05-17-2011, 05:04 PM
This is too off topic for the original thread so I'll start a new one to continue.
[quote name='oneguy' timestamp='1305649737' post='8419']
Yes, it's still sharper from F2.8 and up than both. Cannikon still has a hole. They don't have a cheap F2.8 85mm lens. That's a hole. twice expensive. You have to pay twice more to get F1.8 lens even though wide open both are inferior.
[/quote]
For starters, I'll put aside the "wide open" part and compare like with like. Even then, only Sony vs. Canon as I'm not familiar with Nikon.
Reference the Photozone test results for Sony 85mm f/2.8 SAM and Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM.
Of course we're entering the danger zone of comparing across systems, so we have two scenarios: absolute MTF (the numbers) and relative scale (the rating bar to the left of MTF results). Comparing relative scales both at f/2.8, the border result is about the same, but the centre is higher on the Canon. Comparing absolute numbers, no contest, the Canon easily beats the Sony result. Maybe the Sony would do better on a higher pixel density sensor, but until that exists, right now the Canon combination will get you a little bit more. So comparing equal aperture, the Canon definitely is superior, although being realistic it really isn't significant unless you do nothing other than pixel peep.
Now going back to the "wide open" case, I'm not sure why you want to compare unequal conditions, but let's do so just for fun. On the relative scale, the Sony does get a bit higher here, sitting at the bottom of excellent rating whereas the Canon is at the top of "very good". In absolute terms, the numbers go to Canon though, although it is very marginal for all practical purposes it is the same.
End of the day, all the above comparison is pretty pointless. You consider whichever one you have the body for, and the practical difference in equal settings is not going to be noticed by anyone outside the hardest pixel peepers. Lens choice is something that needs to be considered when entering a system. To me, a main benefit of the "slow" Sony is the small lens size. But if you want bigger aperture 85mm on the cheap on Sony, I think that only leaves the 3rd party Samyang f/1.4. You could argue there is no ultra-budget choice on Canon, but to be realistic, in all the time on all the forums I've visited, I've never heard of anyone asking for one.
[quote name='oneguy' timestamp='1305649737' post='8419']
Yes, it's still sharper from F2.8 and up than both. Cannikon still has a hole. They don't have a cheap F2.8 85mm lens. That's a hole. twice expensive. You have to pay twice more to get F1.8 lens even though wide open both are inferior.
[/quote]
For starters, I'll put aside the "wide open" part and compare like with like. Even then, only Sony vs. Canon as I'm not familiar with Nikon.
Reference the Photozone test results for Sony 85mm f/2.8 SAM and Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM.
Of course we're entering the danger zone of comparing across systems, so we have two scenarios: absolute MTF (the numbers) and relative scale (the rating bar to the left of MTF results). Comparing relative scales both at f/2.8, the border result is about the same, but the centre is higher on the Canon. Comparing absolute numbers, no contest, the Canon easily beats the Sony result. Maybe the Sony would do better on a higher pixel density sensor, but until that exists, right now the Canon combination will get you a little bit more. So comparing equal aperture, the Canon definitely is superior, although being realistic it really isn't significant unless you do nothing other than pixel peep.
Now going back to the "wide open" case, I'm not sure why you want to compare unequal conditions, but let's do so just for fun. On the relative scale, the Sony does get a bit higher here, sitting at the bottom of excellent rating whereas the Canon is at the top of "very good". In absolute terms, the numbers go to Canon though, although it is very marginal for all practical purposes it is the same.
End of the day, all the above comparison is pretty pointless. You consider whichever one you have the body for, and the practical difference in equal settings is not going to be noticed by anyone outside the hardest pixel peepers. Lens choice is something that needs to be considered when entering a system. To me, a main benefit of the "slow" Sony is the small lens size. But if you want bigger aperture 85mm on the cheap on Sony, I think that only leaves the 3rd party Samyang f/1.4. You could argue there is no ultra-budget choice on Canon, but to be realistic, in all the time on all the forums I've visited, I've never heard of anyone asking for one.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
