Jacob, here are two 100% crops (let me know if links don't work). I was suprised to see that much LOCA near the doors on that image, even in the sidewalk where there's not a high contrast range going. I was focused at the middle of the building, so those are not the sharp plane of focus, but still... Maybe I'm expecting too much?
Did you guys and girls know that the Nex 7 is already diffraction limited at f/8, and that the Nex 5n has one stop advantage and is limiting at f/11. And that for most wide angle lenses you will have to stop down to f/8 to get the best corners...
The Nex 5n could be a very valid first choice for wide angle landscapes. Now we have to proof it with images
Herb
In theory it is even possible to see some softening due to diffraction somewhere between f/5.6 and f/8, with the Nex 7 more towards f/5.6 and the Nex 5n more towards f/8. But I would not bother too much. As always, choose your aperture that gets the picture.
This is why I am thinking of keeping my 5N alongside my 7. A kit with ZM 18 on 5N and G 45 or 60 R Makro on 7 sounds like a very light and very versatile kit...
philber wrote:
This is why I am thinking of keeping my 5N alongside my 7. A kit with ZM 18 on 5N and G 45 or 60 R Makro on 7 sounds like a very light and very versatile kit...
Philber I tend to make a comparisson shot for infinity with the same wide angle lens with the 5n and the 7. See how this dillemma works out, corner sharpness versus diffraction. However it is windforce 10 or something around here and my camera gear is so light nowadays that it will be blown away
On another level,what I am wondering is this. How come that Nikon already have 3 lenses for its mirrorless, and Pentax, and now Fuji, whereas it has taken all this time for Sony to get to 3 (the kit zoom, the questionable 16mm pancake prime, the 30mm macro), because the kit telephoto and 50mm prime, though widely reviewed in Europe haven't yet hit dealer shelves here and are thus still vapourware ?
Are Sony engineers suffering from fear of "karoshi"? (death at the workplace due to overwork)
Herb1911 wrote:
From the previous post; crop left of centre only no sharpening. The rest is the same.
Herb
Nice comparison, very similar results to my comparison between the 5d "classic" and my 5N.
frezeiss wrote:
Herb, so the Z 35 beats the Z 24?....
I think the difference is between crop and FF, not the lenses. Images are always somewhat sharper with greater resolution when comparing my 5d with my 5N. Still, the NEX does quite well.
michael49 wrote:
Nice comparison, very similar results to my comparison between the 5d "classic" and my 5N.
I think the difference is between crop and FF, not the lenses. Images are always somewhat sharper with greater resolution when comparing my 5d with my 5N. Still, the NEX does quite well.
frezeiss, michael49,
My shoot with the 5D mk2 and the Nex 7 was only to give an impression about the Nex image quality compared to my own reference, the 5D with Zeiss. This because I heard comments that the big dslr's with Zeiss glass would be miles ahead of the Sony. You cannot distill any conclusing regarding the camera's or lenses alone. Every combination gives different results.
michael49 wrote:
Love that shot btw. I'm going to have to try my C/Y 28 2.8 on the 5N; I've mostly used it on the 5d.
Thanks.This camera takes street photography to a new level.Both because of the waist level shooting that goes mostly unnoticed, and for the fact that this one I really take with me...the 5D2 stays for other stuff..
On another level,what I am wondering is this. How come that Nikon already have 3 lenses for its mirrorless, and Pentax, and now Fuji, whereas it has taken all this time for Sony to get to 3 (the kit zoom, the questionable 16mm pancake prime, the 30mm macro), because the kit telephoto and 50mm prime, though widely reviewed in Europe haven't yet hit dealer shelves here and are thus still vapourware ?
Are Sony engineers suffering from fear of "karoshi"? (death at the workplace due to overwork)
Philber I have no clue. I believe Sony is courcing from Japan, Thailand and China. Maybe this has still something to do with the earthquake in Japan and the flood in Thailand.
In general it seems to be far more demanding to manufacture lenses compared to camera's.
Herb
Herb1911 wrote:
Did you guys and girls know that the Nex 7 is already diffraction limited at f/8, and that the Nex 5n has one stop advantage and is limiting at f/11. And that for most wide angle lenses you will have to stop down to f/8 to get the best corners...
The Nex 5n could be a very valid first choice for wide angle landscapes. Now we have to proof it with images
Herb
In theory it is even possible to see some softening due to diffraction somewhere between f/5.6 and f/8, with the Nex 7 more towards f/5.6 and the Nex 5n more towards f/8. But I would not bother too much. As always, choose your aperture that gets the picture....Show more →
actually, diffraction doesn't change depending on sensor, you just need a higher resolution sensor to resolve it at larger apertures. in theory you should see diffraction set in somewhere between f/4 and f/5.6 on the NEX-7 if i recall correctly. i can already see the effects of diffraction on my lowly 14mp NEX-3 between f/5.6 and f/8.
hitting diffraction earlier on the NEX-7 than the NEX-5 doesn't mean that the NEX-5 is showing more detail at those apertures than the NEX-7, it just doesn't have enough resolution to show the diffraction barrier. even though with the right lens the NEX-7 will be diffraction limited at f/5.6 and the NEX-5N won't, the NEX-7 will still resolve more detail at f/5.6 than the NEX-5N (ignoring different corner issues with rangefinder wides).
I do not understand your diffraction comment completely.
The limit for diffraction is completely dependent on the sensor, and more specific, is directly related to the pixel pitch. My estimated apertures for diffraction were calculated ones. From my last posts from practice it shows indeed that diffraction appears to be earlier visible. But very slightly. With the Nex 7 it can be observed already above f/4 and with the Nex 5n around f/5.6.
Herb1911 wrote:
Sebboh those are two beautifull unrelated images
I do not understand your diffraction comment completely.
The limit for diffraction is completely dependent on the sensor, and more specific, is directly related to the pixel pitch. My estimated apertures for diffraction were calculated ones. From my last posts from practice it shows indeed that diffraction appears to be earlier visible. But very slightly. With the Nex 7 it can be observed already above f/4 and with the Nex 5n around f/5.6.
Herb
you are correct that what aperture diffraction becomes visible at is dependent on sensor, however the resolution limit of diffraction for any lens/aperture combination is the same independent of sensor. you can't see diffraction with the NEX-5N at f/4 because the sensor is not high enough resolution. the fact that you see diffraction on the NEX-7 earlier is a good thing - it means your sensor is able to achieve the maximum resolution physically possible for that aperture lens combo. a sensor that doesn't reach the diffraction limit as soon is not using the full resolving power of the lens.
nice captures!