The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

New 45mm S vs 30-90 zoom? Any thoughts?

topoxforddoc

New member
Why would you choose focal length combo depending on one or two bodies?
I don't think I would like to carry 2 S-bodies. In this case I really would need an assistant ;)
The S bodies aren't that much bigger/heavier than a DMR. I normally tote 2 DMRs around at music festivals, with a 50/2 and the 180/2.
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
I wound up buying the 30-90mm zoom, and while it is very good, I subsequently bought the 45mm and tend to shoot only the prime lenses. The zoom is very versatile, but for my purposes the edges and corners are not sharp enough to be a good general purpose lens. It is better at 30-50mm or so, but at about 60mm and up the lens is quite soft in the edges, and never gets sharp enough that the transition isn't apparent in large prints. Small prints would look fine. Since I am mostly photographing things far away that are mostly equidistant, this behavior is very visible. In a closer range, more 3d environment, this would be much less apparent.

At first I thought it was a problem with my lens or body, but I went on a visit to Leica and brought both, and they looked at them and tested them, and pronounced them both as performing perfectly. The behavior is hinted at in the MTF charts...there is a fairly strong dip in performance at the edges...tangential structures are below 20% contrast at some apertures and focal lengths. If you compare this to the MTF of the 45mm for example, even at 2.8 it barely dips below 40%, and at 5.6 it is all above 60%. In the real world, this means fuzzy edges. If the convenience is more important than edge to edge performance, then get the zoom. If you want the best possible results from a technical standpoint, don't believe the marketing that the zoom is "as good as the prime". It is on center, but not in the field.

The major caveat to all this is that it is still a superbly good lens, just not as superbly good.
You could just cut off the edges!



Here is another photo at 90mm that did not show much of a problem. Most are just fine as long as you don't look too closely or compare them to the primes.

 

aDam007

New member
Why would you choose focal length combo depending on one or two bodies?
I don't think I would like to carry 2 S-bodies. In this case I really would need an assistant ;)
Sorry just seen this.

I think two bodies are necessary when shooting a wedding. Or at least for the types of shots I like to get, I prefer using two bodies. I find the 1Dx to be almost the same weight as the S-006, but less friendly to grip. So the weight doesn't bother me so much.

Only if I had two S-006 bodies, I'd have the 45/100. Alone 45 is just a bit to wide for my use, and 100 is a bit to long for my use. However if I had two bodies and didn't need to switch lenses, they're perfect FLs for my work.

When I only have one body, I'd much rather use a 50 equivalent (the 70-S) and just take a few steps back and a few steps forward. Then if I REALLY need to, switch the the 120 or 35 as needed (I'm looking to buy a 35, if I can find one at a fair price).

Hope this clears things up.
 

aDam007

New member
I have a question for the OP..

Are you really more worried about overall corner performance then the look/feel of the lens?

To be honest, I find the S-system lenses to be more even tempered, but the M-system lenses are moody. So when I'm hunting for a lens I want, I really don't pay much attention to tech details, but more to the look of the lens. Perhaps this is because I don't shoot landscapes, but would the zoom be as nice in it's rendering as the prime. And does that matter to you at all?

Since you now have both, what is your feeling about the mood/drawing style or whatever you call it of the lenses?

I'm actually curious because if the zoom has good mood but poor corner performance, it might be fine for me as an in-studio lens.
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
It is more the edge performance than the corner performance (the corner is often sky or foreground, but the edge is real image detail). I also think that it is an integral part of the look and feel of the lens. Seeing as I am often taking landscape shots and printing them at a meter and a half wide, the edge performance is important. The main reason it is so important is that the transition from extremely sharp to soft is clearly visible in the prints, and is disturbing to the eye. I will look for samples, but it is actually a really busy day today, so I don't have time to make them right now.

I will repeat as well that I think the zoom is lovely in every other way than this one. The distortion does not bother me, the bokeh is very nice, and it is great to handle. The color and contrast is excellent and it pairs well with the rest of the S lens line other than the fact that it does not fair well in the edges. For me that is a deal breaker. If you are a wedding shooter or working in the studio with people, I think it is very unlikely to bother you. You might not even notice it.
 

satybhat

Member
Stuart, thanks for the comments.
Edge performance would be an issue for me for the landscaping shots: F11 and above. Have you noticed a reduced edge performance at these stops as well ?
 

RVB

Member
Stuart, thanks for the comments.
Edge performance would be an issue for me for the landscaping shots: F11 and above. Have you noticed a reduced edge performance at these stops as well ?
I also have this lens,I agree with everything Stuart said,its not bad at the edges at the wider end but past 60 its starting to suffer,F11 makes no difference imo..

Rob
 
Top