Posts: 7,712
Threads: 1,754
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
37
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 2,856
Threads: 30
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
19
09-30-2018, 09:24 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2018, 09:27 AM by Rover.)
As they say over here - the first pancake turned out crumpled. Let's hope the 14/2.8 AF is not as miserable.
All-in-all: thanks Klaus, now I know this is not the lens to get, especially not with the Tamron available on the market.
P.S. One "proofreading" thing to point out: the second tested aperture in the 21 MP resolution graph is shown as 2.2. Is that a misprint?
Posts: 2,964
Threads: 155
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
14
09-30-2018, 09:37 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2018, 09:39 AM by davidmanze.)
I was looking forward to seeing a review here of this lens......so thanks for that!
A rather disappointing result compared to my expectations, Ephotozine reviewed the lens and although they use a simpler sharpness chart things look fine there..........I like the compact style.....but this business about it being softer at close distances is somewhat strange for a portrait lens which is where most folk will be using it...
..........given the close focus issue, the strangest of strange bokeh, the AF backfocus issue and Ephotozone's better findings.........
...........I wonder if it was down to the sample!
Dave's clichés
Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
22
09-30-2018, 10:58 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2018, 11:02 AM by JJ_SO.)
What a shard. Better get a used genuine 85 than this thing.
It's good that you took at least 4 of 14 pictures at f/1.4
Posts: 205
Threads: 4
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
3
Didn't seem that close....
Posts: 6,716
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
25
A shame, that LoCA/fringing extreme. I don't remember seeing that from the manual focus version reviews. Bot have very similar, but different optics.
Posts: 2,856
Threads: 30
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
19
10-01-2018, 12:51 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2018, 12:53 PM by Rover.)
The (new style) graphs still say f/2.2 for the second tested aperture - should it be f/2.0? Did you just copy and paste from the Tamron review, or did you really test the lens at f/2.2? Not that it matters a whole lot, just curious.
P.S. Now that you've started assigning the star ratings to the lenses tested on the 5DSR, are you going to retroactively add them to the older reviews?
Posts: 2,505
Threads: 564
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
14
From this review I understand this lens is no better than my Canon 85f1.8 unless you absolutely need f1.4 which is not my case
Posts: 7,712
Threads: 1,754
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
37
@Rover - fixed the f/2.2 thingy
Are stars so important? ;-)
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji