[thxbb12]

You don't take into account correcting the CA. With your not very wide angle lens, I am sure you do have CA correction. And you compare corners from 11mm (which always will look pulled apart in some way or another) to a mere 28mm equivalent. Which is the odd thing.

 

Also... To what are you comparing 45.7 megapixel images, exactly?

 

Obviously I didn't do any formal measurements. But just by looking at the images, it looks soft (at the pixel level).

I perfectly know ultra wide-angles are more technically difficult and that it's a high resolution sensor.

Again: I don't care. All I'm saying is that it looks soft compared to my Fuji pancake.

[JJ_SO]

Oh, and btw.: Nasim Mansurov put in a test of the Sigma 14/1.8 and his difficulties to focus it. Which goes well with an article of lensrentals about finding the right focal point. I'm in the process to understand there's not such a thing like a focal pane. Especially the wider a lens gets the less pane there is.

[JJ_SO]

Obviously I didn't do any formal measurements. But just by looking at the images, it looks soft (at the pixel level).

I perfectly know ultra wide-angles are more technically difficult and that it's a high resolution sensor.

Again: I don't care. All I'm saying is that it looks soft compared to my Fuji pancake.

 

I agree, I don't think it will ever be as crunchy and convincing as the Sigma Art can be in the corners. But I never expected it to be. However, I made a little video clip with it and for that quality it was cool.

[thxbb12]

I agree, I don't think it will ever be as crunchy and convincing as the Sigma Art can be in the corners. But I never expected it to be. However, I made a little video clip with it and for that quality it was cool.

 

I think that for your purpose the lens will be totally fine and it's true that for the cost it's not bad at all.

[miro]

I didn't write the post to point out the optical qualities. I was just surprised that Irix took care of a lot of little details, like the lockable Front cover.

 

That is what I mean too. I think the time of sharpness race is over. Like car top speed race in 60..70s or PC CPU speed till 2005 It is all about user experience. Wider FL, and what is UWA without filters

[JJ_SO]

My last car I sold ten years ago, and I admit, I like to drive a car, but don't care much about performances. I do see SUVs which hardly touch the environment their designers pretend to have them made for, but narrow roads and (too small) parking lots  Also, in a country with a speed limit of 120 km/h on the highway there's a real overdose of Maserati, Ferrari, Lamborghini and Porsche - but without any petrol in my veins, I just should shut up  B)

 

Filters. Yeah, I'm looking forward to a bit of sunshine to try the ND16× filter. Or maybe two of them?

 



 

That picture was one attempt with this gelatine filters. At the time I put it in I haven't seen the label on the plastic sleeve, I din't know which one I took. Shutter speed was 1.3 sec., others were 3 sec and I was surprised: The massive purple color cast I've seen coming from format hitech is a very differerent story to what Irix delivered for small change.

 

Alright, gradient filters are not available, but that I can compose in post with two different exposures. And polarizers? At this angle, a polarizer can only take care for a small part of the sky.