| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 834
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 10:29 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
lumens pixel wrote:
On Sony A7II my copy of the RMC Tokina 17mm is very sharp on the whole frame at f6,7 but not at all distances.
Huge inward field curvature forbid sharp corners at infinity. Extreme corners can only be sharp at around 3m distance.
You need to play with that and use it at your advantage or in some cases skip the shot.
_________________
Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TurtleSkinny
Joined: 15 Jan 2020
Posts: 70
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
TurtleSkinny wrote:
| lumens pixel wrote: |
| Huge inward field curvature forbid sharp corners at infinity. Extreme corners can only be sharp at around 3m distance. |
It 's true, I really think it is as you say. Edge sharpening decreases with increasing distance.
_________________
I use Google Translate, sorry  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10543
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
| lumens pixel wrote: |
On Sony A7II my copy of the RMC Tokina 17mm is very sharp on the whole frame at f6,7 but not at all distances.
Huge inward field curvature forbid sharp corners at infinity. Extreme corners can only be sharp at around 3m distance.
You need to play with that and use it at your advantage or in some cases skip the shot. |
The A7II sensor is known to have issues with wide angle lenses, as Cooltouch mentions above.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
| The A7II sensor is known to have issues with wide angle lenses, as Cooltouch mentions above. |
That's right but limited to lenses with very close distance from the rear lens to the sensor, typically with RF lenses and this is producing known phenomena like corner smearing and color shift. The Tokina 17 mm lens is a normal SLR lens.
The problem with some extreme wide angle lenses is indeed the field curvature and this isn't limited to the Sony A7, particularly the first series with the old style sensor like the A7 II.
I've done already intensive testing with my A7R II (already the new stile sensor) and found out that some of these lenses produce unsharp edges in the same way on the A7R II like on any other DSLR as well; i.e. the field curvature syndrome is not limited to a type of camera or sensor but primarily a lens problem.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10543
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
 Right, Rangefinder lenses and Field Curvature. Thanks Thomas for reminding me.
Field Curvature effects vary with focus and dof. Corners are best when curvature effects are within dof. The narrow dof at close distances is why macro lenses are flat field without curvature.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr.Bittacy
Joined: 16 Jun 2019
Posts: 76
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mr.Bittacy wrote:
I have to second the full frame camera comments. I was using an a6000 and while it was fine when I wanted to use 50mm and up lenses, the wide angle lenses were really causing me problems.
The problem was that the crop factor is magnified when using a wide angle lens, the difference between 50mm and 75mm is much smaller than the difference between a 20mm and a 30mm lens (factoring in the crop).
To get a decently wide angle on the a6000 I would have had to spend a lot for a much wider lens like your 17mm to get an equivalent 25mm fov and this was a double edged problem because not only were the ultra wide angles so much more expensive but the vintage ultra wides don’t have the best image quality even when cropped. The IQ difference between a Zeiss Contax 28mm lens on a full frame vs a Minolta 20mm on a crop sensor will blow you away as well as the increased speed making the Zeiss lens much more versatile.
To me using a vintage ultra wide on an aspc sensor camera is not the best choice because you are pushing a vintage lens to its limit and it was already designed to be at its limit on a 35mm film camera because of the state of lens design. If you want the vintage look and IQ of an ultra wide on a crop sensor you could just get a 28mm 3.5 Minolta lens for about 20 bucks and use it on a full frame but it would probably still perform better with less distortion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antoine
Joined: 08 Jan 2016
Posts: 298
Location: London
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2020 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Antoine wrote:
You are absolutely right. This also led me to go for a A7Rii...
Getting some proper (+ultra) wide angle with good quality.
On the other hand, when one turns to teles, the aps-c allowed the use of much smaller lenses (and lighter body) and/or getting much futher reach (obviously one can crop with the A7Riv to get the same thing) which is good if you travel and carry stuff.
Then one ends up keeping both cameras...
_________________
Antoine
Sony A6000 APS-C and Sony A7 Rii
Minolta Fisheye MD Rokkor 7.5 mm f4, Fisheye MD 16 f2.8 MD R 17mm f4, MD R 20mm f2.8, MC VFC & MDIII 24mm f2.8, MD 28mm f2.0 &3.5, MD II 35mm 1.8, MD 45mm f2.0, MD 50mm f 1.2 & MD I f1.4, MC PG 58mm 1.2, MD 85mm f2.0, MD R 85mm f2.8 Varisoft, MC 85mm f1.7 MD R 100mm f2.5, MD R 100mm f4.0 macro, MD III 135mm f2.8, MD R 200mm f2.8 & 4.0, RF 250mm f5.6, MD 300mm f4.5, MD APO 400 mm f5.6, RF 500mm f8.0, RF 800mm f8.0 *2 300-s and 300-l
100 mm f4 macro bellows (5/4)
Vivitar 17mm f3.5, Elicar 300mm mirror f5.6, Zhongi turbo ii
Sigma 16mm f 2.8 fish eye
Zooms:24-50 mm f4, 35-70 mm f3.5 macro, 28-85mm f3.5-4.5, 50-135 f 3.5, 70-210 f4 and MD APO 100-500 mm f8 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2020 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| Antoine wrote: |
You are absolutely right. This also led me to go for a A7Rii...
Getting some proper (+ultra) wide angle with good quality.
On the other hand, when one turns to teles, the aps-c allowed the use of much smaller lenses (and lighter body) and/or getting much futher reach (obviously one can crop with the A7Riv to get the same thing) which is good if you travel and carry stuff.
Then one ends up keeping both cameras... |
That's exactly the way to go. Same here. The A7R II is still the best option for the usage of any lens.
Well, to keep the old APS-C camera for the tele end is one option and to use the crop mode is not bad as well. The difference between 18 and 24 MP isn't that huge.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
planet.groove
Joined: 20 Apr 2016
Posts: 73
Location: Berlin, Germany
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
planet.groove wrote:
hi,
a really excellent lens for my a7ii and my crop camera is the good old flektogon 20mm 4.
i have also tested a mc 20mm 2,8, but it was disappointing.
here 2 shots on a7ii @f8
_________________
https://www.flickr.com/photos/planetgroove |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 4748
Location: Cheshire, England
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
Lloydy gave me a Tokina 17mm, it is a little soft even stopped down, but a Cosina version that I bought is much sharper and has better contrast. Great when used at f8.
If you are using crop sensor, I'd go for one of the cheap Chinese lenses as someone mentioned above they're wider.
I know you don't like zooms, but I mention this for the benefit of others: The Cosina 19-35 (in all its branding) is a great little lens, almost as wide as the 17mm but much more versatile. Sharp as a pin stopped down a little Mine is my to-go lens on my A7, Nikon F and Canon F1
_________________
Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bwfcnottingham
Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Posts: 123
Location: Nottingham, England, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bwfcnottingham wrote:
| Alex TG wrote: |
My search for a good vintage ultrawide for my Fuji ended up with modern Samyang 12mm f/2.0  |
The samyang is a fine modern lens . So fast and sharp
_________________
Regards, Phil |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
