08-18-2010, 07:52 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-18-2010, 10:33 AM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='Symple' timestamp='1282102413' post='1850']
Kind of you to say.
I really wouldn't use this lens for close-up myself, especially with tubes because 2cm is a little close for comfort for me on the front element. You can actually see the lens in the reflection off one of the bee's back. I have been doing landscape photos mostly with the 24, and am starting to get over how sharp it is and how fussy the focus can be. I have put up one more link of a night photo where I think this lens really excels. I would put up others that are maybe a little better, but have a look at the detail in the lightning as well as the houses [url="https://cid-d2aa801cea6774c3.office.live.com/self.aspx/PZ%2024%20TS-E%20request%20real%20world/pz%5E_forum%5E_tse24ii%5E_practical%5E_night.jpg"]here[/url]. This shot is wide open at iso 100 and really shows off how well the lens resolves, and handles point light sources without aberrations (again, keep clicking on it to get full size or download it and view on your image software).
I have owned and used the 14L II, 16-35 II, 17-40 and none of them compare to the 24 tse II for night shots. I have been doing 40 minute exposures these past few nights for star trails and the details are incredible. Honestly though, just use the ts-e 90 for close-ups using tilt and shift, just too close with the 24.
[/quote]
*edited*
One thing I do not understand from your posted images is the lack of magnification (anemone shots). Are nr 1 +2 really with 12mm ext. tube? I know I tried 24mm with 12mm ext. tube only on APS-C, but then still, to me it seems I got much bigger magnification.
Also, the 24mm TS-E II offers closer MFD than the lens I tried with, so to me it is even more puzzling. Those anemones are actually quite big... At least 3 cm wide.
And since the 24mm TS-E II actually can do 1:3.5 all on its own, it rather looks like you shot without the 12mm tube in all shots.
Kind of you to say.
I really wouldn't use this lens for close-up myself, especially with tubes because 2cm is a little close for comfort for me on the front element. You can actually see the lens in the reflection off one of the bee's back. I have been doing landscape photos mostly with the 24, and am starting to get over how sharp it is and how fussy the focus can be. I have put up one more link of a night photo where I think this lens really excels. I would put up others that are maybe a little better, but have a look at the detail in the lightning as well as the houses [url="https://cid-d2aa801cea6774c3.office.live.com/self.aspx/PZ%2024%20TS-E%20request%20real%20world/pz%5E_forum%5E_tse24ii%5E_practical%5E_night.jpg"]here[/url]. This shot is wide open at iso 100 and really shows off how well the lens resolves, and handles point light sources without aberrations (again, keep clicking on it to get full size or download it and view on your image software).
I have owned and used the 14L II, 16-35 II, 17-40 and none of them compare to the 24 tse II for night shots. I have been doing 40 minute exposures these past few nights for star trails and the details are incredible. Honestly though, just use the ts-e 90 for close-ups using tilt and shift, just too close with the 24.
[/quote]
*edited*
One thing I do not understand from your posted images is the lack of magnification (anemone shots). Are nr 1 +2 really with 12mm ext. tube? I know I tried 24mm with 12mm ext. tube only on APS-C, but then still, to me it seems I got much bigger magnification.
Also, the 24mm TS-E II offers closer MFD than the lens I tried with, so to me it is even more puzzling. Those anemones are actually quite big... At least 3 cm wide.
And since the 24mm TS-E II actually can do 1:3.5 all on its own, it rather looks like you shot without the 12mm tube in all shots.