Great read. Thank you for the link. If the problem is the adapter, we still have a hope, but if it is in fact the sensor glass thickness, I guess game is over. In practical use, how visibly is it affecting ? It looked bad enough in closeups but wanted to hear your impressions.
tctmp wrote:
Ok, then Tim is right. I never have those enabled in camera, that could explain why. I only check/uncheck those lens corrections boxes after importing depending on the situations. The question though, is there any sony camera/lens combination that those distortion/vignetting corrections can not be disabled in camera? I doubt there is any.
Lenses that force Distortion Compensation on all cameras with the feature:
I thought some older APS-C lenses acted similarly on full-frame bodies, but Sony's website states otherwise--sometimes the information there is inaccurate.
I haven't seen a third-party lens that got distortion compensation forced.
akul wrote:
Great read. Thank you for the link. If the problem is the adapter, we still have a hope, but if it is in fact the sensor glass thickness, I guess game is over. In practical use, how visibly is it affecting ? It looked bad enough in closeups but wanted to hear your impressions.
Luka
Being a landscape shooter primarily, the lens is unusable to me in its adapted role due to this edge softness. Only at f/8 do the edges match the native Sony-sensor performance.
I see similar effects on my astronomy camera/telescope as well. One must compensate for the thickness of filters used in the optical path through adjusting the amount of backfocus (an approximation of which would be the flange distance on a camera/lens combo.) My filters are 3mm thick, so I needed to add 1/3 of that (ie 1mm) of additional backfocus to the image path or I get poor quality stars towards the edges. If I was to take the filters out, I would need to remove 1mm of backfocus, or would also experience poor stars in the edges.
snapsy wrote:
Being a landscape shooter primarily, the lens is unusable to me in its adapted role due to this edge softness. Only at f/8 do the edges match the native Sony-sensor performance.
As a landscape shooter, you might want to consider two other Sony E mount lenses that do a lot better on Nikon cameras. I have used the Zeiss Loxia 21 f/2.8 and the Voigtlander 21 f/1.4 and they work very well on my Nikon Z7. The latter lens I think is excellent for landscapes and the Sony version works a lot better than the Leica M mount version of the lens. And since Voitlander is now making some of their lenses in Z mount we may even see a Z mount version of that lens someday.
Steve Spencer wrote:
As a landscape shooter, you might want to consider two other Sony E mount lenses that do a lot better on Nikon cameras. I have used the Zeiss Loxia 21 f/2.8 and the Voigtlander 21 f/1.4 and they work very well on my Nikon Z7. The latter lens I think is excellent for landscapes and the Sony version works a lot better than the Leica M mount version of the lens. And since Voitlander is now making some of their lenses in Z mount we may even see a Z mount version of that lens someday.
Have you notice any issues with the Voigtlander 21mm f1.4 with felid curvature at infinity? I noticed this behavior a bit on my A7rIV where if I wanted max sharpens in the center of the frame I need to back off slightly from the infinity focus hard stop, but if I wanted max sharpness at the edged I have to be at infinity. I noticed this issue is even more pronounced on my Z8 with the megadap adapter. I gave the 21mm a fairly good side by side try today with the Z8 and A7rIV and it's definitely harder to get across the frame sharpens on the Z8, I probably won't use the 21mm below f5.6 on the Z8 from what I am seeing, which is a bit disappointing as I do really like the images the 21mm produces.
I wonder if the sensor stack on differences on Sony allow lenses around 20mm to be really optimized for Sony sensors.
Feb 10, 2024 at 07:05 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
DWOfPaul wrote:
Have you notice any issues with the Voigtlander 21mm f1.4 with felid curvature at infinity? I noticed this behavior a bit on my A7rIV where if I wanted max sharpens in the center of the frame I need to back off slightly from the infinity focus hard stop, but if I wanted max sharpness at the edged I have to be at infinity. I noticed this issue is even more pronounced on my Z8 with the megadap adapter. I gave the 21mm a fairly good side by side try today with the Z8 and A7rIV and it's definitely harder to get across the frame sharpens on the Z8, I probably won't use the 21mm below f5.6 on the Z8 from what I am seeing, which is a bit disappointing as I do really like the images the 21mm produces.
I wonder if the sensor stack on differences on Sony allow lenses around 20mm to be really optimized for Sony sensors. ...Show more →
I didn't have any problems with using the 21 f/1.4 at infinity either on Sony or Nikon bodies, but then I was always (I think) at f/5.6 or 6.3 when shooting at infinity. At closer distances, where I shot at wider apertures some of the time I never noticed any issues either. I will post a couple of examples below:
Steve Spencer wrote:
I didn't have any problems with using the 21 f/1.4 at infinity either on Sony or Nikon bodies, but then I was always (I think) at f/5.6 or 6.3 when shooting at infinity. At closer distances, where I shot at wider apertures some of the time I never noticed any issues either. I will post a couple of examples below:
Thanks for the samples. Which e to z lens adapter are you using?
Feb 10, 2024 at 07:24 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
DWOfPaul wrote:
Thanks for the samples. Which e to z lens adapter are you using?
I have two of them, but in these shots it was a cheap dumb adapter without contacts. I have the ETZ as well, but for landscapes on a tripod I like using the one without contacts better because if I remember correctly (and I may not be) IBIS is automatically shut off with the dumb adapter, which is what I want on a tripod.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I have two of them, but in these shots it was a cheap dumb adapter without contacts. I have the ETZ as well, but for landscapes on a tripod I like using the one without contacts better because if I remember correctly (and I may not be) IBIS is automatically shut off with the dumb adapter, which is what I want on a tripod.
Sounds like I am going to need to pick up a dumb adapter to try. Would be nice to have this lens playing well with the Z8.
I am not sure about the Z8 as I don't have a dumb adapter to try with it, but on Sony IBIS is still on width a dumb adapter, and if you don't select the correct focal length (or at least a close one) IBIS can negatively effect sharpness.
A bit of extra info for anyone following along, what I am seeing is definitely more noticeable the more wide open the 21mm lens is. I could definitely see it more at f4 then at f8. I feel like f5.6 has been around the sweet spot for the 21mm on Sony, but it is nice to be able to go down to f4 or f2.8 when the light is falling. I will also use it at f2 for astro photos on Sony. Going to have to wait a few months to see how the 21mm works for astro adapted to Nikon.
Anyways, thanks for this informative thread. Once again, FM forum is the only place on the internet where you can find such valuable info .
Until now, the the general opinion was that you can adapt any FE lens to Z mount with AF and no disadvantages. Now, we know that's not the case with (at least some) fast wides, if one cares about IQ...
j4nu wrote:
Anyways, thanks for this informative thread. Once again, FM forum is the only place on the internet where you can find such valuable info .
Until now, the the general opinion was that you can adapt any FE lens to Z mount with AF and no disadvantages. Now, we know that's not the case with (at least some) fast wides, if one cares about IQ...
It’s also lens dependent with regards to AF and such. For instance, my 50/1.2 GM adapts beautifully with no optical downside and near native AF speed. The 200-600 didn’t seem to be quite as seamless when I tested that out. Still usable, but not in that near native class.
Jman13 wrote:
It’s also lens dependent with regards to AF and such. For instance, my 50/1.2 GM adapts beautifully with no optical downside and near native AF speed. The 200-600 didn’t seem to be quite as seamless when I tested that out. Still usable, but not in that near native class.
I had the same experience with the 50 GM. The 20G is a bit of a heartbreaker for me because it's one of my favorite focal lengths and the Sony copy I have is excellent. I got the Sony for use on both systems and because it was less expensive on the used market than the Nikon equivalent.
If the weather cooperates this weekend I want to try the 12-24 f4 on my Z8. I used it a bit around 12mm when I first got the Z8 and I don't remember seeing anything that stood out, but maybe I missed it. I wonder if I will see a dip in IQ around 20mm. That might give us an indication if it's lens specific, focal length specific, or wide lens just don't adapt well (hopefully this is not the case).
It could also be worth keeping a list of lenses wider 24mm or wider that people have had success getting edge to edge sharpness with.
Right now it sounds like (Updated 2/13/24):
Sony 20mm f1.8 (1 no)
Sony 20mm - 70mm f4 (1 yes)
Voigtlander 21mm f1.4 (1 yes, 1 no)
I’m pretty sure it would be lens design specific. I don’t believe a certain focal length would always be bad irrespective of lens used.
DWOfPaul wrote:
If the weather cooperates this weekend I want to try the 12-24 f4 on my Z8. I used it a bit around 12mm when I first got the Z8 and I don't remember seeing anything that stood out, but maybe I missed it. I wonder if I will see a dip in IQ around 20mm. That might give us an indication if it's lens specific, focal length specific, or wide lens just don't adapt well (hopefully this is not the case).
It could also be worth keeping a list of lenses wider 24mm or wider that people have had success getting edge to edge sharpness with.
Right now it sounds like:
Sony 20mm f1.8 (1 no)
Voigtlander 21mm f1.4 (1 yes, 1 no) ...Show more →
tsdevine wrote:
I’m pretty sure it would be lens design specific. I don’t believe a certain focal length would always be bad irrespective of lens used.
Yep. The 20-70 f/4 G does not have the corner/edge issue at 20mm that the 20G has, even at equivalent apertures.
.