alundeb wrote: John_T wrote: alundeb wrote: John_T wrote: gdanmitchell wrote: John_T wrote: gdanmitchell wrote:
Not encouraging, but we probably should be a bit cautious about accepting the first negative report as being the most accurate. Time for some watching and waiting, I suppose.
Dan
(Who is not in the market for this lens at the current time.)
Yeah, I\'ve got the lens here in my hands. I haven\'t had the opportunity yet to give it a thorough range of applications, but I\'d say my experience so far is a bit better than is laid out in this review:
A lot of folks might be interested in seeing a 100% magnification crop from the middle of that nice photograph of yours — perhaps something showing the buildings and some of the foliage?
Dan
...mind you, it was a misty morning, but how is this? (hand-held, BTW)
Awesome, lots of aliasing on the roof. Your lens is certainly super sharp here, and near wide open too.
This roof, @100% +, with the streaked, mossy clay tiles, snow catchers and knobby clay ridge tiles?
This crop shows way more real detail than the previous one, that could not have been a 100% crop then. Did you post a 100% crop at a too large size, so it got downscaled by the forum?
I\'m not such a measurbator, but the last crop is over 100% of the lower center of the frame @ 105mm.
This is the whole perspective from where I was standing @55mm.
Nov 16, 2016 at 03:49 AM
Previous versions of John_T's message #13803600 « 24-105 F4 L IS II tested at TDP »
