distances. This opens up new possibilities and forces me out of my comfort zone! It is optically better than the 20 G, but it is slightly bigger and heavier.
If I owned the 16-35 and wanted something smaller, I would be tempted by the 24 GM, or even the new 24 G. And if a large percentage of your pictures are taken at 16 mm, maybe the 14 mm GM would be an attractive proposition (I pre-ordered it the day it was announced )
f_audet wrote:
I own both, and I agree with you that it is easier to compose compelling images with the 20mm. Very likely, when looking at the images you took with your 16-35, you find that those you prefer were taken in the range 16 to 24. At least that was my conclusion with my Fuji 10-24 (15-36 in FF equivalent).
That being said, the 35 GM has phenomenal resolution wide open and into the corners, and at all focusing distances. This opens up new possibilities and forces me out of my comfort zone! It is optically better than the 20 G, but it is slightly bigger and heavier.
If I owned the 16-35 and wanted something smaller, I would be tempted by the 24 GM, or even the new 24 G. And if a large percentage of your pictures are taken at 16 mm, maybe the 14 mm GM would be an attractive proposition (I pre-ordered it the day it was announced )...Show more →
Actually for my own images I find 27-33 to be the most frequently used. I also sold my Loxia 21 and bought the 25mm as I found that 21 was too often a wider than I wanted in a sun star image.
I don't think this has to do with FL. Maybe it's just more creative shooters in the thread, or something about the color and contrast. I really think 20G exceeds expectations and maybe the images from 35 GM fail to meet expectations from the images I have seen so far.
For landscape stuff I don't see the 35GM beating the 35mm setting of my Contax 35-70mm f3.4 based on the images I have seen. Of course that could quickly change in the just next 5 image posts to that thread.
More inflight, cockpit action with impressive FE20G.
I managed to get this 'sharp' shot at 1/20s in bumpy turbulence (shooting high 20fps burst hoping for the best)
stgrove wrote:
I really like how this lens resolves detail. Anyone using this on an A1?
I have the lens, I have the camera - I have yet to take any images with the combo, I might be able to this afternoon but I expect nothing but greatness.
mudlake wrote:
Lee - I know you just got the lens, but how do you feel it compares to the CV 21/3.5?
In all honesty, I don't know. Sorry.
My instincts tell me it doesn't quite have the (micro?) contrast/look maybe? But then, that's not as noticeable in wide landscapes I don't think.
I do have the CV21 boxed up & advertised but I might try to do a comparison at some point if I get the chance - nothing scientific, just side by side typical images. I might do the same for the 35GM & CV40/1.2 also......
This lens continues to produce probably my best images, but I find the perspective also produces more duds from user error than with any other lens—it remains an ultrawide, so small errors in composition (especially angle of shooting) can result in easily noticeable perspective distortion. Good thing that the lens is so flawless in almost every aspect of operation then! The only criticism I have with this lens over almost a year of use is that the colors seem a bit flat while contrast is high. Perhaps this is more common than in my experience, but I've definitely had to adjust my editing process to get results I'm happy with.
)
