- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Panasonic, think its a f3.5-5.6 kit lens and its IQ is on level you'd expect from a kit lens.
The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!
- Thread starter woof woof
- Start date
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,712
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 17,355
- Name
- Bob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It was a 12-60mm kit lens.
I had one and it was actually not a bad lens....
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,712
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I think there's a FF 20-60mm or something like that for one of the new mirrorless systems. Unless I imagined it all.
Ah Ha!...
- Messages
- 17,355
- Name
- Bob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ah, ok...
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Good enough for a lot of people a lot of the time then
indeed, not one I'd personally carry but yeah full points for panasonic thinking and designing lenses away from the standard. I like that their 24-105mm and the new 70-300mm can actually focus down to give 0.5x macro capability. I have really liked their lens designs on FF mirrorless.
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,712
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I keep meaning to try to use my 28-70mm f3.5-5.6 more but when it comes to it I always seem to pick something else unless I do force myself.
I do think that even a technically quite poor (to us geeks) 20-60mm might be a good option for good light whole pictures when sharpness and distortion may matter less rather than the nit picking pixel peeping I/we sometimes do A lens like that could make a good day out and holiday lens when partnered with something else, maybe a fast prime.
I do think that even a technically quite poor (to us geeks) 20-60mm might be a good option for good light whole pictures when sharpness and distortion may matter less rather than the nit picking pixel peeping I/we sometimes do
A lens like that could make a good day out and holiday lens when partnered with something else, maybe a fast prime.
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I keep meaning to try to use my 28-70mm f3.5-5.6 more but when it comes to it I always seem to pick something else unless I do force myself.
I do think that even a technically quite poor (to us geeks) 20-60mm might be a good option for good light whole pictures when sharpness and distortion may matter less rather than the nit picking pixel peeping I/we sometimes do
not so much the technical/optical competence that's a problem, its not wide enough for me to not take a UWA lens and its not long enough that I'd drop a telephoto lens.
I'd much prefer to carry a UWA+28-200mm or 24-105 instead of UWA+20-60mm+telezoom.
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Sigma make a 24-35mm F2 zoom - but thats not exactly small or light either
- Messages
- 23,648
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I bought this as a light travel lens, but then bought the 24-70mm instead. The size and weight of the new Sigma looks great, only being fractionally bigger and heavier than the 24-70mm f4, but I can't help think that I'd miss the extra 4mm if I replaced the 24-70mm with it.I keep meaning to try to use my 28-70mm f3.5-5.6 more but when it comes to it I always seem to pick something else unless I do force myself.
I do think that even a technically quite poor (to us geeks) 20-60mm might be a good option for good light whole pictures when sharpness and distortion may matter less rather than the nit picking pixel peeping I/we sometimes do
24mm top, 28mm bottom
Screenshot 2021-03-03 at 16.18.15 by TDG-77, on Flickr
Screenshot 2021-03-03 at 16.18.36 by TDG-77, on Flickr
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I bought this as a light travel lens, but then bought the 24-70mm instead. The size and weight of the new Sigma looks great, only being fractionally bigger and heavier than the 24-70mm f4, but I can't help think that I'd miss the extra 4mm if I replaced the 24-70mm with it.
24mm top, 28mm bottom
the difference is definitely noticeable, more so when you are shooting in tight spaces or indoors.
When I had the 24-105mm I used to mostly get away without having to change to an UWA lens. With the 28-200mm, I don't even bother trying because I know I will need a wide angle.
For outdoorsy stuff with lot of room, the difference isn't so big that you couldn't replicate the results using your feet.
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I bought this as a light travel lens, but then bought the 24-70mm instead. The size and weight of the new Sigma looks great, only being fractionally bigger and heavier than the 24-70mm f4, but I can't help think that I'd miss the extra 4mm if I replaced the 24-70mm with it.
24mm top, 28mm bottom
I had the same thoughts when I chopped in my Fuji 14mm (21mm FF) for the 16mm (24mm FF), for landscapes I've found it makes very little difference, but where it is noticeable is in cityscapes or interior architecture, here that extra mm of focal length can count, and often you are tight on space and can't move backwards. only option then is to stitch.
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
A1 dynamic range measurements out:
results only available for mechanical shutter at the moment but dpreview image quality review today shows there is insignificant loss in IQ from using fully electronic shutter
www.dpreview.com
Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting
photonstophotos.net
results only available for mechanical shutter at the moment but dpreview image quality review today shows there is insignificant loss in IQ from using fully electronic shutter
Sony a1 review
The Sony Alpha 1 is Sony's flagship mirrorless camera for, well, just about anything. With a 50MP sensor, it gives you tons of resolution, but it also lets you fire off burst images at 30 fps for fast action sports. Add in 8K video capture and you have a really impressive package.
www.dpreview.com
- Messages
- 23,648
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Exactly. Tbh when I went to the Sagrada Familia I wish I’d got a 16 or 18mm
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
or a 12mm
I am having a go with tamron 17-28mm to complement the 28-200mm. I'll see how that goes for now.
I really do wish that rumour about sony 16mm f1.8 is true though.
- Messages
- 17,355
- Name
- Bob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've been reading some comparison reviews between the Sony 16-35mm f4 and the Tamron 17-28mm f2.8or a 12mm
I am having a go with tamron 17-28mm to complement the 28-200mm. I'll see how that goes for now.
I really do wish that rumour about sony 16mm f1.8 is true though.
and the tamron gets great reviews.
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Roger's line from lensrentals blog made me want to try it out - "The 17-28mm, in particular, is about as close to magically violating the “price, size, optical quality” pyramid as you’re likely to get."
MTF Tests of the Tamron 17-28mm and 28-75mm f/2.8 Di III RXD Lenses
Tamron has a nice set of three f/2.8 zooms for Sony E mount cameras. Today I'm putting out MTF results for the 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD and the 28-75mm f/2.8 Di III RXD. They offer a reasonably priced alternative to Sony-branded lenses, and Tamron has been making good products lately. I'll admit...
www.lensrentals.com
- Messages
- 23,648
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I don’t really want to mess changing lenses when out being a tourist if I can help it.or a 12mm
I am having a go with tamron 17-28mm to complement the 28-200mm. I'll see how that goes for now.
I really do wish that rumour about sony 16mm f1.8 is true though.
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
having two bodies is key
if you can make your missus carry the second one for you then even better.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 23,648
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
All the Tamron “Holy Trinity” lenses are supposedly top notch, I just find the focal lengths a bit odd. 16-35mm is a more usable range for me
- Messages
- 3,350
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Had a go at the water shot I was asking for help on but the flat light made for no drama and a much easier autofocus test which the A9 easily managed. Hoping for some low light and I will try the shot I have in mind.
Shaking all over by Simon Wootton, on Flickr
Shaking all over by Simon Wootton, on Flickr
- Messages
- 6,951
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I’ve thought about that combination as on paper it’s a good two lens landscape set up. Trading in the Sony 24-105 to do it is what’s stopping me at the moment. The tamron lenses UK new price are about the price of the 24-105 and 70-200 f4 used. I’ve never had a tamron lens and it feels difficult to make the switch, especially if it doesn’t work out.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 23,537
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
If they were the same price I'd sacrifice a little quality for the extra versatility of the 16-35 that could be a true walk-about around town lens. 17-28 is just not versatile enough.
- Messages
- 17,355
- Name
- Bob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Depending on where you buy from the difference is as little as £69
- Messages
- 23,648
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I’ve found the quality of the 16-35mm f4 to be excellent, but it’s not a lens I’ve used wide open so cannot comment what it’s like at f4.
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Stopped down to f8 the tamron is rather sharp even at 200mm and I dare say possibly sharper than 70-200mm f4 in corners.
The 70-200mm f4 is one of the oldest e-mount lenses and shows its age. If I were looking for max sharpness for landscapes at 200mm I'd go with tamron 70-180mm and crop a little.
As for 24-105mm vs. 28-200mm it's hard to tell the difference on a 24mp apart from in extreme corners. On 61mp 24-105mm is definitely better across the range at f4. Stopped down to f8 tamron catches up to a good extent.
So for landscapes I am not sure how much you stand to gain or lose from carrying all that weight but that's really up to you.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 6,951
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
the big draw of the 28-200 is it could be a one lens set up for taking up mountains. i don’t really use the wide end of the 24-105 for mountains. I’m more of a 70-200 range for mountains. It would be both lighter and stop the need to swap lenses, both big plus points. I’m sure it would be a good option and would be good enough for my needs, but there’s just a stupid niggling feeling that I’d be making a mistake. it’s the what if I get a high MP body in the future that makes me think twice. I’d need something wider than 28mm and the 24-105 isn’t really wide enough to warrant keeping. Both the 17-28 and 28-200 would be around 1kg which is very good compared to the Sony f4 lens equivalent.
Last edited:
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,712
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
A1 dynamic range measurements out:
Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting
photonstophotos.net
results only available for mechanical shutter at the moment but dpreview image quality review today shows there is insignificant loss in IQ from using fully electronic shutter
Sony a1 review
The Sony Alpha 1 is Sony's flagship mirrorless camera for, well, just about anything. With a 50MP sensor, it gives you tons of resolution, but it also lets you fire off burst images at 30 fps for fast action sports. Add in 8K video capture and you have a really impressive package.
I don't know what's going there. The DR at base seems to be under 12 stops in the graph and in the listing. That'd put it on a par with my old Canon 5D? That can't be right can it? Interestingly they list the A7 as 10.82 whereas DXO say 14.
Me no understandie why the numbers are all over the place.
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
its not like its terrible on 61mp, stopped down its pretty competent tbh.
If you mostly care about long end then its quite good for that. the tamron 70-180mm is also an option, its the sharpest one compared to the other two 70-200mm options.
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
numbers aren't all over the place, its that they are on two different scales.
you can't directly compare DXO numbers with Bill's number unless you convert one from the other (results of which he has also published on his website if you want to a comparison between two data sets)
Bill's explained it on dpreview:
Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR) is a More Useful Measure than the DxOMark Landscape Score: Photographic Science and Technology Forum: Digital Photography Review
Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
www.dpreview.com
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 23,648
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I don’t profess to understand a great deal of that tbh, but it’s apparent that both have their place. As I read it DXO provides an absolute score and therefore what the sensor is truly capable of, whereas Bill’s site shows you what you’re likely to get in the real world, is this a fair summation?numbers aren't all over the place, its that they are on two different scales.
you can't directly compare DXO numbers with Bill's number unless you convert one from the other (results of which he has also published on his website if you want to a comparison between two data sets)
Bill's explained it on dpreview:
Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR) is a More Useful Measure than the DxOMark Landscape Score: Photographic Science and Technology Forum: Digital Photography Review
Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
pretty much, DXO's is the "engineering" dynamic range which is what Sony quote when they say you get 15-stops or whatever their marketing claims these days. in reality you do not get anywhere close to that.
but issue I have with DXO is its inconsistencies and inaccuracies with their data plus lack of transparency on how they got it all of which we discussed recently
- Messages
- 15,880
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I wouldn't say higher in most cases it seems to be the same (or within the error margins to be considered the same).
though I am sure I have seen the odd one or two where it's been higher.
Unfortunately I do not have the answer for this, but Bill does respond to emails or private messages on dpreview. by all means ping him and he might respond with an answer.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 23,648
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 3,133
- Edit My Images
- No
So buy the Amazon one because it will be good enough. Lol
- Messages
- 3,106
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'd like a APS 10mm-70mm or 15mm-85mm FF but they wouldn't make it even if it was feasible, as they want to sell two lenses instead of one.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 3,350
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That is pretty much what I took from it. I would get if there was something innovative about the bag but it is a shoulder bag pretty much. Some will want the option of the cheaper bag with lesser material and some will want a more premium bag from a known and trusted manufacturer. Two slightly different markets for me.