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!

NEX-7 lens comparison at lensrentals.com

There's a very interesting comparison of lenses (Sony, Sigma, Zeiss ZA, and even a Summilux) by Roger Cicala over at lensrentals:

LensRentals.com - NEX-7 Lens Imatest Resolution Comparison

I was particularly shocked to see the Imatest numbers for the Zeiss ZA 24/1.8, which I have and like very much: 475 wide-open at f/1.8, but increasing to 960 when stopped down to just f/2.8. I guess I've been so grateful to finally have a fast lens for a compact camera I hadn't quite grasped how much better it is when stopped down a bit.
 

mazor

New member
looks like the sigma 30 f2.8 e mount is a no brainer. Compactish, autofocus, and amazing IQ.

Now wish there was a 19mm f2.8 sigma e-mount test to decided on which to get.
 
looks like the sigma 30 f2.8 e mount is a no brainer. Compactish, autofocus, and amazing IQ.

Now wish there was a 19mm f2.8 sigma e-mount test to decided on which to get.
Mazor, they tested the 19mm in that same article. It did very well, just not as exemplary as the 30mm.
 

mazor

New member
ahh my bad for not reading carefully, was so distracted by the high MTF values of the 30mm f2.8 I did not see the 19mm which merges with the rest of the lens comparisons.

Wonder if Sigma will further make a 30mm f2.8 with OS in the future for e mount
 

jonoslack

Active member
The surprise for me in all this is the much derided 16mm sony pancake . . rather good really!
. . . and, of course, the Sigma
 

douglasf13

New member
The Sigma 30 and Sony/Zeiss 24 drive me nuts, because I have a hard time choosing between the two. I like the size and focal length of the Sigma, and I like the speed and build quality of the Zeiss, so I've been switching back and forth between the two. If the Sigma would have been f2, it would have been about perfect, but I'm getting by with f2.8 most of the time.

FWIW, I don't notice much difference in sharpness between the two from f2.8 on.
 
The Sigma 30 and Sony/Zeiss 24 drive me nuts, because I have a hard time choosing between the two. I like the size and focal length of the Sigma, and I like the speed and build quality of the Zeiss, so I've been switching back and forth between the two. If the Sigma would have been f2, it would have been about perfect, but I'm getting by with f2.8 most of the time.

FWIW, I don't notice much difference in sharpness between the two from f2.8 on.
I found out how well the Zeiss is built last week when the lanyard I had the camera latched onto snapped and it dropped a good 3 1/2 feet unto concrete pavement. It landed on the front edge of the barrel and other than a little scuff, no dent, no focus issues, nothing...
 

douglasf13

New member
I found out how well the Zeiss is built last week when the lanyard I had the camera latched onto snapped and it dropped a good 3 1/2 feet unto concrete pavement. It landed on the front edge of the barrel and other than a little scuff, no dent, no focus issues, nothing...
That's a great sign. I was surprised that my little Zeiss 24 is made out of a similar barrel material as my ZA primes. The Sigma doesn't give me tons of confidence in its build, but, at $199, I'm not too worried.
 

ustein

Contributing Editor
>The Sigma doesn't give me tons of confidence in its build, but, at $199, I'm not too worried.

Me neither. I thought it was pretty good but did not expect it to be checking out that well.
 

mazor

New member
The surprise for me in all this is the much derided 16mm sony pancake . . rather good really!
. . . and, of course, the Sigma
think the 16mm pancake starts creeping up to the zoom 18-55 and 18-200 when stopped down to f4. I have read that the 16mm becomes sharp at the corners when stopped down to f8 for my copy

thats why I prefer the cv 15 as even at 4.5 corner sharpness seems better than my 16mm at 5.6 even on my 5n
 

alphaman

New member
I seem to remember some interview with Sigma where they stated that the high quality of the lenses was the prime concern, rather than the size (the interview was criticizing them for not having made the lenses pancakes).

Well, it looks like they succeeded! What great little gems!

I hope we soon see some more from Sigma.
 

douglasf13

New member
Makes sense, Alphaman. When you look into the rear of the lens, the aperture/exit pupil is very far away from the sensor. This lenses are highly telecentric, and it a little length was a good trade off. They're still pretty small lenses.
 
Top