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

allround zoom lens for holiday
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
CIZ is basically digital zoom then? I guess nothing is changing in terms of optics.


Yep. However, have compared many different solutions and also several old Minolta AF zoom lenses on my A7R II.
In terms of portability with still the best image quality the FE 28-70 beats them all. For special circumstances the digital zoom called CIZ is better than nothing as my examples clearly show.
Anyway, you may also choose to shoot RAW instead and crop & magnify the picture afterwards in Topaz Gigapixel AI which may lead to similar results.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Sony 28-60 eats the 28-70 for breakfast and is even smaller.

Many of you guys, sorry, seem to have no clue... there is absolutely no reason to recommend the Sony 28-70 in 2022.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 2:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's the comparison you wanted ...

* Konica AR 28-135mm
* Minolta AF 28-135mm
* Minolta AF 28-105mm
* Minolta AF 24-135mm
* Nikkor AF 35-135mm
* Tamron SP 28-135mm

plus MD-III 2.8/35mm and MD-III 2.5/100mm for reference.

CLICK TWICE TO GET FULL RESOLUTION!

First at f=35mm:


A few remarks. At f=35mm ...

* the Minolta 2.8/35mm clearly outperforms all zooms (be aware that this is the best vintage 35mm I know; on 43 MP FF it is as good as the Sony Zeiss Sonnar 2.8/35mm)
* the Minolta 24-105mm performs best among the zooms; it's very good from f5.6 on
* the Minolta 28-135mm and 28-105mm are a bit weaker, and so is the AF Nikkor 35-135mm
* the Tamron SP 28-135 has a yellowish color cast; wide open it's a bit weaker than the Minoltas/Nikkor
* stopped down to f11 all zooms EXCEPT the Konica AR 28-135mm are very good (especially if lateral CAs are corrected in PP)
* the Konica AR 28-135mm can't match the others, in spite (or because of?) its very complicated construction with 18 lenses. I have checked a Tokina 28-135mm as well, with similar results; thus the results shown here are probably valid


* most zooms are well suited for landscapes if stopped down to f11
* the Konica AR


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hasenbein wrote:
The Sony 28-60 eats the 28-70 for breakfast and is even smaller.

Many of you guys, sorry, seem to have no clue... there is absolutely no reason to recommend the Sony 28-70 in 2022.


Some side-by-side comparisons would be much appreciated - "an image says more than thousand words" Wink

S


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hasenbein wrote:
The Sony 28-60 eats the 28-70 for breakfast and is even smaller.

Many of you guys, sorry, seem to have no clue... there is absolutely no reason to recommend the Sony 28-70 in 2022.


I have more clue than you might believe.

The OP was asking for a recommendation and I can only recommend what I have experienced and tested myself and not based on any lens test from somebody else.

Luckily the OP use the same A7R II camera like myself, therefore it might be interesting for him to see results from the same camera and to learn about the practical experience from an owner of any particular lens.

You are welcome to provide some example picture from the 28-60 lens to proove your statement if you like, prefrerably on the A7R II as well.
Although 60mm max. focal length wasn't really what the OP was asking for.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
hasenbein wrote:
The Sony 28-60 eats the 28-70 for breakfast and is even smaller.

Many of you guys, sorry, seem to have no clue... there is absolutely no reason to recommend the Sony 28-70 in 2022.


I have more clue than you might believe.

The OP was asking for a recommendation and I can only recommend what I have experienced and tested myself and not based on any lens test from somebody else.

Luckily the OP use the same A7R II camera like myself, therefore it might be interesting for him to see results from the same camera and to learn about the practical experience from an owner of any particular lens.

You are welcome to provide some example picture from the 28-60 lens to proove your statement if you like, prefrerably on the A7R II as well.
Although 60mm max. focal length wasn't really what the OP was asking for.

The 28-60 works like a 28-55 when compare to 28-70 according to the review below. Both are good lens though.

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_fe_28_60mm_f4_5_6_review


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's the same bunch of lenses at f=100mm (more or less at least - the Nikkor seems to be more at f=95mm or so, the two Minolta 28-105 and 24-105 were tested at nominally 105mm):



* Again, the prime (Minolta MD-III 2.5/100mm) is the best of the lenses tested here. And again, this is the best of about a dozen or so fast 100mm vintage MF primes I own
* Minolta AF 28-135mm comes very close to the prime, especially if one would correct the contrast and CAs in post processing (not done here). Similar results can be expected in the entire 40mm to 110mm range.
* The Tamron SP 28-135mm, the Minolta AF 28-105mm and the MinAF 24-105mm come next - quite usable overall performance, but low contrast with the Tamron and strong CAs with the MinAF 24-105mm.
* the Konica AR 28-135mm as well as the Nikkor have surprisingly little CAs, but lack resolution - especially the Nikkor which performs pretty poorly (the Nikkor AF 2.8/35-70mm from the same generation has similar problems).

These results pretty much explain why I usually work with a combination of modern 2.8/16-35mm and 2.8/70-200mm zooms. Wideangle as well as tele zooms generally have a better performance than the midrange (2.8/24-70mm) zooms. If I need a midrange zoom, I take the Minolta AF 28-135mm which nicely complements the 2.8/16-35mm and 2.8/70-200mm zooms, especially since it in the 70-90mm range its is better than the Sony A 2.8/70-200mm G SSM.

S


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Now that I've seen how good in Stephan's comparisons the Minolta MD 100/2.5 and Minolta MD 35/2.8 are (two lenses that I own myself), I think I will actually stick to my primes and accept the hassle of changing them. With these 2 lenses + MD 50/2 and perhaps a SMC Pentax 28/3.5 I could make a nice set and keep the weight within reasonable limits.

The Sony 28-70 is not really an option because of its limited range and the fact that I always like to shoot RAW. For good corners it has to be stopped down quite a bit. Furthermore, I'm not intending to spend really a lot of money on a zoom lens, as I will only occasionaly use it, so expensive alternatives are not interesting for me.

I want to thank everybody for their input: lots of very informative reactions.
Now that I've decided to stick to my primes; perhaps people can recommend me a camera bag that is allows for (non extreme) hiking, yet allows me to quickly grab my lenses? I use a Think Tank Mirrorless Mover right now, but it swings too much for hiking and can easily drop from the shoulder.

Perhaps a sling bag is an option?


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
You're welcome.

We all are different. I'm willing to compromise when on holiday. Once I tried to limit myself for a whole trip with just a 28mm lens and I realised that it was more than good enough.

My most favorite kit for holidays is presently my Lumix GX80 with the pancake zoom 12-32mm and the 100-300mm for wildlife. So I'm well served from 24 to 600mm in FF equivalence.
With this combination not even a bag is necessary; i.e. one lens can always be stored in my jacket.

I wish you good luck to find a proper camera bag for your equipment.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Coincidentally I was about to recommend Click here to see on Ebay and taking your great 28or35 50or55or58 105or135 primes.



ebay seller davescafe


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's another one to think about:



The three common vintage 28-135mm zooms vs two zooms from around 2005.

The results are pretty clear. There's no way these vintage 28-135mm zooms can replace my current standard gear for travel / landscape / cityscapes (2.8/16-35, 2.8/24-70, 2.8/70-200 plus Canon TS-E 4/17mm Shift and, occasionally, a 2.8/300mm APO and/or 2.8/400 L)

S


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Now that I've seen how good in Stephan's comparisons the Minolta MD 100/2.5 and Minolta MD 35/2.8 are (two lenses that I own myself), I think I will actually stick to my primes and accept the hassle of changing them. With these 2 lenses + MD 50/2 and perhaps a SMC Pentax 28/3.5 I could make a nice set and keep the weight within reasonable limits.


Sometimes I prefer a light equipment as well, especially when hiking (landsacpes / cityscapes).
If you have a good 35mm and a good 100mm lens with you (and maybe even a 40-60 MP FF camera) you can get the following:

* "24mm": (by stitching three images taken with the 35mm lens)
* 35mm (native)
* "50mm" (by slightly cropping your 35mm image)
* "70mm" (by stitching three images taken with the 100mm lens)
* 100mm (native)
* "135mm" (by slightly cropping your 100mm image)

Works pretty well.

S


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
visualopsins wrote:
Coincidentally I was about to recommend Click here to see on Ebay and taking your great 28or35 50or55or58 105or135 primes.


Yes, that could be handy.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Now that I've seen how good in Stephan's comparisons the Minolta MD 100/2.5 and Minolta MD 35/2.8 are (two lenses that I own myself), I think I will actually stick to my primes and accept the hassle of changing them. With these 2 lenses + MD 50/2 and perhaps a SMC Pentax 28/3.5 I could make a nice set and keep the weight within reasonable limits.


Sometimes I prefer a light equipment as well, especially when hiking (landsacpes / cityscapes).
If you have a good 35mm and a good 100mm lens with you (and maybe even a 40-60 MP FF camera) you can get the following:

* "24mm": (by stitching three images taken with the 35mm lens)
* 35mm (native)
* "50mm" (by slightly cropping your 35mm image)
* "70mm" (by stitching three images taken with the 100mm lens)
* 100mm (native)
* "135mm" (by slightly cropping your 100mm image)

Works pretty well.

S


Yes, That’s an option. What software do you use for stitching?


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
What software do you use for stitching?

I'm not doing that very often since usually I have the 16-35 plus 70-200 with me. Mostly I use it for the TS-E 17mm L, to get really "crazy" perspectives. The built-in stitching in Photoshop has been fine for these purposes. But I'm sure there are others here with plenty of experience, and tips & tricks Wink

S


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
Here's the same bunch of lenses at f=100mm (more or less at least - the Nikkor seems to be more at f=95mm or so, the two Minolta 28-105 and 24-105 were tested at nominally 105mm):

These results pretty much explain why I usually work with a combination of modern 2.8/16-35mm and 2.8/70-200mm zooms. Wideangle as well as tele zooms generally have a better performance than the midrange (2.8/24-70mm) zooms. If I need a midrange zoom, I take the Minolta AF 28-135mm which nicely complements the 2.8/16-35mm and 2.8/70-200mm zooms, especially since it in the 70-90mm range its is better than the Sony A 2.8/70-200mm G SSM.

S


That's interesting. Why a 28-135mm over a 24-70? That's neither a wide angle nor tele zoom.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eggplant wrote:

That's interesting. Why a 28-135mm over a 24-70? That's neither a wide angle nor tele zoom.


Usually f=70mm simply isn't enough for me (and the Zeiss ZA 24-70 is more like 67mm than 70mm).

The 16-20mm range is something I use most often, but the 50-100mm range often is pretty nice both for classical landscapes as well for shooting in our ancient towns.

To be honest - I bought only in 2020 my first 2.8/24-70mm zoom. I very rarely use it. On the short end 24mm usually are too long, and on the long end 67mm are simply not enough. Back in November I finally forced myself to spend a day in Pisa just with the ZA 2.8/24-70mm. Technically the lens is very good, but I felt seriously hampered by the missing 20mm and 100mm ranges.

S


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2022 10:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
Back in November I finally forced myself to spend a day in Pisa just with the ZA 2.8/24-70mm. Technically the lens is very good, but I felt seriously hampered by the missing 20mm and 100mm ranges.

S


I would recommend a tilt/shift lens in Pisa Wink.

Sorry, couldn't resist; I'll log off now...


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2022 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You need a tilt shift to show the proper verticals, instead of a set of tombstones.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
What software do you use for stitching?


I'm using PanoramaStudio 3 Pro. Works great and does all kinds of Panorama. Very useful if no wider lens on hand.

Example from Venice/Rialto, don't remember the number of single pictures:



PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
What software do you use for stitching?


I'm using PanoramaStudio 3 Pro. Works great and does all kinds of Panorama. Very useful if no wider lens on hand.

Example from Venice/Rialto, don't remember the number of single pictures:



Thank you, looks good!


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2022 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:

I would recommend a tilt/shift lens in Pisa Wink.

Sorry, couldn't resist; I'll log off now...


Well - now *I* couldn't resist: here it is Wink

(Canon TS-E 4/17mm L plus Sony A7RII)



S


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2022 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Slalom wrote:
You need a tilt shift to show the proper verticals


Often I prefer to simply use tele lenses (70-200). See examples below. These are JPGs straight out of the Sony A900 (resized, of course).

This was a November morning with an incredibly clear light. The Sony A900 is still unsurpassed for such conditions. In fact, the camera settings (DRO/contrast/saturation/underexposure/brightness, you name it) were adjusted quite carefully to the existing light, resulting in pretty usable JPGs straight out of the camera. The details of this optimization process can be found in my book about the the A900 system (http://www.artaphot.ch/minolta-sony-af/alpha-systembuch, starting at p 104).


Pisa, S. Maria della Spina - former church, now museum (sadly). Situated directly at the Arno river. 70mm focal length.



Pisa, view from Ponte Solferino to the town center. 90mm focal length.



Pisa, view from Ponte della Fortezza towards the town center. 150mm focal length.



Pisa, Lungarno Galileo Galiei. 200mm focal length.

S
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2