davidjl Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
"I'm curious, why do you say the primes are better on the A7RV, what's different?"
The primes have more contrast and pop (saturation). Sometimes slightly, sometimes noticeably.
It turns out that the PZ can be persuaded to be better than I thought if I manual focus. With AF, I think the camera is slightly "back focussing". (Maybe, or maybe it's just not reading my mind as to what I want.) The camera gets the thing I put the AF point on, but the DoF region ends up not getting the other things I wanted, whereas with MF, it does better. Not so much a "go figure" thing as a "not yet fully figured out thing".
For example, in a canonical bookcase test, with AF (at the center of the frame), the corners are not good, but with MF (and carefully checking that left and right edges are in focus), it's almost as good as the (in this case 35mm) prime. (I shot the 35/2.0 at f/2.8 and the PZ at f/5.6.) I would have thought that that should give the PZ an edge. But that's an almost: the four corners all look clearly better with the prime than with the PZ (while not unsharp, the PZ has less contrast and color saturation).
So my current thought is that the PZ loses contrast and color saturation when away from the plane of optimal focus more than/faster than the primes. This is a problem for landscapey things, not so much if your images have an actual subject...
|