Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
next PZ lens test report - Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS
#1
Quite good (other than the mentioned issue):

 

http://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff...4105f4goss

#2
Wow, at long last something to read. Smile


ZOMG the distortion / vignetting... But it really becomes commonplace. Apart from that, if you treat this as an f/5.6 lens, it's really pretty good considering the sensor.


Another observation: if you do one more Sony E mount review after this one, the OPTICAL LIMITS UPDATES box is going to be filled up with Sony stuff. At least on mobile. Big Grin
#3
The next one is for Canon followed by a third-party Fuji review.

Markus is about to restart as well.

#4
   I'm writing after BC's post btw!

   

...auto distortion has cropped the image nicely right in the corners....the question is now what is the effective focal length at the wide end when the auto facilities do their clever work?

 

  does it start off wider than 24mm to get  24mm after corrections?

Dave's clichés
#5
The dark edges are not so much gone because of the distortion correction, but more because of vignet correction (realizing that after reading the review). Thats still bad... At least at higher ISO settings.

#6
     I would have thought that 4.5% distortion correction would lose quite some part of the corners BC?....

 

            .......leaving the auto vignetting an easier task.

Dave's clichés
#7
Quote:The dark edges are not so much gone because of the distortion correction, but more because of vignet correction (realizing that after reading the review). Thats still bad... At least at higher ISO settings.
 

It's really the distortion correction that makes the difference here. The barrel distorted corners are stretched out. With pincushion distortions you tend to keep the corners but stretch out the middle part (alternatively you shrink the edges and scale up the whole image. 

#8
That digital correction thing doesn't seem lossless

Tried canon 750D plus 15-85 at 15mm versus Sony a6000 at 16mm corrected or uncorrected Canon is by far better, I can post 100% crops here if you want. But we are comparing a tiny kit lens versus a decent 800$ lens. So it's an unfair comparo results are to be expected.

I can try versus kit 18-55 if you want
#9
Quote:It's really the distortion correction that makes the difference here. The barrel distorted corners are stretched out. With pincushion distortions you tend to keep the corners but stretch out the middle part (alternatively you shrink the edges and scale up the whole image. 
If you look at how much gets cut off at the edge, and then look at where the corners will end up, you still are above 3 stops + worth of vignetting. So, I still say the vignetting correction is the main factor here.

Quote:That digital correction thing doesn't seem lossless

Tried canon 750D plus 15-85 at 15mm versus Sony a6000 at 16mm corrected or uncorrected Canon is by far better, I can post 100% crops here if you want. But we are comparing a tiny kit lens versus a decent 800$ lens. So it's an unfair comparo results are to be expected.

I can try versus kit 18-55 if you want
Of course it is not lossless. That is not something you need to show, because everyone knows that?
#10
Quote:That digital correction thing doesn't seem lossless

Tried canon 750D plus 15-85 at 15mm versus Sony a6000 at 16mm corrected or uncorrected Canon is by far better, I can post 100% crops here if you want. But we are comparing a tiny kit lens versus a decent 800$ lens. So it's an unfair comparo results are to be expected.

I can try versus kit 18-55 if you want
 

If you have that 16-50mm lens - its only value prop is size really.  All the rest is ... meh.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)