Any thoughts on how the 25mm compare to the 35mm, one of my favorites?
Tom
Tom,
Once I decided on the 645D, I started acquiring lenses, and it has grown into quite an arsenal. Of all my 67 and 645 lenses, the 645-A 35mm has been my favorite as it compliments my shooting style well. Probably 75 to 80 percent of my photos on the 645D have been taken with that lens. It's a sharp lens and I feel I'm getting the quality - sharpness wise - as when I was using a 4x5. I'm getting much better results than I got with my 67 using the 45mm lens, due in part that all my old 6x7 work was hyper-focused (I bought into all the rubbish about circles of confusion, and viewing distance and all the other pontifications that were just excuses for not having a sharp image). With the 35mm, I almost never shoot hyper-focally. I usually try using f/11 and shoot several slices and combine them later with either ZereneStacker or Helicon Focus and rarely Photoshop. I'm usually using 3 or 4 slices at f/11, but that all depends on how close I am and sometimes its as many as 6 or 7.
I have only used the 25mm a couple times so I can't say too much yet with any authority, but I can give some initial impressions.
The photos I've taken with the 25mm so far have all been single image captures. The depth of field with that lens is so great that all that business of focus stacking and extra photoshop work can be reduced significantly. But……I was using a smaller aperture to insure focus and thereby introducing a bit of diffraction. Of course I can always focus stack for the sharpest possible image. Perfectionism vs Lazynism.
Because of the large depth of field, I think this lens is going to open up a lot of "small world" type of images like the pond shots. Shots that I wouldn't have considered before where I can get close and explore the little spaces.
As I'm sure you are aware, it's big and relatively heavy. Not that big a deal, but it will limit lens selection on longer hikes with a concern with keeping the pack weight down. You can't use a front filter. I like having a good quality (B+W) filter on my lenses so any cleaning will be done on the filter and not the front lens element. It makes me a little nervous to have the front of the lens exposed. I also use split neutral density filters a lot. Almost all of my lenses, with few exceptions, have the Lee adapter ring mounted to the lens front. I use the Lee hood which accommodates the rectangular filters. It makes it very easy to shade and use the filters. With the 25mm, it seems the built in petal hood comes out too far to mount the Lee holder without getting vignetting. I don't like the idea of hand holding the filter. I'll have to play with this some more and try to come up with some kind of solution. (The first - Japan only - 25mm has a shorter hood and I've seen solutions for that lens that work with the filters).
The 35mm has an aperture ring and the 25mm has to be set with a dial - no biggy.
I think it's going to be harder to shoot with regards to perspective control. I'm not used to something this wide, and if the lens is out of square, it's going to produce converging lines. This can be used creatively, but most often can be problematic. I imagine the Tech Cam crowd were cringing with the pond photos I posted. The distortion is very apparent with those. The other shot with the grasses and lone tree, I used the vertical transform tool in Lightroom to straighten the trees in the corners and thereby cropping the image.
Chromatic Aberration is very apparent, but cleans up easily but not always entirely in Lightroom. My solution might be to take a double whack at it in photoshop.
I think I will really like this lens. Most of it's issues can be mitigated with careful craft and technique. I think it's going to open up all kinds of imaging possibilities.
I'll post some of my 35mm photos that use slices and yesterday I used the 25mm, so I'll post that shot also.
Rick