08-02-2021, 01:05 AM
08-02-2021, 06:26 AM
The 20 will be entertaining. EPZ found 8.1% native distortion which is the record value. Can it be called a fisheye when uncorrected, or does that term describe something more specific?
08-02-2021, 08:41 AM
“The Tamron 24mm f/2.8 Di III OSD M1:2 stays a bit short of the optical quality that we have seen from the Tamron 24mm f/2.8 Di III OSD M1:2 ”
I think the latter should be the 35mm.
"... it still feels like an answer to a question that nobody has asked"
The reason for this triplet of lenses is macro capabilities, otherwise they actually don't make a lot of sense.
"The 20 will be entertaining. EPZ found 8.1% native distortion"
Yep, it's huge!
I think the latter should be the 35mm.
"... it still feels like an answer to a question that nobody has asked"
The reason for this triplet of lenses is macro capabilities, otherwise they actually don't make a lot of sense.
"The 20 will be entertaining. EPZ found 8.1% native distortion"
Yep, it's huge!
08-02-2021, 08:57 AM
I didn't see 8% but it's bad, yes.
08-02-2021, 12:53 PM
Maybe it depends strongly on focus distance and their use (and testing) case was more conducive to revealing it, who knows. Their finding for the 24mm was 6.1%, so a bit more than what you discovered, for some reason. Even for the 35, they found 1.2%.