View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010 Posts: 4713 Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
Eriksen wrote: |
Do you think this zoom lens will give the same IQ as the 15mm prime lens? |
Yes, I think it is just as good with barely noticable differences and it has great sunstars, and very compact for a zoom too. _________________ Lars | Manuellfokus.no |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Eriksen
Joined: 15 Nov 2016 Posts: 153
|
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Eriksen wrote:
What about Minolta 17-35mm 2.8-4? That´s a very inexpensive lens, but does it perform in the same class as the other lenses in this thread? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
Eriksen wrote: |
What about Minolta 17-35mm 2.8-4? That´s a very inexpensive lens, but does it perform in the same class as the other lenses in this thread? |
No. Particularly this one is one of the weakest zooms in the Minolta AF line. Actually it's a Tamron. Almost all zooms will perform below any of the prime lenses discussed earlier in this thread. Even contemporary and expensive ones have their weak points. _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Eriksen
Joined: 15 Nov 2016 Posts: 153
|
Posted: Wed Mar 27, 2019 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Eriksen wrote:
Here are two pictures I shot with the Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III on my A7III camera. Is this distortion normal? I sat the camera very low near the ground and pointed the lens ca. 20 - 30 degr. upward, so maybe that can be the reason?
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
e6filmuser
Joined: 12 Nov 2010 Posts: 555 Location: Reading UK
|
Posted: Wed Mar 27, 2019 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
e6filmuser wrote:
[quote="Eriksen"]Here are two pictures I shot with the Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III on my A7III camera. Is this distortion normal? I sat the camera very low near the ground and pointed the lens ca. 20 - 30 degr. upward, so maybe that can be the reason?
Yes! With such lenses the only way to avoid leaning effects is to point straight ahead and dead level (focal plane and lens axis). _________________ Dedicated to using manual focus lenses with digital. Equiped for photography from macro to panoramic & from ultra-wide to extreme telephoto. Mostly shooting outdoor macro. Experienced entomological taxonomist. Some knowledge of mushrooms. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4572 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2020 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
tb_a wrote: |
..
I've got the 15mm in version 1 and consider it as good enough on my A7R II.
A typical landscape example slightly optimized in Lightroom (lens profile applied); click on picture for best quality viewing:
|
tb_a wrote: |
..
Even my old Ricoh GXR-M 12MP APS-C without AA-filter delivers the better (sharper) pictures compared to the older 24MP Sony FF CMOS sensor with AA-filter (I've got the Sony A850 with the same sensor) in direct comparison and these 2 cameras deliver apprx. the same resolution per sensor square millimeter. |
Cut out these two quotes above because of my specific situation and question:
I own the mentioned 15mm Heliar 1st version in LTM, the Ricoh GXR M, Sony NEX5n and A7. My best wide angle performance still is the 15mm on the GXR M. It's decidedly better than the same lens on A7 even in APS-C crop mode. Also better than, in FF mode, the similar angle of view Color Skopar I f4/21mm and an old, wider Tokina RMC f3.5/17mm.
With my lenses, for wide angle performance, would the A7III ( or also A7II ) beat the GXR M?
( Is there another alternative camera that is smaller, even if this means APS-C, that would? )
cheers, Andreas _________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2491
|
Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2020 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
Irix 15mm 2.4 (Blackstone or Firefly) is also worth looking at. I just acquired a Cosina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5. Not perfect but it was cheap. _________________ pentaxian |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2020 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
kuuan wrote: |
With my lenses, for wide angle performance, would the A7III ( or also A7II ) beat the GXR M?
( Is there another alternative camera that is smaller, even if this means APS-C, that would? )
cheers, Andreas |
I don't believe that any camera will ever beat the GXR-M in this discipline as no other camera is developed specificly for these wide angle RF lenses developed for film usage.
As I already mentioned in this thread before, the A7R II is a good compromise but ultimate corner sharpness is better on the GXR-M. Most probably the A7 III will perform likewise because of the same new BSI sensor design. The A7 II performs identically to the A7 (same old style sensor).
If the A7R II is used in APS-C mode only (18MP) then you get really sharp outer corners as well.
At least there are rumors that the mirrorless Nikon Z6 (same new BSI sensor like the A7 III) or the Z7 (same new BSI sensor like the A7R II and III) perform slightly better in that respect because of thinner filter stacks in front of the sensors, but I haven't seen any direct comparison yet.
Cheers, _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
e6filmuser
Joined: 12 Nov 2010 Posts: 555 Location: Reading UK
|
Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2020 9:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
e6filmuser wrote:
tb_a wrote: |
If the A7R II is used in APS-C mode only (18MP) then you get really sharp outer corners as well. |
Yes, but they are not the same corners.
It might be better to use full frame and crop until you get acceptable corners. _________________ Dedicated to using manual focus lenses with digital. Equiped for photography from macro to panoramic & from ultra-wide to extreme telephoto. Mostly shooting outdoor macro. Experienced entomological taxonomist. Some knowledge of mushrooms. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
tb_a wrote: |
If the A7R II is used in APS-C mode only (18MP) then you get really sharp outer corners as well. |
e6filmuser wrote: |
Yes, but they are not the same corners.
It might be better to use full frame and crop until you get acceptable corners. |
Of course, that goes without saying. Whatever will suit your needs.
Andreas wanted to know if there is any camera (incl. APS-C) which will be as good as the Ricoh GXR-M with these problematic lenses.
To the best of my knowledge, the only alternative would be the A7R II or III in APS-C mode. It's even a little bit better as this will offer a higher resolution and sharp corners.
However, if stopped down to something like F8 to F11 it's IMHO usable in FF-mode as well like I've shown already in this thread. _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|