[Guest]

Hi,

 

I just try out some lenses on my new NEX a6000 but I'm not very happy with the results. For me small size with good IQ is important, yes, I like Pixel peeping. It makes it a little bit easier that I prefer the boring focal length around 50 mm (=> 30 mm).

 

Now my question: Why don't I find comments to color or contrast behaviour of lenses? I was very astonished when I compared a Sigma 30/2.8 with a Tamron 17-50/2.8 on the NEX. Until that day I liked the Sigma, but when I saw the much better contrast of the Tamron that changed. Unfortunately the Tamron is too big for me to carry around. Now in my eyes the Sigma looks really fade. 

 

I tried with RAW files, is it that the jpgs of the reviews are pushed up internally a little bit? Or is it a very individual point, difficult to give a rating?

 

Last question: is it a General Problem of small cheap glasses that they have poor contrast?

 

Regards,

 

Norbert

[dada]

Have you tried to manually set the white balance?
perhaps that's the reason for the difference.
My Sigma 70/2.8 macro, which is one of the best lenses that tested here at PZ, gives a very blueish results on my NEX-C3 with AWB, but all changed to normal and very vibrant with manual WB.
Please try it and tell me. I'm quite satisfied with the Sigma 30/2.8 EX DN, and the 60/2.8 is even better...
BTW, I consider to buy the refined A6000 or the half baked first generation FF  A7, have you compared them?
 
Regards,

[popo]

There are colour and contrast differences between lenses, but unless they're too severe you can turn it up in software later. I've had some shots taken with fogging on the lens which reduced contrast a lot, but it was largely recoverable in processing. For normal lens differences I wouldn't think it significant.

 

There was a good article I saw a long time ago describing how lens colour correction evolved through the decades. I do find the cheaper Sigma lenses to be quite yellow for example, but again you can neutralise this to a good degree in processing.