Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

35mm sharpness test on sony a7
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2014 1:35 pm    Post subject: 35mm sharpness test on sony a7 Reply with quote
Hello,
this is a fast 35mm lenses sharpeness test on sony a7 with:

-Leica summilux R 35mm f1.4
-CZ distagon 35mm f1.4
-Olympus Zuiko 35mm f2
-Sigma E-mount 30mm 2.8
-Leica summicron r 35mm f2

I found that the sigma ex 30mm 2.8 (sony emount) is very good comparing price/size
I hope sigma make a full frame lenses for sony A7 !

result is her : ( the focus point is always this windows border in the center of image)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/114394093@N05/14305194315/in/set-72157644925186055

and full images :
https://www.flickr.com/photos/114394093@N05/sets/72157644925186055/

I will test the border/bokey after, any advice to do that are welcome.

Best regards
Alain


PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2014 2:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
They all looks with good in the center. The border test will be meaningless for sigma ex 30mm 2.8 as it is a APS-C lens. Wink


PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2014 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Two surprises, one positive, one negative.
Amazing how the Distagon is very soft in the corners, even closed down 2 stops.
In contrast, the Sigma is very sharp wide open even outside its coverage circle.

Distagon wide open - lower right corner:



Distagon at F2.8 - lower right corner:




Sigma at F2.8 - lower right corner:


PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2014 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
yes the sigma is very sharpe but i found that the distagon is best to isolate a subject than any of my other 35mm (with the same aperture). Maybe because the distagon is longer or of the lens disign.

I found the Leica summilux disapointing. for exemple at the same shutter speed/aperture speed it is less luminous than the distagon ( and less sharper). for it price ( x3 more expensive than the distagon ) it is not a good deal ( thanks God i got it for bargains )

Best regards.


PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2014 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Distagon 35mm F1.4 is worser than the much cheaper Distagon 35mm F2.8 in corner performance. It can be tell from the MTF published by Zeiss.

Distagon 35mm F1.4


Distagon 35mm F2.8


The new Distagon 35mm F1.4 have much better corner performance.


PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2014 4:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sorry I don't understand .
The results of the Sigma 30 2.8 are on cropped sensor or on FF?


PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2014 7:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hello.
The sigma was used in full frame mode ( i remove the back baffle but vignet on corner)


PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2014 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Sigma does really well, not bad for an aps-c lens!


PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2014 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
thebbm wrote:
yes the sigma is very sharpe but i found that the distagon is best to isolate a subject than any of my other 35mm (with the same aperture). Maybe because the distagon is longer or of the lens disign.

I can see no reason for the Distagon isolates better a subject than the other 35mm lenses (the exception is the Sigma which is a 30mm lens). The physical length of a lens plays no special role in its optical performance.

thebbm wrote:
I found the Leica summilux disapointing. for exemple at the same shutter speed/aperture speed it is less luminous than the distagon ( and less sharper). for it price ( x3 more expensive than the distagon ) it is not a good deal ( thanks God i got it for bargains )

Interesting… I had the impression that the the Summilux is sharper both in the center and in the corners than the Distagon.


calvin83 wrote:
Distagon 35mm F1.4 is worser than the much cheaper Distagon 35mm F2.8 in corner performance. It can be tell from the MTF published by Zeiss.

Indeed, the performance of the Distagon 35mm F1.4 plummets after 15~18mm.

I was thinking about the reasons why the Distagon is so valued by many people:
1. Zeiss name
2. aperture 1.4
3. associated with the name Contax
4. floating optical element
5. outstanding mechanical construction

Sadly, the enchantment is broken when you note that the optical performance is so, so, at least by today's standards. A Samyang 35mm F1.4 has a much better optical performance, but costs less than $500 brand new . The Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art, that is perhaps the best 35mm lens ever built, can be bought for about $900. It's hard to understand how many people are willing to pay more than $1000 by a used Distagon .


PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 3:48 am    Post subject: Re: 35mm sharpness test on sony a7 Reply with quote
thebbm wrote:


I found that the sigma ex 30mm 2.8 (sony emount) is very good comparing price/size
I hope sigma make a full frame lenses for sony A7 !



Sigma make the AF 35mm f/1.4 HSM DG A, which is FF and is available in an A-mount. Used with the LA-EA4 adapter, you can use it with fast AF on a Sony A7.

Review here:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/848-sigma35f14eosff

It looks like it better than the Canon L lens!!!!


PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:48 pm    Post subject: Re: 35mm sharpness test on sony a7 Reply with quote
dnas wrote:

Sigma make the AF 35mm f/1.4 HSM DG A, which is FF and is available in an A-mount. Used with the LA-EA4 adapter, you can use it with fast AF on a Sony A7.

Review here:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/848-sigma35f14eosff

It looks like it better than the Canon L lens!!!!



thanks but i wished a emount native lens, same size of the sonnar 35mm 2.8 and for a lower price ( it dont have to be so good) like the one for apsc


PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Gerald wrote:
thebbm wrote:
yes the sigma is very sharpe but i found that the distagon is best to isolate a subject than any of my other 35mm (with the same aperture). Maybe because the distagon is longer or of the lens disign.

I can see no reason for the Distagon isolates better a subject than the other 35mm lenses (the exception is the Sigma which is a 30mm lens). The physical length of a lens plays no special role in its optical performance.


this is an exemple of what i mean ( i try to take both at same distance and iso )





PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I see your point. The Distagon bokeh is more pleasant even though the Summilux is sharper.
It is not unusual for highly corrected lenses to produce a harsh bokeh.
Apparently, the priority of the Summilux designers was image sharpness, and not a nice bokeh.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2014 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh Summilux!


PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 10:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
right now i have 2 copies of both the contax 35 1.4 aeg and summilux r 35 (1982). no time yet to do rigorous comparison, but just want to note that a few impressions:

one copy of the summilux has soft edges wide open, while the other doesn't.

contax has noticeably more focus breathing than the summilux, starting wider than the lux at distant focus but veering close to a 38mm lens at close focus (which is 0.3m instead of the 0.5m of the lux)

summilux has more coma than contax on the edges. actually the summilux's coma is surprisingly high on the corners, given that leica's marketing material states that coma is "virtually non-existent"!

contax seems to have a bit less vignetting wide open. maybe this is what the OP means by the summilux being "less luminous," which i don't think is true at the center in my experience.

my "good" copy of the summilux has higher resolution and less purple fringing than both my contax's, wide open. it also seems to be slightly better than the copy used here on the edges.

rendition style is quite different between the two. summilux is more like looking through, emphasizing transparency and space. contax is more like looking at, emphasizing detail and microcontrast.

while i think the Summilux-R 80 handily, unequivocally beats the Contax 85 in terms of sheer beauty of imagery, i find it harder to decide which 35 I prefer. The Summilux-R 35 is harder to use than the Distagon 35, less effortlessly pleasing.

a couple from the lux

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1