Was mentioned the other day
Was mentioned the other day
I use the 1.4x TC with it and it works very well, hard to see any difference in IQ.
The 1.4x is on sale too at £279, I’d rather use that and then crop but if you do buy the 2x I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts.
I’d have thought this would be a weak point of the TC as from my experience IQ is good for subjects relatively close, but when you start focussing closer to infinity it takes a bigger hit so I’m really interested to hear what you find.
Different people like different focal lengths for landscape, so what focal lengths did you use for landscape on m4/3?
If you’re ok with zoom. Tammy 28-75 G2 is a very good lens.
Sony 16-35mm f4 is my go to landscape lens, great sharpness (stopped down) and not too big and heavy. The equivalent of this lens on m4/3 would be an 8-17.5mm if there was such a thing. If you want someting simlar to the Olympus 12-40mm you'd be looking at a 24-70mm. The Sony 24-70mm f4 is another good lens (stopped down) that's not too big or heavy. I think all other 24-70's will be out of budget.
Thanks for the reply, I would typically opt for 14-35/40 on m43 which I have been happy with width wise I’ve never shot wider than this.
Thanks, that looks interesting, do the 3rd party lenses play nicely on the Sony bodies?
Thank you, the 24-70 was the first lens I considered, is there a considerable difference as you upgrade from Sony g -Sony gm etc?
Ideally a zoom to start with, I would like to add primes in the future, my first one being a 50mm I think as I often used the 25mm prime on the Olympus.
Yes Sony opened up their mount to third party so they work really well. The only restrictions are that they can only be used at 15fps max, and you can't use TC's with them.
This will depend on the individual as not everyone sees the differences as much as the next person. Also, as you stop down the differences can become less apparent. I don't think there's a "considerable" difference as you go from non G > G > GM but the GM's are the cream of the crop for sure, usually haveing better edge to edge sharpness, less CA's, better AF etc.
the last paragraph is certainly interesting, I have to say I am one for pixel peeping and examine the bokeh, if I remember rightly I think you done some testing I remember reading a while back with regards to bokeh balls etc and I think I recall one lens in particular causing cats eye bokeh, I think this would bug me lol I like round bokeh in my images. So I will certainly be coming back in the future to ask for advice on low light primes.
Having since discovered “cat eye” bokeh it appears every lens I have demonstrates it to some degree or another, as have most if not all lenses in the past barring the Samyang 50mm f1.4 FE II. Some are more noticeable than others, and most go away if you stop down 2/3 stop or so.
Following on, once you notice it you see it everywhere. For example it can be seen here on the Olympus 25mm f1.2
That’s encouraging to know i can stop down and it calms down a bit.
Wow that is a surprise.Did you know, a lot of what we hate in still photography is something that they embrace and pay EXTRA for in cinematography?
Just look at Cooke Lenses.
On the Product page, "The Cooke Look"
Take at look at what Hollywood production use these lenses. Then you realise these lenses embrace the look and the truth is....people either don't notice or they LOVE it, they are on lenses that cost 5 figures.
Cat eye bokeh is due to optical vignetting so therefore is only seen on the periphery of the image. Here you can see the difference in bokeh of the 50mm f1.2 GM at the centre compared to mid frame and corner and also the same when stopped down.
I've just had a look on here and can't see anything regarding cat eye bokeh? They talk about colour, fall off, flare etc and the only thing I found about bokeh was on the primes page.Did you know, a lot of what we hate in still photography is something that they embrace and pay EXTRA for in cinematography?
Just look at Cooke Lenses.
On the Product page, "The Cooke Look"
Take at look at what Hollywood production use these lenses. Then you realise these lenses embrace the look and the truth is....people either don't notice or they LOVE it, they are on lenses that cost 5 figures.
www.sonyalpharumors.com
No idea, can’t think what product no other manufacturer has done. No doubt it’ll be an overhyped disappointmentAre we ready to be WoW'd?
Confirmed: Sony “WOW” product announcement coming soon after the CP+ show – sonyalpharumors
If it's a camera I suppose it could be more video orientated as that seems to be the way things are going, but it's also broader interest. Hmmm. I suppose we'll soon know.
Beckford church by Andy Williams, on Flickr
DSC01266-1 by Andy Williams, on Flickr
Beckford Nature Reserve by Andy Williams, on Flickr
As you know I really liked the Samyang rendering as well, I sometimes wonder if I did the right thing. That being said stopping the GM down to f1.4 to match the Sammy results in more rounded bokeh, and from my tests the GM had more shallow DOF and smoother OOF areas for a given aperture.
I must be going blind, I’ve gone through multiple pages on the Cooke site and can’t see one single example of cat eye bokeh
There’s some slight ovoid shaped bokeh balls but that’s all I’ve seen.
