Photoclubalpha

Yeah, the 16mm lens is the lens people love to hate, but thanks to David, I gave it a try and found it pretty useful. I recently got the .75 converter, making it a 12mm lens. Now, I've not had anything this wide before, so I'm still trying to get used to it! Not sure how best to use it, but I'm trying.

http://www.computingbits.com/gallery/12 ... _small.jpg
(sorry, can't imbed due to forum limitations!)

What's annoying is that I forget which photos I took with the converter and which without, so some of what I think may be 12mm photos are really 16mm.

Oh, and I was getting moire artifacts, once I processed from RAW, so I don't think sharpness is a problem, through most of the photo. The corners, well, let's hope you don't have anything important there!!! Corners are pretty sad unless stopped down a lot. BTW, I find that the RAW processing is even more important with this lens. The CA is kind of noticeable, but I think the whole image sharpens up with post-processing the CA. Nothing's perfect, but if you can live with a bit of imperfection, this seems like a great bang-for-the-buck combo. How are you going to beat it? With something larger and a lot more expensive, probably!

Very nice picture Vidgamer - great tractor and I think that is a fantastic example of a wide angle shot

Vidgamer, I bought that .75 converter for E16mm as well and I have concluded like you that the image quality is as good as the 16mm alone and the main problem is CA. Quite a lot of careful work with the sliders is required to remove the CA. In addition my 16mm is good, but only after Sony had it back for repair.

Birma wrote:Very nice picture Vidgamer - great tractor and I think that is a fantastic example of a wide angle shot

Thanks!

Here's another one I uploaded. I'm still confused as to which photos were taken with the adapter and which were not!

http://www.computingbits.com/gallery/12 ... _small.jpg

alphaomega wrote:Vidgamer, I bought that .75 converter for E16mm as well and I have concluded like you that the image quality is as good as the 16mm alone and the main problem is CA. Quite a lot of careful work with the sliders is required to remove the CA. In addition my 16mm is good, but only after Sony had it back for repair.

I'm surprised they were able to adjust it. I've seen comments about how it's shimmed in place or something where it's not really that adjustable? I dunno. Can't believe everything written on the internet.

I guess with the 5n, with it's built-in adjustments, it would look better OOC. I've found that DxO is giving me a lens upgrade. Photos come out sharper, CA mostly removed or at least reduced, distortion straightened.... And then there's a corresponding "camera upgrade", by getting the most DR out of RAW, adjusting color, etc. So, my thinking is that while these e-mount lenses are compomises, their weaknesses are greatly reduced making it a real bang-for-buck value.