Jonas B wrote:
It reminds me about the look the images taken with the Zeiss ZM 35/1.4 have. The effect is not that bad here as with the Zeiss lens though.
When you get your copy, will you be able to check if it really is about a focal plane curvature or about an effect caused by vignetting?
Exactly. This TTA 40/2 lens produces similar uneven rendering you get when adapting an M-lens to a stock Sony body. I'll share my thoughts once mine arrives...I've got an A7RII and an A7CR Kolari lined up for testing.
RoamingScott wrote:
My up to date LRC had the profile for this lens before it was even publicly announced
I'm using Lightroom (non-classic), up to date and there isn't a single TTartisan lens profile.
I just checked the latest lightroom classic....it's the same list I see on regular lightroom.
On their instruction page it's a video, you put the lens cap on, plug the lens cap with usb cable, shows up as removable storage, and they show dragging a .bin file (for a different lens) onto the removable storage for the lens... and the video ends. No text instructions that elaborate. Like how do you know the firmware update is complete and it's safe to remove... or is it going to update when you plug it into the camera. Seems a little lacking in info for a firmware update that can brick devices. I watched a video on youtube from TTartisan and it mentioned it being complete by the time the file transfers into the removable storage...
Not sure why that's only do-able on Windows either, but perhaps Mac adds those weird .dstore hidden files that might interfere. Autofocus with A7Cii seemed okay for me out of the box so I'll just wait a little while but I haven't played too much with it yet but seems nice enough for portraits.
Yogifi wrote:
Mine arrived today in the UK. Seems like lightroom doesn't have any TTartisan profiles at all, anyone found one that matches up nicely?
Cool. Congratulations!
When tracking my copy (ordered at the same time I think) it has arrived Belgium in the EU and need another day or two to get to me. It doesn't matter exctly when it arrives but it would be fun to have it before the weekend.
Are you in dire need of a profile? Just correct things to your preferences for some time. I think many of the images taken with this lens will work fine without the use of any profile during developing them.
Yogifi wrote:
I'm using Lightroom (non-classic), up to date and there isn't a single TTartisan lens profile.
I just checked the latest lightroom classic....it's the same list I see on regular lightroom.
Jonas B wrote:
Cool. Congratulations!
When tracking my copy (ordered at the same time I think) it has arrived Belgium in the EU and need another day or two to get to me. It doesn't matter exctly when it arrives but it would be fun to have it before the weekend.
Are you in dire need of a profile? Just correct things to your preferences for some time. I think many of the images taken with this lens will work fine without the use of any profile during developing them.
It's not the end of the world but would have been nice to have the profile ready for download on their website at least when they release the lens right, it's not their first lens. In lightroom I see profiles for Samyung, Viltrox, hell even Helios. But RoamingScott has it so not sure what's going on there.
So far so good for people photos, at least when outside with light.
Got enough now I think for compact people lenses in 40-55mm with AF but they're all pretty fine really, quite tough to narrow it down based on candid shots, though I'm thinking the Sonnar 55mm isn't for me.
If I can get someone to sit still for 10 mins and do a proper test at a few different distances and lighting will be great xD. Family want too much compensation for sitting still for 10mins, cheaper to get someone off the street I think.
RoamingScott wrote:
I'm using the Z version and for me I have:
Make: Nikon
Model: TTARTISAN 40mmF2.0Z
Maybe look under Sony.
Appreciate the help, I checked and checked again all the Sony ones. Weirdly I don't see it under Nikon either.
I also have the latest version of both CC and Classic, and I am not seeing profile for this lens anywhere. There is no TTArtisan and there is nothing under Sony, Sony E, Sony FE, and Nikon.
Yogifi wrote:
It's not the end of the world but would have been nice to have the profile ready for download on their website at least when they release the lens right, it's not their first lens. In lightroom I see profiles for Samyung, Viltrox, hell even Helios. But RoamingScott has it so not sure what's going on there.
So far so good for people photos, at least when outside with light.
Got enough now I think for compact people lenses in 40-55mm with AF but they're all pretty fine really, quite tough to narrow it down based on candid shots, though I'm thinking the Sonnar 55mm isn't for me.
If I can get someone to sit still for 10 mins and do a proper test at a few different distances and lighting will be great xD. Family want too much compensation for sitting still for 10mins, cheaper to get someone off the street I think.
Appreciate the help, I checked and checked again all the Sony ones. Weirdly I don't see it under Nikon either. ...Show more →
Out of curiousity, what is it about the Sonnar 55mm which you are not so happy with? I periodically think about getting one to use when I want to travel light. The TTArtisan 40/2 is on my list of possibilities for that job now too.
JD07 wrote:
Out of curiousity, what is it about the Sonnar 55mm which you are not so happy with? I periodically think about getting one to use when I want to travel light. The TTArtisan 40/2 is on my list of possibilities for that job now too.
TBH with you I'm not 100% certain, I don't have a tonne of shooting time with it (or many of the newly acquired lenses) and I don't want to go off-topic from the thread too much. It's a very popular lens, lightweight, focusses fast, good subject isolation, strong contrast, has a lot of pros.
But it's something to do with the way it renders the out of focus areas and then I assume it's amplified by the slightly more narrow focal length enlarging those out of focus backgrounds. I always feel like I have to stop it down more to tone it down and can never quite find the right distance or aperture to get a little more classy render out of it, it's just been harder to get what I want with it and I want something for the candid shots that I can rely on to get the look I want easier. Otherwise I'll just use the Nokton if they have to hold the pose while I figure it out, but perhaps with more time I'll get there with it but I dunno if it's just the sonnar render with the focal length that will make that always challenging.
I don't have enough shots currently on any of the lenses to rule things out for sure to be honest so just plan on rotating between them. Hoping to find one with AF I'm really happy with for people shots that's compact.
Random other early impressions:
- samyung 45mm f1.8 a little flat rendering, can be nice to mix it up. Cheap looking and feeling body. Sometimes a little odd with the colours, strong vignette.
- Sigma 45mm f2.8 renders really well, not amazing autofocus, sometimes you want more blur than f2.8, has a "toon-y" look to images, maybe that's the SA, smooth rendering and sigma colours I don't know.
- sony 50mm f1.8, good autofocus, sometimes a bit messy backgrounds, nice feeling lens, often too many skin details
Like I mentioned, too early, could be talking rubbish and I've got more than enough of the compact options... other than the Sigma 50mm f2 which I haven't been able to find a good deal on yet. I think it's going to be a little flat but that might be okay.
If I wasn't focussed as much on this focal length for candid people shots then Voigtlander APO 50mm f2, Viltrox 50mm f2 Air seems popular and cheap, or the Sony 40mm f2.5 (still curious about this one though).
mine arrived yesterday. i took a few shots with it and updated the firmware (assuming you just place the firmware in the attached drive). haven't noticed an obvious difference between before and after, but i didn't do any rigorous testing just tried to take pictures of kids running around. focus isn't as good as the sigma 35/2 or the 55/1.8, but seems good enough for when the subject is moving at a walking pace. i like the look better than the 40/2.5, but other than that not sure how i feel about the draw.
Yogifi wrote:
It's not the end of the world but would have been nice to have the profile ready for download on their website at least when they release the lens right, it's not their first lens. In lightroom I see profiles for Samyung, Viltrox, hell even Helios. But RoamingScott has it so not sure what's going on there.
So far so good for people photos, at least when outside with light.
Got enough now I think for compact people lenses in 40-55mm with AF but they're all pretty fine really, quite tough to narrow it down based on candid shots, though I'm thinking the Sonnar 55mm isn't for me.
If I can get someone to sit still for 10 mins and do a proper test at a few different distances and lighting will be great xD. Family want too much compensation for sitting still for 10mins, cheaper to get someone off the street I think.
Appreciate the help, I checked and checked again all the Sony ones. Weirdly I don't see it under Nikon either. ...Show more →
I went back to look today and it's ONLY vignette correction so you're not really missing anything. Easy to do manually or make a quick preset for.
I updated my copy as well. It now reads version 02 in the camera menu.
It's done by connecting the lens to the computer and dropping the FIR-lens on the lens.
I noticed some improvement: In AF-C focus locks better onto something when using the back focusing button. But... the lens AF is worse after updating as the focus now is pulsating around the target when closing down to f/4 or smaller aperture opening. That is in AF-C. I haven't tried any other AF setting.
Manual focusing still works in visible steps which can be annoying and especially so at short distances. The focusing ring still goes in the opposite direction compared to what we are used to. That's already mentioned by sebboh above and the situation is the same after the FW update.
Yogifi wrote:
Random other early impressions:
- samyung 45mm f1.8 a little flat rendering, can be nice to mix it up. Cheap looking and feeling body. Sometimes a little odd with the colours, strong vignette.
- Sigma 45mm f2.8 renders really well, not amazing autofocus, sometimes you want more blur than f2.8, has a "toon-y" look to images, maybe that's the SA, smooth rendering and sigma colours I don't know.
- sony 50mm f1.8, good autofocus, sometimes a bit messy backgrounds, nice feeling lens, often too many skin details
Like I mentioned, too early, could be talking rubbish and I've got more than enough of the compact options... other than the Sigma 50mm f2 which I haven't been able to find a good deal on yet. I think it's going to be a little flat but that might be okay.
If I wasn't focussed as much on this focal length for candid people shots then Voigtlander APO 50mm f2, Viltrox 50mm f2 Air seems popular and cheap, or the Sony 40mm f2.5 (still curious about this one though). ...Show more →
I was looking for a lens in this range for my "small" kit (A7c2) and went with the SY 45mm - at the time is the best balance of size/performance that I was looking for. Maybe today I'd have tried the TT 40mm but still pretty happy with my choice. FWIW the Sony 40mm is very nice (particularly size-wise) but quite expensive for what you get.
Jonas B wrote:
......
I noticed some improvement: In AF-C focus locks better onto something when using the back focusing button. But... the lens AF is worse after updating as the focus now is pulsating around the target when closing down to f/4 or smaller aperture opening. That is in AF-C. I haven't tried any other AF setting.
......
Thank you for your feedback. That is somewhat disappointing to read. Hopefully future firmware updates will make it better. I am going to hold off for now.
I got my TTA 40/2 today, and here's a quick comparison with the Sony 40/2.5: (I can post side by sides but they are boring...)
1. Build quality is solid, and it's smaller than the Sony 40/2.5G...just 1mm shorter in length but noticeably slimmer.
2. Field of view feels wider than the 40/2.5.
3. Vignetting is stronger...Lightroom fully corrects it at "75" setting.
4. Specular highlights are cleaner; the 40/2.5G shows a visible onion-ring effect.
5. MF focus ring rotates opposite to Sony and Leica, likely similar to Nikon.
6. AF is fast and quiet but not as "sticky" as the 40/2.5G. Firmware .02 might improve it, but the Sony's higher correction across the field probably explains the difference.
7. Center sharpness is comparable to Sony, but corners are noticeably softer.
8. CA correction is similar between the lenses which is surprising since the TTA is 2/3 stops faster.
Interestingly, at the same distance on a tripod, blur looks about the same. That might be because the TTA is slightly wider than 40mm (maybe closer to 36–37mm) though I need more testing.
If I had to choose one regardless of price, I'd go with the TTA for its cleaner rendering (despite aspherical), slightly wider FOV (my preference), smaller size, and better handling on the A7CR. (more space for my fingers since it's thinner)
Fred Miranda wrote:
I got my TTA 40/2 today, and here's a quick comparison with the Sony 40/2.5: (I can post side by sides but they are boring...)
1. Build quality is solid, and it's smaller than the Sony 40/2.5G...just 1mm shorter in length but noticeably slimmer.
2. Field of view feels wider than the 40/2.5.
3. Vignetting is stronger...Lightroom fully corrects it at "75" setting.
4. Specular highlights are cleaner; the 40/2.5G shows a visible onion-ring effect.
5. MF focus ring rotates opposite to Sony and Leica, likely similar to Nikon.
6. AF is fast and quiet but not as "sticky" as the 40/2.5G. Firmware .02 might improve it, but the Sony's higher correction across the field probably explains the difference.
7. Center sharpness is comparable to Sony, but corners are noticeably softer.
8. CA correction is similar between the lenses which is surprising since the TTA is 2/3 stops faster.
Interestingly, at the same distance on a tripod, blur looks about the same. That might be because the TTA is slightly wider than 40mm (maybe closer to 36–37mm) though I need more testing.
If I had to choose one regardless of price, I'd go with the TTA for its cleaner rendering (despite aspherical), slightly wider FOV (my preference), smaller size, and better handling on the A7CR. (more space for my fingers since it's thinner)...Show more →
I noticed and reported the wider FOV on the Nikon side as well, markedly wider than the Z 40/2 and even moreso the CV 40/2 Ultron, the tightest of the 3. Like you, I actually find that to be a plus for the TTA.
Did you notice it manually focusing in "steps"? I've seen that reported for the Sony, similar to how some Fuji GF lenses work with markedly spaced out focus-by-wire positions.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I got my TTA 40/2 today, and here's a quick comparison with the Sony 40/2.5: (I can post side by sides but they are boring...)
1. Build quality is solid, and it's smaller than the Sony 40/2.5G...just 1mm shorter in length but noticeably slimmer.
2. Field of view feels wider than the 40/2.5.
3. Vignetting is stronger...Lightroom fully corrects it at "75" setting.
4. Specular highlights are cleaner; the 40/2.5G shows a visible onion-ring effect.
5. MF focus ring rotates opposite to Sony and Leica, likely similar to Nikon.
6. AF is fast and quiet but not as "sticky" as the 40/2.5G. Firmware .02 might improve it, but the Sony's higher correction across the field probably explains the difference.
7. Center sharpness is comparable to Sony, but corners are noticeably softer.
8. CA correction is similar between the lenses which is surprising since the TTA is 2/3 stops faster.
Interestingly, at the same distance on a tripod, blur looks about the same. That might be because the TTA is slightly wider than 40mm (maybe closer to 36–37mm) though I need more testing.
If I had to choose one regardless of price, I'd go with the TTA for its cleaner rendering (despite aspherical), slightly wider FOV (my preference), smaller size, and better handling on the A7CR. (more space for my fingers since it's thinner)...Show more →
I have owned a 40/2.5G a couple of times before. If TTA 40/2 is pretty close to 40/2.5G then that is good to hear. I would love to hear your feedback after the latest firmware update.
I'll share my thoughts once mine arrives...I've got an A7RII and an A7CR Kolari lined up for testing.
