Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
just a quick sharpness test, no pp, jpg, no boost in sharpness, sorry its a bit dim.I saw results of that 8-16mm Sigma on Sigma bodies - they confirmed what I saw on NEX.
I think that small LUMIX is unbeatable among all APS-C cameras. Also u43 sensor gives larger DOF on smaller apertures.
You are at f/7.1. You should see 100% crop of 7-14mm in the same place at f/4, max f/5.6.8mm f/7.1 [...] not too terrible
Oh i don't doubt the 7-14 is superior-- it costs alot more and by all accounts is worth the money--and is way smaller obviously.You are at f/7.1. You should see 100% crop of 7-14mm in the same place at f/4, max f/5.6.
With E-PL1 or GF1 (or cheap G1 if you do not need video) + 7-14mm - you have:
- sharp picture without need to close down
- much smaller
- much lighter
- with AF
- with great video
Up to you
this shot was with the MD 24mm 2.8Any info about using MD lenses? I found there are 50mm like f/1.2, f/1.4, f/1.7.
There is one difference against rangefinder lenses - smaller min. focusing distance.
Any comments?
elmarit 90mm todayWow!
You have quite similar approach to mine ;-)
Enjoy and show us samples later!
I wonder if it aberrates as CV 50mm 1.1 or less.I want the 50/1.2 as well
i had the MD 50/1.2, but sold it last year. i loved it's color and the transition from in focus to out of focus. it's bokeh tends to have a lot of character and is probably busier than the cv 50/1.1. my MD 50/1.2 had a lot of loCA wide open but not much laCA. i suspect that the cv is sharper (at least wide open) from the samples i've seen. the cv should also have less ghosting due to it's aspherical design and will be smaller on the NEX (shorter adapter). the MD can focus much closer though (.45m if i remember correctly). i sold my MD because i determined that my canon FL 55mm f/1.2 was sharper wide open and stopped down while having less loCA. i do like the MD better than the canon though for portraits.I wonder if it aberrates as CV 50mm 1.1 or less.
Or - how much you need to close it down - to minimize chromatic aberration.
I saw samples from NEX and CV 50 1.1 - they look great when downsized, but not so encouraging - due to big chromatic aberration and lack of sharpness - when looking at bigger versions, not even 100% level.
I love the wild field in the foreground with the faint city in background. Very nice.i had the MD 50/1.2, but sold it last year. i loved it's color and the transition from in focus to out of focus. it's bokeh tends to have a lot of character and is probably busier than the cv 50/1.1. my MD 50/1.2 had a lot of loCA wide open but not much laCA. i suspect that the cv is sharper (at least wide open) from the samples i've seen. the cv should also have less ghosting due to it's aspherical design and will be smaller on the NEX (shorter adapter). the MD can focus much closer though (.45m if i remember correctly). i sold my MD because i determined that my canon FL 55mm f/1.2 was sharper wide open and stopped down while having less loCA. i do like the MD better than the canon though for portraits.
a couple of shots from the MD 50/1.2 (on 4/3 not the NEX since i sold it before i got the NEX):
wide open:
@f/5.6: