Page 1 of 1
24-70f2.8: is this "normal"
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:26 pm
by pakodominguez
I got the A900 kit from the Adorama Rentals department last weekend and play with it in different situations, most of the times with my own lenses (I only "Challenged" the 70-200 f2.8 Sony Vs. the Tamron, but that another story)
Is that normal that a US$ 1800 lens perform this way?
A900 CZ 24-70 f2.8 @ 24mm f9.0
The corp is not even from the corner, where lenses supposed do show their weakness.
Re: 24-70f2.8: is this "normal"
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:37 pm
by Dr. Harout
You mean the CA? or am I missing something?
Re: 24-70f2.8: is this "normal"
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:40 pm
by David Kilpatrick
I have found much the same CA on the 24-70mm - one of the main reasons I'm not jumping for it, and remain happy with my 28-75mm and 28-105mm. What matters is that the image producing the CA is sharp. It's a pain to have to correct CA all the time though - this looks just like the 16-80mm on APS-C, similar amount of CA, similar sharpness.
David
Re: 24-70f2.8: is this "normal"
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:51 pm
by pakodominguez
David Kilpatrick wrote:I have found much the same CA on the 24-70mm - one of the main reasons I'm not jumping for it, and remain happy with my 28-75mm and 28-105mm. What matters is that the image producing the CA is sharp. It's a pain to have to correct CA all the time though - this looks just like the 16-80mm on APS-C, similar amount of CA, similar sharpness.
David
CA is a "quality" that I find often in lenses (mostly wides) people like because sharp, like the kit lens, that is very sharp but lots of CA.
As a profesional, I'm not ready to invest on a lens that will bring more steps (and consuming time) to my workflow. The 17-35 f2.8-4 showed some CA too, as well as the 35-200 Xi. But those arent "expensive" lenses!
In other hand...
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:02 pm
by pakodominguez
A900 with 24-70 f2.8 @70mm ASA 800 1/50 f2.8 with 58 bounced to a wall on the left. jpg straight from the camera
you can see CA and Noise here, but both looks less bad than expected
Re: 24-70f2.8: is this "normal"
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:25 pm
by David Kilpatrick
Even at 800, that is not looking too sharp for me. I would not trust that particular example of the 24-70mm.
David
Re: 24-70f2.8: is this "normal"
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:38 pm
by caporip
This was done with a A900 24-70 zeiss today f2.8 iso 320:-
Based on my (limited) experience with the lens it looks like you may have a problem?
Re: 24-70f2.8: is this "normal"
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 5:13 pm
by pakodominguez
caporip wrote:This was done with a A900 24-70 zeiss today f2.8 iso 320:-
Based on my (limited) experience with the lens it looks like you may have a problem?
No: I don't have a problem and I don't think I'll have any since I'm not planning to spend 1800 on a lens. The lack of "perfect" sharpness is probably du to montion. Or a bad ssample. Or a good sample mistreated (this is a lens coming from the Adorama Rentals department...)
In other hand, your pic looks sharper because the lighting, the quality of the subject and probably some post process help (USM) before you show it here. I'm posting 100% crops from JPGs straight from the camera...
Regards
Re: 24-70f2.8: is this "normal"
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:23 pm
by caporip
Pako
sorry i realise how my response could be intepreted there was no criticism intended (particularly seeing some of your other posts)...
what i meant was a problem with the lens i.e. a duff version.