uhoh7 wrote:
Well it's obviously a great lens. Next time you have a wonderful shot like that shoot some at f/16 and 22. I'd bet that corner would be just like the rest. And I don't think the overall image will seem less sharp.
Well that's my new theory on the wides right now, hehe.
I've been shooting 4-5.6 for the sensor, but just not getting the edges. However As I look at some test shots--for example the 35/1.2--the thing is fantastic edge to edge at f/22 and looks quite crisp.
I think the sensor optimum of f/4 may be a dog whistle when it comes to getting the best out of the wides ...Show more →
wides are of course much harder to design and make sharp corner to corner than longer lenses. as such, they must be stopped down further to get sharp corners. after f/5.6 (possibly earlier on the new 24MP sensor) diffraction limits maximum sharpness possible on the NEX rather than sensor resolution. optimal aperture depends on lens performance as well though. my contax g 45/2 outresolves the sensor across the frame from f/2.8 to f/5.6 after which resolution degrades as i stop down due to diffraction. my rokkor 24/2.8 outresolves the sensor in the center from f/2.8 to f/5.6 after which resolution degrades as well, however the corner resolution continues to improve until f/11 where it starts to degrade. this is because the lens is not resolving enough in the corners for diffraction to be visible till f/11. for my sony 16/2.8 corner resolution continues to improve until after f/16.
uhoh7 wrote:
Well it's obviously a great lens. Next time you have a wonderful shot like that shoot some at f/16 and 22. I'd bet that corner would be just like the rest. And I don't think the overall image will seem less sharp.
Well that's my new theory on the wides right now, hehe.
I've been shooting 4-5.6 for the sensor, but just not getting the edges. However As I look at some test shots--for example the 35/1.2--the thing is fantastic edge to edge at f/22 and looks quite crisp.
I think the sensor optimum of f/4 may be a dog whistle when it comes to getting the best out of the wides ...Show more →
Thanks, I'll try that. In fact, I dont think I ever have shot an image with F/11 or smaller - kind of reveals my experience and interest for tripoded landscape shots I guess :-)
Yes, it's definetly a great lens series. Need to shoot more with the "stellar" G45 which I am trying to get use for but have problems to shake away the tele-feel I get when it's on.
What we lack is equally good, fast and similarly priced WA's for the NEX. I dont know of any
That's because the great G 21 doesn't work on the NEX 5N. But, remember, the 7 is supposed to have these offset microlenses, and defintely more computing power, so it will be interesting to see if that isn't enough to make the G21 the WA of choice. That said, it is such a good lens that it isn't as cheap as its longer brethren
Contax G 90mm on Nex 5n. I'm finding it difficult in a situation like this to nail focus using the adapter. And of course I wish my hands were steadier. I should use a tripod more.
sebboh wrote:
wides are of course much harder to design and make sharp corner to corner than longer lenses. as such, they must be stopped down further to get sharp corners. after f/5.6 (possibly earlier on the new 24MP sensor) diffraction limits maximum sharpness possible on the NEX rather than sensor resolution. optimal aperture depends on lens performance as well though. my contax g 45/2 outresolves the sensor across the frame from f/2.8 to f/5.6 after which resolution degrades as i stop down due to diffraction. my rokkor 24/2.8 outresolves the sensor in the center from f/2.8 to f/5.6 after which resolution degrades as well, however the corner resolution continues to improve until f/11 where it starts to degrade. this is because the lens is not resolving enough in the corners for diffraction to be visible till f/11. for my sony 16/2.8 corner resolution continues to improve until after f/16....Show more →
yes, you have to wonder when we are seeing diffraction and when it's just the chemistry of nex + whatever wide.
this seems to be the sweet spot: f/16--but edges are still not steallar, and overall sharpness is behind it's reputation.
Maybe we need to get a list going of the really premier wides for the nex. Philber shows the ZM18 should be on it.
I need to play more with the CVs and see how they will do stopped down. Right now I'm getting frankly fantastic centers, but edges are not there---at 4-5.6
uhoh7 - FWIW, the Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 CRC version is a much sharper lens and has the added benefit of close focus. In my experience, the f/2.8 version is quite a bit better than the f/2.
partitura wrote:
Contax G 90mm on Nex 5n. I'm finding it difficult in a situation like this to nail focus using the adapter. And of course I wish my hands were steadier. I should use a tripod more.
I find the G90 very sharp. I'll take on the challenge and will try this tomorrow and post a close-up image reply. I use a no-name adapter for all G's and allthough it can take a split sec of extra effort to nail it my take is that you can always get optimal focus. Sometimes (close-up) I've find myself kind of "focus bracketing" with moving the body rather than rotating the focus ring when composition is set. Tripods are boring, dont use them.
Yeah, you can see on the one below that I missed it (to the back side) by about a half inch or so. My adapter binds, so I get in the area, then it will stick, then go too far, etc, etc... Frustrating. Maybe I should try a couple of the no-name ones in the hope I get a smoother one. I'll try the focus bracketing! Thanks for the tip.
>Tripods are boring, dont use them.
ha, - I think they are boring, too. But they may be necessary... for me at least.
Gary Clennan wrote:
uhoh7 - FWIW, the Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 CRC version is a much sharper lens and has the added benefit of close focus. In my experience, the f/2.8 version is quite a bit better than the f/2.
That one is hotly debated, with some claiming the 28/2 is superior at infinity, while 28/2.8 is better close in.
Post up some full size links to land scapes with just default LR sharpening so we can see--if you have a chance sometime
I also have a nikkor PC 28, which is supposed to be really crisp--I'll have to do a little shootout
partitura wrote:
Contax G 90mm on Nex 5n. I'm finding it difficult in a situation like this to nail focus using the adapter. And of course I wish my hands were steadier. I should use a tripod more.
The problem is, partitura, that we can't always put flowers and leaves on tripods as well....
More seriously, one of our fellow FMers claims he can shoot down to 1/5 over FL, whereas I can't go below 1/3. But, for me, that is only if I cradle the cam in my hands and shooot from the waist. If I try to handhold it at face level, it is much less effective, stability-wise.
Otherwise, I find focusing it quite easy. It is so sharp and so long that it snaps in focus quite clearly. It is keeping focus that is hard, because DOF is so thin that even very small body movements are enough to lose focus altogether.
Tripod-wise, NEX is light enough that even very light tripods give good results. For such instances I use a Cullmann Nanomax 220 (there are alternativs, such as Slik) which I can set up ridiculously fast, carry with me at all times, and looks inocuous enough that it has been tolerated in places where a larger tripod would have definitely been outlawed.
I find the Canon 50 is the fast 50 I grab--so much more forgiving than the CV 50/1.1, and of course so much better handling. Another far underrated Canon rangefinder lens IMHO. The nex just loves the thing. Besides the CVs nasty DOF, it's intense contrast often blows highlights. Nevertheless it can produce utterly superb results when everything falls into place. http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6133/6004775326_e7095628e8_b.jpg
not saying my photography is superb, hehe. Obviously not, but sans bright lights in dim conditions the CV 50/1.1 comes into it's own.
the 5n's new quiet shutter is manna for this sort of shot
wfrank wrote:
Time for Samyang 14/2.8 on the 5N. It IS a sharp lens but kind of sensitive to nail it. These are from friday, roof-shots from where I work. Distortion is there and easy to correct, but I wont - I like that it shows it's a WA. Good light and sky. Around F/4.5-5.6.
