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

Rectilinear ultra wide angle lens for FF
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2018 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dan_ wrote:
Congrats, Thomas!
It's a nice camera and your many Minolta AF lenses will have a new life as well. I'm curious of your findings with your wide lenses. Let us know.

However, it's possible that not all the old NEX adapters will fit A7R2. I had to replace half of them when I upgraded from NEX to A7R2. But they were cheap adapters.


Thank you, Dan.

I'll certainly report back on this. I am rather confident that at least some of my lenses will perform nicely. At least those SLR ones which proved that already on my A850. The question remains whether my RF lenses will perform acceptable.

Finally this test report from my CV 12mm lens on an A7: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-voigtlander-12mm-5-6-ultra-wide-heliar/ influenced my decision to give it a try.

Cheers,


PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2018 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:
Very nice results you got Sebastien!!

Thank you, Klaus!

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2018 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
I've just ordered the A7R2 brand new. It should arrive by tomorrow. In light of the battery issue I've ordered a battery grip and two extra batteries together with an external double-charger as well. I think the ones I have already from my NEX will also fit. Therefore totally six copies will be hopefully sufficient.

Additionally I've ordered the necessary flash adapter as I already have a set of totally 4 flashes for my A850 and of course, the LA-EA4 adapter for all my existing Minolta AF lenses. All other adapters I have already on hand (from my NEX).

Already curios about the performance of my wide angles.... Wink

Congatulations on the new camera. Please report your findings regarding classic wides on the A7RII. I hope they will be disappointing, otherwise I will hold you accountable for the wreckage of my marriage due to me buying an A7RII... Wink Rolling Eyes Twisted Evil

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2018 11:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz wrote:
Congatulations on the new camera. Please report your findings regarding classic wides on the A7RII. I hope they will be disappointing, otherwise I will hold you accountable for the wreckage of my marriage due to me buying an A7RII...


Thank you! I'm on your side as to convince my wife was the most difficult part. My best argument was the "low" price compared to a new Leica M10. Wink


PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My new A7R2 arrived today and I made some quick and dirty test shots with my existing rectilinear wide angle lenses.

For maximum corner performance I've used F16 and applied the existing lens correction profiles in LR6 during conversion.

1. Voigtländer Ultra Wide-Heliar 12mm/F5.6 aspherical in LTM/M39:



100% crop of far right corner:



2. Voigtländer Super Wide-Heliar 15mm/F4.5 aspherical in LTM/M39:



100% crop of far right corner:



I am rather satisfied with the performance and would rate it as more than good enough; i.e. far better than expected. Therefore I don't need to purchase any new lens for the time being. 121° (12mm) and 110° (15mm) on FF is wide enough for me.
There is no need to purchase any Samyang or Laowa lens.
The new Voigtlaender Heliar-Hyper Wide 10mm/F5.6 would add another 9° with a FOV of ttl. 130°. Anyway, this lens would cost another 1000 EUR. That's presently a little bit too much. Wink


PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The diffraction limit of the sensor of a7RII is some were between F8 to F11...


PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
The diffraction limit of the sensor of a7RII is some were between F8 to F11...


That may well be. However, I think the loss of a little bit of resolution is somehow acceptable on the A7R2 if the lens performs better in the corners. Maybe F11 is already sufficient as recommended by phillipreeve.net for the normal A7. I didn't take the time to experiment more detailed as I had to get familiar with the new camera and in combination with other lenses first.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
calvin83 wrote:
The diffraction limit of the sensor of a7RII is some were between F8 to F11...


That may well be. However, I think the loss of a little bit of resolution is somehow acceptable on the A7R2 if the lens performs better in the corners. Maybe F11 is already sufficient as recommended by phillipreeve.net for the normal A7. I didn't take the time to experiment more detailed as I had to get familiar with the new camera and in combination with other lenses first.

Sure. Try different lenses and different aperture, you will find that stopping down more than F11 may give you softer corners instead of sharper corners.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
My new A7R2 arrived today and I made some quick and dirty test shots with my existing rectilinear wide angle lenses.

For maximum corner performance I've used F16 and applied the existing lens correction profiles in LR6 during conversion.

Thank you for the nice samples. Just like I feared, they are quite good! Wink

I think LR correction is a bit overdone in your samples, as the center of the frame appears much darker than the corners. The problem is that Lightroom has no way of determining the effective aperture of the lens. Therefore, LR applies a standard correction for vignetting and magenta corners, witch is either too little when the lens is used wide open (strong vignetting in the out-of-camera picture) or too much when the lens is closed down to F/16 (reduced vignetting in the out-of-camera picture).

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 12:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz wrote:
I think LR correction is a bit overdone in your samples, as the center of the frame appears much darker than the corners. The problem is that Lightroom has no way of determining the effective aperture of the lens. Therefore, LR applies a standard correction for vignetting and magenta corners, witch is either too little when the lens is used wide open (strong vignetting in the out-of-camera picture) or too much when the lens is closed down to F/16 (reduced vignetting in the out-of-camera picture).


Well, I have certainly to play around a little bit to get more familiar with my new toy. The problem in the samples was also the direct sun in the left side of the picture frame. Anyway, considering this critical lightning condition as well the result isn't that bad. Particularly with less problematic lenses I'm quite impressed about the performance of the A7R2. That's really a major step forward compared to my old A850 24MP FF DSLR.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 1:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I had a point & shoot. Being used to using slrs quite often I would put the p&s up to my eye before realizing it had no viewfinder. Laughing


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 3:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
visualopsins wrote:
I had a point & shoot. Being used to using slrs quite often I would put the p&s up to my eye before realizing it had no viewfinder. Laughing

The Sony A7 series have electronic viewfinders, and rather good ones. After having used one for a few years, it's now very difficult for me to focus with the optical viewfinder of an SLR.

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 6:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz wrote:
visualopsins wrote:
I had a point & shoot. Being used to using slrs quite often I would put the p&s up to my eye before realizing it had no viewfinder. Laughing

The Sony A7 series have electronic viewfinders, and rather good ones. After having used one for a few years, it's now very difficult for me to focus with the optical viewfinder of an SLR.

Cheers!

Abbazz


How is optical viewfinder more difficult to use after using a7 evf, please? I assume due to loss of evf features? Which features are missed? Smile


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 7:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
visualopsins wrote:
How is optical viewfinder more difficult to use after using a7 evf, please? I assume due to loss of evf features? Which features are missed?


When using manual focus lenses the EVF offers magnification up to 12.5x in combination with focus peaking across the entire field. Additionally you've got an automatic leveling tool which helps you to hold the camera perfectly right. Actually if you are used to such features you have really troubles to use a normal OVF again. Particularly as there are no more focus aids in modern AF DSLRs like in the old manual focus SLRs (split screen/micro prism). Finally you see in an EVF already before you release the shutter exactly what will be recorded afterwards. Good high resolution EVFs like in the A7 series cameras are therefore much more convenient and far better for manual focus lenses. Bright OVFs used with automatic AF lenses are also very nice but that's another story. Wink


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Have compared the CV 12mm/F5.6 lens to the Samyang 8mm/F3.5 fish-eye for APSC (resulting in 12mm FOV on FF).
Both shot free hand in RAW and converted in LR6 with the existing lens profiles for both lenses.

CV12/5.6 at F8:



Samyang 8/3.5 at F8:




Lenses compared:



The result is quite similar but taking into account the monster size of the Samyang lens and its smaller APS-C format the winner is clearly the Voigtländer LTM lens.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2023 8:45 pm    Post subject: Re: Rectilinear ultra wide angle lens for FF Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:

I've been using the Samyang a few times, and i never felt attacted to buy one, even though they are very cheap. The Samyang can litteraly "dismantle" itself when in use (glued lenses falling apart). I cannot and will not work with such lenses when doing professional work. In addition the Samyang simply has too much distortion. Corner resolution may be great - if you have a sample with correctly glued lenses...

I am thinking about getting the the Laowa, especially since its designer is a keen photographer and certainly loves designing good lenses.

On the other had i have the Canon TS-E 4/17mm Shift which I can use for extreme wideangle shots: Shifting the lens +/- 12 mm each gives me two 24x36mm images (= 36 x 48mm sensor size; image angle corresponding to a 12mm Full Frame lens) with an excellent medium format quality.

Stephan


A few years ago I bought a sample of the Samyang 2.8/14mm, but it was same as with earlier samples I had tested (and not bought): Abysmal decentering and very strong waveform distortion. The lens was under Swiss guarantee, I had no problems returning it, got a voucher and bought the Sony EF 1.8/85mm instead. NOT RECOMMENDED (the Samyang). The Sony 1.8/85 is good & useful Wink

Here's the other lens mentioned by the OP - the Laowa 2.8/12mm:



Now some 100% crops from the extreme corner, taken with the 24 MP Sony A7II. Wide open, f5.6 and f11:


Apart from vignetting, they look identical. Very imperssive indeed. CAs are well controlled, espcially for such an extreme image angle (122°). Converting the RAW taken at f2.8 results in the folowing (again 100% crop from 24 MP FF):


The Laowa 12mm has a similar image field as the Canon TS-E 4/17mm L when shifted. In the shifted position and at f11 the Canon clearly has less resolution than the Laowa at f2.8. I assume I can replace the "Canon TS-E 4/17mm L & Sony A7II" by using the Laowa with the 43 MP Sony A7RII. Remarkable indeed.

S


PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2023 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That Laowa 2.8/12 looks pretty impressive Stephan! Like 1 small

The only ultra-wide rectilinear shorter than 17mm I have is an old manual focus SIGMA 3.5/14; I wouldn't recommend it for anything larger than postcard-sized images.
Also, it had the horrible deteriorated sticky SIGMA "zen" soft-touch rubberised coating which I have had to strip off completely.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2023 11:53 am    Post subject: Re: Rectilinear ultra wide angle lens for FF Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:

I've been using the Samyang a few times, and i never felt attacted to buy one, even though they are very cheap. The Samyang can litteraly "dismantle" itself when in use (glued lenses falling apart). I cannot and will not work with such lenses when doing professional work. In addition the Samyang simply has too much distortion. Corner resolution may be great - if you have a sample with correctly glued lenses...

A few years ago I bought a sample of the Samyang 2.8/14mm, but it was same as with earlier samples I had tested (and not bought): Abysmal decentering and very strong waveform distortion. The lens was under Swiss guarantee, I had no problems returning it, got a voucher and bought the Sony EF 1.8/85mm instead. NOT RECOMMENDED (the Samyang). The Sony 1.8/85 is good & useful Wink

S


While I've never owned or used one of the more recent Samyang AF lenses, my older manual Samyang lenses (8 mm f/3,5, 14 mm f/2,8 and 35 mm f/1,4) are excellent in optical and subpar in mechanical terms - I've had to repair or adjust every single one in order to use them. The Samyang 14 mm f/2,8 I own has excellent sharpness even in the corners while suffering from horrible waveform distorsion (a custom profile cleans up most of it in Lightroom/Camera Raw...). But I've had to recalibrate the focusing ring of the lens myself - if the infinity stop is even slightly off, sharpness suffers a lot since the focusing relates directly the floating element.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2023 8:43 pm    Post subject: Re: Rectilinear ultra wide angle lens for FF Reply with quote
Alsatian2017 wrote:

While I've never owned or used one of the more recent Samyang AF lenses, my older manual Samyang lenses (8 mm f/3,5, 14 mm f/2,8 and 35 mm f/1,4) are excellent in optical and subpar in mechanical terms - I've had to repair or adjust every single one in order to use them. The Samyang 14 mm f/2,8 I own has excellent sharpness even in the corners while suffering from horrible waveform distorsion (a custom profile cleans up most of it in Lightroom/Camera Raw...). But I've had to recalibrate the focusing ring of the lens myself - if the infinity stop is even slightly off, sharpness suffers a lot since the focusing relates directly the floating element.


Yeah, I know ... Back in 2012 I had a participant on my Florence/Assisi photo journey who just had gotten the 2.8/14mm. We all were impressed about resolution and contrast, including the near perfect corners on 24 MP FF. A few days into the journey we weren't that imperssed any more, and on the last days his 2.8/14mm images had completely mushy corners. Well, you get what you pay for. Sometimes at least. My own sample was completely de-centered when i got it, and remembering the bad experiences before (and the horrible dirtortion) I was happy to get rid of and to exchange ot for a Sony FE 1.8/85mm!

The latter hasn't disappointed, and it works fairly well aslo on 43 MP FF.

S


PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2023 3:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a Rokinon-brand version of the Samyang 14/2.8 MF rectilinear,
and while I haven't yet given it much use, it's shown some very solid results
with my FF Canon 5D4 in testing.

I borrowed a Canon 10-22 EF-S and later owned a Sigma 10-20 for APS-C
before I acquired a 5D4, and I much prefer the results from a FF sensor
and a UWA made FOR the FF format. Even a 28mm made during
35mm film's heydays produce a better FF WA image than the modern lenses
made for crop-sensor digital cameras.

The larger and advanced image sensor, as well as the larger image circle,
obviously play large parts in the equation, while the modern UWA isn't nearly
the unicorn it was during the heights of film imaging in terms of availability and cost.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2