h00ligan wrote:
From what I've been seeing it looks like the zeiss does much better at closer focus than farther off...
Is anyone else seeing that in the samples posted?
Seems like it's not great with high freq. detail at a distance. I need to do more shooting and some printing to form a solid opinion about it for my own use.
Couple of grab shots from the first few minutes with the NEX. The yellow willow branches in particular were a mess in these images.
My brief experience with ZA24 f:1.8 definitely showed greater affinity with shorter distances than with infinity.
Corposant, love your set, with the third and last an truly great pic IMHO!
Bob, your pics ooze quality. What else is new?
Nice stich, sebboh, good control of tough DR and contrast.
JimBuchanan wrote:
I would agree. I've been a little surprised at the f/8 and f/11 apertures used in the lens comparisions on these NEX threads.
wfrank and jimbuchanan,
I understand your worries. Some explanation.
Please note that the lenses I tested are perfectly useable from wide open to f/11.
When I investigate a lens I shoot at close / medium and infinity distance with all full aperture stops. Then I check these RAW files at 100% within Lightroom in centre, edges and corners.
The centre image is most of the time after one stop closing already very good, however for most (wide angle) lens designs it takes further stoping down for corners. Certainly in case of sensor / lens combinations that are not specifically designed for each other it can take quite some stopping down to reach the best corner sharpness. And when you have the best corner sharpness the centre image could have worsened a little due to diffraction. One has to decide for oneself which aperture is optimum. For landscape I tend to choose for better corners, for images with the main subject in the centre I choose for the best centre performance.
The optimum aperture for one lens at closest focus can be different compared to infinity.
And overruling it all; in practice I pick any aperture needed to get the picture.But I still want to know how my gear can perform.
I know only a handful (Leica M) wideangle lenses that perform almost perfect wide open and do not need to stop down for corners on the Leica M9.
Best thing is to try it for yourself. Take a camera, pick your wide angle lens en shoot an aperture series.
Check the RAW files at 100% without noisereduction and without sharpnening. It will amaze you how much you will have to stop down for the most even performance. Please note again we are talking here about wide angle lenses. Anything from 35 mm and longer is far more easy to get sharp from corner to corner.
Interesting test. The 5dmk2 is clearly better, but the difference is small. It would be interesting to do this same comparison with your stamp scene, since it seems clear that the 24/1.8 is superior at closer distances.
Interesting set, Herb. Less difference than I'd expect. I was thinking to try 7D + 24TSEII against NEX + ZA 24 this week. Wish I had an adapter to put the TSEII on the NEX, just to see...
mco_970 wrote:
Interesting set, Herb. Less difference than I'd expect. I was thinking to try 7D + 24TSEII against NEX + ZA 24 this week. Wish I had an adapter to put the TSEII on the NEX, just to see...
mco_970
I have tried the Nex 5n already with the 24TSE and some crappy Chinese adapter. Posted here some weeks ago.
This performs perfect as suspected. Tacksharp images. Only you will have to set aperture once on your EOS body first. With this TSE you will have world class performance very close and at infinity.
But today I do not care about these big lenses on the Nex camera's anymore.
On a fine small camera you will need fine small lenses otherwise it makes no sense at all to carry a small camera. With your Nex camera's and 5 kg of Zeiss ZF.2 lenses you will get topnotch quality however. As with the top glass from Nikon, Canon and others. No doubt about this.
Herb1911 wrote:
The centre image is most of the time after one stop closing already very good, however for most (wide angle) lens designs it takes further stoping down for corners. Certainly in case of sensor / lens combinations that are not specifically designed for each other it can take quite some stopping down to reach the best corner sharpness. And when you have the best corner sharpness the centre image could have worsened a little due to diffraction. One has to decide for oneself which aperture is optimum. For landscape I tend to choose for better corners, for images with the main subject in the centre I choose for the best centre performance.
The optimum aperture for one lens at closest focus can be different compared to infinity.
And overruling it all; in practice I pick any aperture needed to get the picture.But I still want to know how my gear can perform.
I know only a handful (Leica M) wideangle lenses that perform almost perfect wide open and do not need to stop down for corners on the Leica M9.
Jeff Kott wrote:
Herb, do you attribute this to field curvature and the stopping down being necessary to increase the depth of field to bring the corners into focus?
Jeff, this might be the case with some combinations but I have no real proof yet. I am confident it has also to do with lensdesign and how that is matched to our digital sensors.
I think that the lenses we care about are begging for a matched sensor. And of course this is very hard to do with all different lensdesigns.
That is why the Micro Four Thirds system is genius. Built for digital from the ground up. These combinations can often provide very sharp high resolution images. But of course cost cutting is also here in progress. Relying often on lenscorrection by software. However I value a larger sensor still higher with better noise performance and better dynamic range.
We are stuck here somehow. We have a camera we adore, like a Nex 7, but we still have to struggle to find matching lenses that can squeeze out the maximum performance.
And to be honest, also a Leica M9 struggles to produce the quality the M lenses are capable of.
And the big dslr brands will give us 36 Mp camera's soon but they have very few top notch lenses. The best mostly only tele designs.
I am sorry for all this comment, this is after all an image thread. Lets enjoy our images
Herb
I just want you to know that I personally really appreciate all of the hard work you've done, not to mention your insightful analysis and the time you've taken to share them with us.
mco_970 wrote:
Playing with 24ZA at sundown. The lens feels like a nice match to the system, I just have to get used to the width of the 24 since I've mostly been shooting my OM50.
f/1.8 (used AF, would likely have been sharper with MF). Hope my animal shots are not boring you to tears. A bit of vignette added in post on this one.
The yellow willow branches in particular were a mess in these images.
- "The Strater"