This is really surprising - I have a few zooms and never noticed a drop in resolution except at the ends of the FL\'s.
It almost makes one wonder if it was missed during the design? There are very many compromises in any lens design, and particularly so in a zoom lens.
Glenn
I think nothing was missed in the design. I think they noticed that many users tend to live near either end of the zoom so why not optimize for the ends instead of the middle or a sliding quality scale that either starts well wide and fades to long or starts well long and fades to wide. People were tired of the OK long and fades to wide and OK middle and fades at either end of the old desings, was my impression. So now they give you the magicaly edge to edge 24mm performance on a FF and they also make it do pretty well at 70mm, sounds like a heck of a win to me over the 24-105, I stink at 24mm and 105mm or the other I stink near 24mm standard zooms.
50mm is a bit boring focal length on FF, arguably and it is also the one place where you can get amazing FF image quality in a VERY small/compact/low-priced package (with say the 50mm 1.8) so why not, if you must pick a weak point, make it be right at 50mm? It seems genius to me.
Naw. Genius is to make it pin sharp across the entire range. What you got is a compromise.
What\'s genius is to sell a compromise for that much!
Nov 20, 2013 at 11:23 PM
Previous versions of galenapass's message #11948853 « Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses »
