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

TEST 24mm f2.8 (FD, AR, MD, AiS, Sigma, Yash, Zeiss)
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2024 9:50 pm    Post subject: TEST 24mm f2.8 (FD, AR, MD, AiS, Sigma, Yash, Zeiss) Reply with quote
For an easier later search I have re-posted the 24mm f2.8 test here, including some new crops from the field (about 10 mm image height).
100% crops from 24 MP Sony A7II FF JPGs, as usual.

100% crops from the corners first:



100% crops from about 10mm image height:


S


PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2024 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sigma is fantastic. Too bad it's hard to find a well-centered copy, allegedly. I've only tried two, both decentered, which is a shame.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2024 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excellent test. Yes Sigma very good lens and an ordeal to find a good copy.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2024 10:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
thank you Steve, i was going to get a FD black nose 2.8 but i might have to change my mind; anyway, i am curious how these lenses deal on infinity, which is where they were meant to shoot most of the times


PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2024 11:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Dejan wrote:
Sigma is fantastic. Too bad it's hard to find a well-centered copy, allegedly. I've only tried two, both decentered, which is a shame.


lumens pixel wrote:
Excellent test. Yes Sigma very good lens and an ordeal to find a good copy.


I've not much experience with Sigma lenses - and I wasn't aware of these problems. The two copies I have (a "Minolta MD MF" plus he Af version with Minolta AF mount) both are surprisingly good.


kiddo wrote:
thank you Steve, i was going to get a FD black nose 2.8 but i might have to change my mind; anyway, i am curious how these lenses deal on infinity, which is where they were meant to shoot most of the times


These quick test shown above were shot at a distance of 5m. I don't think the results at infinity will differe a lot ... but I can compare the FD 2.8/24mm and the Sigma, at infinity, tomorrow. No time for all ...

S


PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2024 12:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
Dejan wrote:
Sigma is fantastic. Too bad it's hard to find a well-centered copy, allegedly. I've only tried two, both decentered, which is a shame.


lumens pixel wrote:
Excellent test. Yes Sigma very good lens and an ordeal to find a good copy.


I've not much experience with Sigma lenses - and I wasn't aware of these problems. The two copies I have (a "Minolta MD MF" plus he Af version with Minolta AF mount) both are surprisingly good.


kiddo wrote:
thank you Steve, i was going to get a FD black nose 2.8 but i might have to change my mind; anyway, i am curious how these lenses deal on infinity, which is where they were meant to shoot most of the times


These quick test shown above were shot at a distance of 5m. I don't think the results at infinity will differe a lot ... but I can compare the FD 2.8/24mm and the Sigma, at infinity, tomorrow. No time for all ...

i really appreciate it, currently i´m using nFD 28mm as wide angle , but sometimes i feel like i need something wider , and as far as i have read, the 24mm FD was pretty much praised, but now these results of sigma, at least on this distance and aperture up to 5.6, are putting a shame many of the competitors

S


PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2024 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
If the Sigma has a reputation for being decentered then it's entirely possible that the corner being shown above might be it's best corner and not representative of the lenses performance. That's one of the problems with showing the same corner from a large group of lenses, as it's not likely that all of them are centred well. Another corner might perform better, and this is often the case.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2024 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jjphoto wrote:
If the Sigma has a reputation for being decentered then it's entirely possible that the corner being shown above might be it's best corner and not representative of the lenses performance. That's one of the problems with showing the same corner from a large group of lenses, as it's not likely that all of them are centred well. Another corner might perform better, and this is often the case.

Sample variation is always the elephant in the room when it comes to these lens tests. Not just the ones done by members here, but even tests done by photo magazines and forums; if they get sent a new lens for review you can bet that the manufacturers will pick a favourable sample.

Us members here can only test what we have access to in terms of representative samples, often vintage ones without a known history of servicing; it is what it is.
It is up to the tester to let us know if there are any noteworthy issues that the sample images shown do not reveal. If Stephan had noticed decentering I am sure he would have mentioned the corner performance shown wasn't representative of the other three corners for the sample tested.

In the end, these are all real-world single sample performance illustrations, and should be interpreted in that context. For test to have much value beyond that one would really need to shoot multiple samples using test targets under controlled conditions for proper measurements, but few (if any) of us have both the means and time for that I imagine. Even 'proper' reviews rarely publish extensive tests; e.g. they may show performance stats for difference apertures, but rarely do they show them also for different focus distances at the same time and they never publish sample variation stats.

Ultimately, there is no substitute for simply using a particular sample and get to know its unique behaviour under real-world shooting conditions, incl. its sample-specific flaws.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2024 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jjphoto wrote:
If the Sigma has a reputation for being decentered then it's entirely possible that the corner being shown above might be it's best corner and not representative of the lenses performance. That's one of the problems with showing the same corner from a large group of lenses, as it's not likely that all of them are centred well. Another corner might perform better, and this is often the case.


I'd say even more: in a decentered lens, the best corner is often better or even much better than average, since it's like if those light rays were passing through a more central part of the glass. I had a Canon 24-105 so, a side was mediocre, the other one excellent; when I've got a centered one, good and bad mixed up. That said, I am confident that Stephan would have noted a decentered lens before the test.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1