Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
p.21 #1Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Still, I'm a bit shocked at how unsharp that corner looks, at 10m focus distance without filter.
Or am I missing something?So far, I've only compared it to the Sigma 14-24 DG DN and the Sony 14 is not as sharp as the Sigma at the very corners at f/2.8 and f/4. It could be copy variation but my loan is well centered. It's not absurd to think that's not possible since the Sigma is optimal @14mm@ and performs similarly to the 12-24 GM at this FL.
Thanks, Fred.
According to your tests, do the corners of the GM 14mm catch up at f/5.6 (at infinity) compared to the Sigma DN 14-24mm or the Sony GM 12-24mm?
Maximilian wrote
Bobu wrote
Focus distance was about 10m. At infinity, the FC effect without a filter is not as strong and corner sharpness further improves.Or am I missing something?
Thanks, Fred.
According to your tests, do the corners of the GM 14mm catch up at f/5.6 (at infinity) compared to the Sigma DN 14-24mm or the Sony GM 12-24mm?
Jun 07, 2021 at 04:57 PM
p.21 #2Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Maximilian wrote:
Still, I'm a bit shocked at how unsharp that corner looks, at 10m focus distance without filter.
Or am I missing something?So far, I've only compared it to the Sigma 14-24 DG DN and the Sony 14 is not as sharp as the Sigma at the very corners at f/2.8 and f/4. It could be copy variation but my loan is well centered. It's not absurd to think that's not possible since the Sigma is optimal @14mm@@ and performs similarly to the 12-24 GM at this FL.Thanks, Fred.
According to your tests, do the corners of the GM 14mm catch up at f/5.6 (at infinity) compared to the Sigma DN 14-24mm or the Sony GM 12-24mm?
I will post a full aperture series soon. I'm just waiting for a second copy to make sure that's how it really performs. My current copy is well centered on my A7R IV but I'm not super happy with the extreme corners.
I tested it against the Voigtlander 15/4.5 III as well.
Fred Miranda wrote
Maximilian wrote
Bobu wrote
Focus distance was about 10m. At infinity, the FC effect without a filter is not as strong and corner sharpness further improves.Or am I missing something?
According to your tests, do the corners of the GM 14mm catch up at f/5.6 (at infinity) compared to the Sigma DN 14-24mm or the Sony GM 12-24mm?
I will post a full aperture series soon. I'm just waiting for a second copy to make sure that's how it really performs. My current copy is well centered on my A7R IV but I'm not super happy with the extreme corners.
I tested it against the Voigtlander 15/4.5 III as well.
Jun 07, 2021 at 07:58 PM
p.21 #3Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Because waiting for the new version of the haida rear filter (It's just that the printed words are different from the old version), I have to wait until the weekend to get it, I will try my best to make a complete comparison.
new version:
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's my guess too. The Haida sits directly behind the last lens element, probably only 2 mm away. Maybe this helps to avoid astigmatism issues.Yes, that's the case and explains the results. Still an interesting and unusual effect.This is puzzling to me but I take comfort that you are testing it properly. Could you run a test showing the subject at infinity distance? It would be hard to believe the extreme corners will look OK (or better) at f/1.8 when focusing at center.
With the Kase (0.3m), extreme corners are almost unusable at f/1.8.
new version:
 |
||
 |
||
|
Fred Miranda wrote:
Bobu wrote
olalafoto wrote
The corners of 14GM is forward FC, maybe Haida makes the corners enhance the backward FC, so the foreground corners looks better, and the infinity corners becomes worse.Bobu wrote
olalafoto wrote
Haida is closer to the last lens and Kase is closer to CMOS，maybe this difference will cause interesting results ？Fred Miranda wrote
That's interesting since the Kase is already causing a lot of FC and astigmatism issues when used with the FE 14/1.8 and it's way thinner than the Haida.With the Kase (0.3m), extreme corners are almost unusable at f/1.8.
Jun 07, 2021 at 08:30 PM
p.21 #4Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
I’d certainly try more copies; mine matched and bested my 12-24GM corners at equal or faster apertures. Or maybe my 12-24 is bad 😂😂. Actually I’m quite confident in my 12-24, it is really solid across the frame and all apertures. Original post below
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1703568/0#15616048
Fred Miranda wrote:
Still, I'm a bit shocked at how unsharp that corner looks, at 10m focus distance without filter.
Or am I missing something?So far, I've only compared it to the Sigma 14-24 DG DN and the Sony 14 is not as sharp as the Sigma at the very corners at f/2.8 and f/4. It could be copy variation but my loan is well centered. It's not absurd to think that's not possible since the Sigma is optimal @14mm@@@ and performs similarly to the 12-24 GM at this FL.Thanks, Fred.
According to your tests, do the corners of the GM 14mm catch up at f/5.6 (at infinity) compared to the Sigma DN 14-24mm or the Sony GM 12-24mm?I will post a full aperture series soon. I'm just waiting for a second copy to make sure that's how it really performs. My current copy is well centered on my A7R IV but I'm not super happy with the extreme corners.
I tested it against the Voigtlander 15/4.5 III as well.
Edited on Jun 07, 2021 at 09:21 PM · View previous versions
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1703568/0#15616048
Fred Miranda wrote:
Maximilian wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Maximilian wrote
Bobu wrote
Focus distance was about 10m. At infinity, the FC effect without a filter is not as strong and corner sharpness further improves.Or am I missing something?
According to your tests, do the corners of the GM 14mm catch up at f/5.6 (at infinity) compared to the Sigma DN 14-24mm or the Sony GM 12-24mm?
I tested it against the Voigtlander 15/4.5 III as well.
Edited on Jun 07, 2021 at 09:21 PM · View previous versions
Jun 07, 2021 at 09:18 PM
p.21 #5Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
To me, personal assessment is highly subjective without any pictures. With that said, I really appreciate all the reports so far. If it's true that the GM 14 is worse than the Sigma 14-24 in the corners at f/2.8, it should not matter much (slightly disappointing though). The question remains is if it will be comparable with the zoom at f/4 or f/5.6.
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.
Jun 07, 2021 at 09:20 PM
p.21 #6Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
NatDeroxL7 wrote:
I’d certainly try more copies; mine matched and bested my 12-24GM corners at equal or faster apertures. Or maybe my 12-24 is bad 😂😂. Actually I’m quite confident in my 12-24, it is really solid across the frame and all apertures. Original post below
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1703568/0#15616048
Still, I'm a bit shocked at how unsharp that corner looks, at 10m focus distance without filter.
Or am I missing something?So far, I've only compared it to the Sigma 14-24 DG DN and the Sony 14 is not as sharp as the Sigma at the very corners at f/2.8 and f/4. It could be copy variation but my loan is well centered. It's not absurd to think that's not possible since the Sigma is optimal @14mm@@@@ and performs similarly to the 12-24 GM at this FL.Thanks, Fred.
According to your tests, do the corners of the GM 14mm catch up at f/5.6 (at infinity) compared to the Sigma DN 14-24mm or the Sony GM 12-24mm?I will post a full aperture series soon. I'm just waiting for a second copy to make sure that's how it really performs. My current copy is well centered on my A7R IV but I'm not super happy with the extreme corners.
I tested it against the Voigtlander 15/4.5 III as well.
My findings are similar to yours here. My 12-24 GM is a superb copy, centering is almost perfect at all focal lengths, wide open. My top 2 corners on the 14mm GM are weaker than the bottom 2, but centre-top is fine.
Of the 3 lenses, my 14-24 DG DN gives the best corners at f2.8 if I corner focus, but centre sharpness suffers more. Corner focusing on my 14mm GM and 12-24 GM keeps the centre pretty sharp. For astro specifically there's little to choose between the 3 at 14mm and f2.8 in terms of 'star quality', but the 14mm GM is still remarkably good corner to corner at f1.8 if focused very carefully.
I’d certainly try more copies; mine matched and bested my 12-24GM corners at equal or faster apertures. Or maybe my 12-24 is bad 😂😂. Actually I’m quite confident in my 12-24, it is really solid across the frame and all apertures. Original post below
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1703568/0#15616048
Fred Miranda wrote
Maximilian wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Maximilian wrote
Bobu wrote
Focus distance was about 10m. At infinity, the FC effect without a filter is not as strong and corner sharpness further improves.Or am I missing something?
According to your tests, do the corners of the GM 14mm catch up at f/5.6 (at infinity) compared to the Sigma DN 14-24mm or the Sony GM 12-24mm?
I tested it against the Voigtlander 15/4.5 III as well.
My findings are similar to yours here. My 12-24 GM is a superb copy, centering is almost perfect at all focal lengths, wide open. My top 2 corners on the 14mm GM are weaker than the bottom 2, but centre-top is fine.
Of the 3 lenses, my 14-24 DG DN gives the best corners at f2.8 if I corner focus, but centre sharpness suffers more. Corner focusing on my 14mm GM and 12-24 GM keeps the centre pretty sharp. For astro specifically there's little to choose between the 3 at 14mm and f2.8 in terms of 'star quality', but the 14mm GM is still remarkably good corner to corner at f1.8 if focused very carefully.
Jun 08, 2021 at 04:54 AM
p.21 #7Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Maximilian wrote:
Still, I'm a bit shocked at how unsharp that corner looks, at 10m focus distance without filter.
Or am I missing something?
Because the depth of field is not enough, the corners of 14GM has forward field curvature.
This is realwold test: A7Riv, F1.8
Bobu wrote
Focus distance was about 10m. At infinity, the FC effect without a filter is not as strong and corner sharpness further improves.Or am I missing something?
Because the depth of field is not enough, the corners of 14GM has forward field curvature.
This is realwold test: A7Riv, F1.8
|
||
 |
||
|
Jun 08, 2021 at 10:06 AM
p.21 #8Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
hiepphotog wrote:
To me, personal assessment is highly subjective without any pictures. With that said, I really appreciate all the reports so far. If it's true that the GM 14 is worse than the Sigma 14-24 in the corners at f/2.8, it should not matter much (slightly disappointing though). The question remains is if it will be comparable with the zoom at f/4 or f/5.6.
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom...Show more →
Here are some additional pictures to confirm my subjective assessment.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
14GM @f/1.8 100% center crop
Sigma 14-24 @14mm @f/2.8 100% center crop
14GM @f/1.8 100% corner crop
Sigma 14-24 @14mm @f/2.8 100% corner crop
To me, personal assessment is highly subjective without any pictures. With that said, I really appreciate all the reports so far. If it's true that the GM 14 is worse than the Sigma 14-24 in the corners at f/2.8, it should not matter much (slightly disappointing though). The question remains is if it will be comparable with the zoom at f/4 or f/5.6.
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom...Show more →
Here are some additional pictures to confirm my subjective assessment.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
14GM @f/1.8 100% center crop
Sigma 14-24 @14mm @f/2.8 100% center crop
14GM @f/1.8 100% corner crop
Sigma 14-24 @14mm @f/2.8 100% corner crop
Jun 08, 2021 at 11:34 AM
p.21 #9Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Bobu wrote:
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.Here are some additional pictures to confirm my subjective assessment.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
In these, the Sigma is sharper.
hiepphotog wrote
To me, personal assessment is highly subjective without any pictures. With that said, I really appreciate all the reports so far. If it's true that the GM 14 is worse than the Sigma 14-24 in the corners at f/2.8, it should not matter much (slightly disappointing though). The question remains is if it will be comparable with the zoom at f/4 or f/5.6.You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
In these, the Sigma is sharper.
Jun 08, 2021 at 12:34 PM
p.21 #10Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
jamato8 wrote:
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.Here are some additional pictures to confirm my subjective assessment.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).In these, the Sigma is sharper.
yes, at least f/1.8 vs f/2.8
Bobu wrote
hiepphotog wrote
To me, personal assessment is highly subjective without any pictures. With that said, I really appreciate all the reports so far. If it's true that the GM 14 is worse than the Sigma 14-24 in the corners at f/2.8, it should not matter much (slightly disappointing though). The question remains is if it will be comparable with the zoom at f/4 or f/5.6.You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
yes, at least f/1.8 vs f/2.8
Jun 08, 2021 at 12:40 PM
|
p.21 #11Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Bobu wrote:
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.Here are some additional pictures to confirm my subjective assessment.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
Thanks. That is illuminating and a real world example.
What you are calling corner, I call "mid-field" when evaluating resolution across the image field. For an extreme corner comparison, where differences will be more noticeable, one would need to show a subject at the very corner of the frame (like shooting a landscape diagonally just to test it). It would be best not to refocus at the corner to evaluate the effects of field curvature as well. If you could do a diagonal infinity test with and without the Haida as well, always focusing at center, that would clarify the effects of a 0.5m rear filter on this lens.
My Sigma is noticeably sharper than the GM (at f/2.8) but I will get a second copy on Thursday to confirm this. They are more of less equivalent at f/5.6 and smaller apertures so both great for landscapes.
hiepphotog wrote
To me, personal assessment is highly subjective without any pictures. With that said, I really appreciate all the reports so far. If it's true that the GM 14 is worse than the Sigma 14-24 in the corners at f/2.8, it should not matter much (slightly disappointing though). The question remains is if it will be comparable with the zoom at f/4 or f/5.6.You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
Thanks. That is illuminating and a real world example.
What you are calling corner, I call "mid-field" when evaluating resolution across the image field. For an extreme corner comparison, where differences will be more noticeable, one would need to show a subject at the very corner of the frame (like shooting a landscape diagonally just to test it). It would be best not to refocus at the corner to evaluate the effects of field curvature as well. If you could do a diagonal infinity test with and without the Haida as well, always focusing at center, that would clarify the effects of a 0.5m rear filter on this lens.
My Sigma is noticeably sharper than the GM (at f/2.8) but I will get a second copy on Thursday to confirm this. They are more of less equivalent at f/5.6 and smaller apertures so both great for landscapes.
Jun 08, 2021 at 12:44 PM
p.21 #12Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Maximilian wrote:
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.Here are some additional pictures to confirm my subjective assessment.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).In these, the Sigma is sharper.yes, at least f/1.8 vs f/2.8
Sony 14GM at f/2.8:
14GM @f/2.8 100% corner crop
jamato8 wrote
Bobu wrote
hiepphotog wrote
To me, personal assessment is highly subjective without any pictures. With that said, I really appreciate all the reports so far. If it's true that the GM 14 is worse than the Sigma 14-24 in the corners at f/2.8, it should not matter much (slightly disappointing though). The question remains is if it will be comparable with the zoom at f/4 or f/5.6.You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
Sony 14GM at f/2.8:
14GM @f/2.8 100% corner crop
Jun 08, 2021 at 12:50 PM
p.21 #13Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Fred Miranda wrote:
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.Here are some additional pictures to confirm my subjective assessment.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).Thanks. That is illuminating and a real world example.
What you are calling corner, I call "mid-field" when evaluating resolution across the image field. For an extreme corner comparison, where differences will be more noticeable, one would need to show a subject at the very corner of the frame (like shooting a landscape diagonally just to test it). It would be best not to refocus at the corner to evaluate the effects of field curvature as well. If you could do a diagonal infinity test with and without the Haida as well, always focusing at center, that would clarify the...Show more →
I would definitely not call this mid-field. Here is the whole image to illustrate what I mean. I will do the test with the rear filters at infinity on the weekend.
Bobu wrote
hiepphotog wrote
To me, personal assessment is highly subjective without any pictures. With that said, I really appreciate all the reports so far. If it's true that the GM 14 is worse than the Sigma 14-24 in the corners at f/2.8, it should not matter much (slightly disappointing though). The question remains is if it will be comparable with the zoom at f/4 or f/5.6.You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
What you are calling corner, I call "mid-field" when evaluating resolution across the image field. For an extreme corner comparison, where differences will be more noticeable, one would need to show a subject at the very corner of the frame (like shooting a landscape diagonally just to test it). It would be best not to refocus at the corner to evaluate the effects of field curvature as well. If you could do a diagonal infinity test with and without the Haida as well, always focusing at center, that would clarify the...Show more →
I would definitely not call this mid-field. Here is the whole image to illustrate what I mean. I will do the test with the rear filters at infinity on the weekend.
Jun 08, 2021 at 12:55 PM
p.21 #14Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Bobu wrote:
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.Here are some additional pictures to confirm my subjective assessment.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).Thanks. That is illuminating and a real world example.
What you are calling corner, I call "mid-field" when evaluating resolution across the image field. For an extreme corner comparison, where differences will be more noticeable, one would need to show a subject at the very corner of the frame (like shooting a landscape diagonally just to test it). It would be best not to refocus at the corner to evaluate the effects of field curvature as well. If you could do a diagonal infinity test with and without the Haida as well, always focusing at center, that would clarify the effects of a 0.5m rear filter on this lens.
My Sigma is noticeably sharper than the GM (at f/2.8) but I will get a second copy on Thursday to confirm this. They are more of less equivalent at f/5.6 and smaller apertures so both great for landscapes.I would definitely not call this mid-field. Here is the whole image to illustrate what I mean. I will do the test with the rear filters at infinity on the weekend.
My apologies. I thought the subject was in the middle instead of the top.
Fred Miranda wrote
Bobu wrote
hiepphotog wrote
To me, personal assessment is highly subjective without any pictures. With that said, I really appreciate all the reports so far. If it's true that the GM 14 is worse than the Sigma 14-24 in the corners at f/2.8, it should not matter much (slightly disappointing though). The question remains is if it will be comparable with the zoom at f/4 or f/5.6.You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
What you are calling corner, I call "mid-field" when evaluating resolution across the image field. For an extreme corner comparison, where differences will be more noticeable, one would need to show a subject at the very corner of the frame (like shooting a landscape diagonally just to test it). It would be best not to refocus at the corner to evaluate the effects of field curvature as well. If you could do a diagonal infinity test with and without the Haida as well, always focusing at center, that would clarify the effects of a 0.5m rear filter on this lens.
My Sigma is noticeably sharper than the GM (at f/2.8) but I will get a second copy on Thursday to confirm this. They are more of less equivalent at f/5.6 and smaller apertures so both great for landscapes.
My apologies. I thought the subject was in the middle instead of the top.
Jun 08, 2021 at 12:59 PM
p.21 #15Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Bobu wrote:
You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.Here are some additional pictures to confirm my subjective assessment.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).In these, the Sigma is sharper.yes, at least f/1.8 vs f/2.8Sony 14GM at f/2.8:
Thanks for the comparison.
To me the corner of the Sigma 14-24mm at f/2.8 still looks sharper than the GM 14mm at f/2.8 although the difference is not large.
Maximilian wrote
jamato8 wrote
Bobu wrote
hiepphotog wrote
To me, personal assessment is highly subjective without any pictures. With that said, I really appreciate all the reports so far. If it's true that the GM 14 is worse than the Sigma 14-24 in the corners at f/2.8, it should not matter much (slightly disappointing though). The question remains is if it will be comparable with the zoom at f/4 or f/5.6.You're trading size and weight for zoom versatility and slight IQ advantage. I might hold off till the Sigma 14/1.8 DG DN if so to decide what I want to do at this focal length. The Sigma zoom is very good for my purpose.
I don't see any real difference between these images (besides a different color temperature). Both lenses were wide open and focused at near infinity (100-200m).
Thanks for the comparison.
To me the corner of the Sigma 14-24mm at f/2.8 still looks sharper than the GM 14mm at f/2.8 although the difference is not large.
Jun 08, 2021 at 02:13 PM
p.21 #16Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Haida rear filter ND sharpness comparison:
Center focus at infinity, 5500K, ACR13.3（only enable vignetting correction）
F/1.8~F/4, corner
haida rear ND-01 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, corner
haida rear ND-02 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/1.8~F/4, border
haida rear ND-05 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, border
haida rear ND-06 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/1.8~F/4, middle
haida rear ND-03 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, middle
haida rear ND-04 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/7.1,F9,F10,border and corner
haida rear ND-07 by olalafoto, on Flickr
========================================================================
field curvature comparison：
manual focus, based on electronic scale in camera display
haida rear ND-08 by olalafoto, on Flickr
=========================================================================
Update: ghost comparison：
F/8 corner, 50% crop
Edited on Jun 09, 2021 at 09:07 AM · View previous versions
Center focus at infinity, 5500K, ACR13.3（only enable vignetting correction）
F/1.8~F/4, corner
haida rear ND-01 by olalafoto, on FlickrF/5.6~F/11, corner
haida rear ND-02 by olalafoto, on FlickrF/1.8~F/4, border
haida rear ND-05 by olalafoto, on FlickrF/5.6~F/11, border
haida rear ND-06 by olalafoto, on FlickrF/1.8~F/4, middle
haida rear ND-03 by olalafoto, on FlickrF/5.6~F/11, middle
haida rear ND-04 by olalafoto, on FlickrF/7.1,F9,F10,border and corner
haida rear ND-07 by olalafoto, on Flickr========================================================================
field curvature comparison：
manual focus, based on electronic scale in camera display
haida rear ND-08 by olalafoto, on Flickr=========================================================================
Update: ghost comparison：
F/8 corner, 50% crop
|
||
 |
||
|
Edited on Jun 09, 2021 at 09:07 AM · View previous versions
Jun 09, 2021 at 06:37 AM
p.21 #17Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
olalafoto wrote:
Haida rear filter ND sharpness comparison:
Center focus at infinity, 5500K, ACR13.3（only enable vignetting correction）
F/1.8~F/4, corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235940328_24b4ffd6d0_o.jpghaida rear ND-01 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235939643_4f36c70f49_o.jpghaida rear ND-02 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/1.8~F/4, border
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236791840_6297519e36_o.jpghaida rear ND-05 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, border
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236791435_cc3ae2244d_o.jpghaida rear ND-06 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/1.8~F/4, middle
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235730021_90b0575ae2_o.jpghaida rear ND-03 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, middle
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235938798_cfff639913_o.jpghaida rear ND-04 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/7.1,F9,F10,border and corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235019087_ac42ec7672_o.jpghaida rear ND-07 by olalafoto, on Flickr
========================================================================
field curvature comparison：
manual focus, based on electronic scale in camera display
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236552054_9e1e435e93_o.jpghaida rear ND-08 by olalafoto, on Flickr
Perfect!!! These are expected results from the 0.5m Haida rear filter. It's a bit worse than what I'm seeing with the 0.3m Kase.
With the latter at f/5.6, the filtered crops matches the unfiltered one which is not quite the case when compared to the Haida. There is a big induced field curvature, which is very noticeable at wide apertures.
This shows that rear filters + fast ultra wide lenses is not a good idea unless one is shooting at f/8 or smaller apertures. With the big zooms (Sigma and Sony), the Kase's induced field curvature gets masked by ~ f/4 where they are optimal, so imo, a great combination.
Haida rear filter ND sharpness comparison:
Center focus at infinity, 5500K, ACR13.3（only enable vignetting correction）
F/1.8~F/4, corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235940328_24b4ffd6d0_o.jpghaida rear ND-01 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235939643_4f36c70f49_o.jpghaida rear ND-02 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/1.8~F/4, border
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236791840_6297519e36_o.jpghaida rear ND-05 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, border
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236791435_cc3ae2244d_o.jpghaida rear ND-06 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/1.8~F/4, middle
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235730021_90b0575ae2_o.jpghaida rear ND-03 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, middle
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235938798_cfff639913_o.jpghaida rear ND-04 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/7.1,F9,F10,border and corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235019087_ac42ec7672_o.jpghaida rear ND-07 by olalafoto, on Flickr
========================================================================
field curvature comparison：
manual focus, based on electronic scale in camera display
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236552054_9e1e435e93_o.jpghaida rear ND-08 by olalafoto, on Flickr
Perfect!!! These are expected results from the 0.5m Haida rear filter. It's a bit worse than what I'm seeing with the 0.3m Kase.
With the latter at f/5.6, the filtered crops matches the unfiltered one which is not quite the case when compared to the Haida. There is a big induced field curvature, which is very noticeable at wide apertures.
This shows that rear filters + fast ultra wide lenses is not a good idea unless one is shooting at f/8 or smaller apertures. With the big zooms (Sigma and Sony), the Kase's induced field curvature gets masked by ~ f/4 where they are optimal, so imo, a great combination.
Jun 09, 2021 at 07:01 AM
p.21 #18Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Thank you Fred
Yes, the test result is only marginally acceptable，however, I will still insist on using Haida, because I prefer the operation mode of Haida to Kase, and I updated ghost comparison.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Center focus at infinity, 5500K, ACR13.3（only enable vignetting correction）
F/1.8~F/4, corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235940328_24b4ffd6d0_o.jpghaida rear ND-01 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235939643_4f36c70f49_o.jpghaida rear ND-02 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/1.8~F/4, border
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236791840_6297519e36_o.jpghaida rear ND-05 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, border
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236791435_cc3ae2244d_o.jpghaida rear ND-06 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/1.8~F/4, middle
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235730021_90b0575ae2_o.jpghaida rear ND-03 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, middle
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235938798_cfff639913_o.jpghaida rear ND-04 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/7.1,F9,F10,border and corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235019087_ac42ec7672_o.jpghaida rear ND-07 by olalafoto, on Flickr
========================================================================
field curvature comparison：
manual focus, based on electronic scale in camera display
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236552054_9e1e435e93_o.jpghaida rear ND-08 by olalafoto, on FlickrPerfect!!! These are expected results from the 0.5m Haida rear filter. It's a bit worse than what I'm seeing with the 0.3m Kase.
With the latter at f/5.6, the filtered crops matches the unfiltered one which is not quite the case when compared to the Haida. There is a big induced field curvature, which is very noticeable at wide apertures.
This shows that rear filters + fast ultra wide lenses is not a good idea unless one is shooting at f/8 or smaller apertures. With the big zooms (Sigma and Sony), the Kase's induced field curvature gets masked by...Show more →
Edited on Jun 09, 2021 at 09:15 AM · View previous versions
Yes, the test result is only marginally acceptable，however, I will still insist on using Haida, because I prefer the operation mode of Haida to Kase, and I updated ghost comparison.
Fred Miranda wrote:
olalafoto wrote
Haida rear filter ND sharpness comparison:Center focus at infinity, 5500K, ACR13.3（only enable vignetting correction）
F/1.8~F/4, corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235940328_24b4ffd6d0_o.jpghaida rear ND-01 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235939643_4f36c70f49_o.jpghaida rear ND-02 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/1.8~F/4, border
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236791840_6297519e36_o.jpghaida rear ND-05 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, border
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236791435_cc3ae2244d_o.jpghaida rear ND-06 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/1.8~F/4, middle
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235730021_90b0575ae2_o.jpghaida rear ND-03 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/5.6~F/11, middle
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235938798_cfff639913_o.jpghaida rear ND-04 by olalafoto, on Flickr
F/7.1,F9,F10,border and corner
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51235019087_ac42ec7672_o.jpghaida rear ND-07 by olalafoto, on Flickr
========================================================================
field curvature comparison：
manual focus, based on electronic scale in camera display
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51236552054_9e1e435e93_o.jpghaida rear ND-08 by olalafoto, on Flickr
With the latter at f/5.6, the filtered crops matches the unfiltered one which is not quite the case when compared to the Haida. There is a big induced field curvature, which is very noticeable at wide apertures.
This shows that rear filters + fast ultra wide lenses is not a good idea unless one is shooting at f/8 or smaller apertures. With the big zooms (Sigma and Sony), the Kase's induced field curvature gets masked by...Show more →
Edited on Jun 09, 2021 at 09:15 AM · View previous versions
Jun 09, 2021 at 08:29 AM
p.21 #19Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Too bad. I don't want to have to worry about wanting to use a lens wider than the acceptable results of using the a filter. May as well save money and buy a slower lens. I already have a 10mm that is excellent but much slower. I would use the Kase on other lenses where I want the ND etc.. but to me, the 14 does not lend itself to the use of the rear filters from Haida and in my case, Kase, which I have here an have tested. But for longer lenses, very good results. Money well spent on the Kase.,? I don't know yet. But I don't make much money off of photography any longer. Most of my work was visual anthropology and that is what I love doing anyway and my critical care nursing made up the different in income needs.
Jun 09, 2021 at 09:15 AM
p.21 #20Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Today I also managed to do the FC test with and without the Haida rear filter at infinity. Here are the results:
Jun 09, 2021 at 01:19 PM