Zeiss Batis 25 versus Canon 24mm TSE ll lens

[jlm]

bear in mind these lenses are of quite different purpose, reflected in usable image circle, mechanics, aperture use, size, etc. personally if i'm shooting that wide, i want rise/fall much more that f2.8

 

[Ken_R]

Erik the lower left corner is MUCH better on the TS-E shot. Also I see quite a bit of CA on the TSE shot (edge of roof tiles). Maybe the metabones adapter is misaligned a bit (decentering?). Also, in the TS-E lens is easy to have a tiny bit of tilt dialed in by mistake which will alter results slightly.It is also a finiky lens to nail focus. The TSE lens works great even when shifted so your results are bit surprising. (the cover glass thickness of the Sony also affect sharpness with some lenses not designed for it, see Roger's blog on lensrental.com, he has lots of info on this)

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Ken,

Thank for your observations. Just a few comments:

• The Sony lens is quite a bit unsharp in the corners, I wanted the Canon as a high quality alternative and also wanted the T&S
• Regarding the tilt, it has a lock for tilt and that was activated for that shot
• Misalignment on the metabones is possible, hard to check without another canon lens.
• I have noticed focusing was not easy, it doesn't snap in and out of focus
• I have also seen the CA, but I have seen similar CA on one of Chris Barrets samples with the Canon 24/3.5 TSE on a Sony A7r
• The cover glass thing is not relevant. To begin with it is similar thickness to what Canon uses (around 2 mm I guess). Also the Canon lens is clearly a retrofocus design with the outlet pupil far from the sensor plane.

Just to say, I found the Sony zoom far better than I expected, but it is known to be very sharp at the center and having pretty bad corners.

A months ago I have shot with the lens on my friends Canon 5DIII and compared it to his brand new Canon 16-35/4L. We expected it to perform better.

Thanks for taking time to answer my posting!

Best regards
Erik

Erik the lower left corner is MUCH better on the TS-E shot. Also I see quite a bit of CA on the TSE shot (edge of roof tiles). Maybe the metabones adapter is misaligned a bit (decentering?). Also, in the TS-E lens is easy to have a tiny bit of tilt dialed in by mistake which will alter results slightly.It is also a finiky lens to nail focus. The TSE lens works great even when shifted so your results are bit surprising. (the cover glass thickness of the Sony also affect sharpness with some lenses not designed for it, see Roger's blog on lensrental.com, he has lots of info on this)

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Yes, sharpening can make the Canon keeping up with the Sony lens.

Best regards
Erik

Erik,
Is there a lens profile for the Sony 24-70?
I noticed there is not a lens profile for the 24 TSE when I was doing some comparison shooting this morning.

If there is a profile for the Sony lens it makes it hard to do a comparison since there is know way to know what sharpening or contrast is baked into the profile.

The details you provided look as though contrast, clarity and sharpening would go a long way toward getting the TSE looking similar to the Sony.

 

[Zlatko Batistich]

Re: Not very happy with my 24/3.5 TSE… much interested in observations

These were shot on the Sony Alpha A7rII with the Metabones adapter. Sony 24-70/2.8 at f/6.3 and Canon 24/3.5 TSE LII at f/11.

Why not compare them at the same aperture? The A7RII is probably diffraction limited at around f/8, so f/11 will be a little less sharp than f/6.3. (The 50mp 5DS is diffraction limited at f/6.7.)

The Digital Picture shows that the 24/3.5 TSE II is less sharp at f/11 than it is at f/5.6 (on a 1DsIII, when viewing at 100%). The difference is subtle but real:
Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II Tilt-Shift Lens Image Quality
(mouse over the chart for f/11)

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Re: Not very happy with my 24/3.5 TSE… much interested in observations

Hi,

Thanks for the observation!

I also have aperture f/8 shots with the Canon, same building another day. At that time I shot an aperture series. The lens is a bit sharper at the center at f/8. With corners its is a bit mixed.

The reason I used f/11 for this shot was that I was not very happy with the corners of the previous shot.

It may be that I should be happy with my Sony 24-70/2.8ZA and not unhappy with my Canon 24/3.5LII?

Best regards
Erik

Why not compare them at the same aperture? The A7RII is probably diffraction limited at around f/8, so f/11 will be a little less sharp than f/6.3. (The 50mp 5DS is diffraction limited at f/6.7.)

The Digital Picture shows that the 24/3.5 TSE II is less sharp at f/11 than it is at f/5.6 (on a 1DsIII, when viewing at 100%). The difference is subtle but real:
Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II Tilt-Shift Lens Image Quality
(mouse over the chart for f/11)

 

[anGy]

TSE do not have any profiles available in any raw program.its a shift lens so they have no real standard point to go by.

Alpa does make a very nice tool for correction distortion of shifted lenses. Unfortunately last time I checked it was still not available for the Canon TS-E lenses (only for Schneider & Rodenstock series). Was hoping that the Canon TS-E profiles would be added after they released their FPS adapter and also wrote that to Alpa. But no answer.

When no shift (or little shift) is done, I'm quite happy correcting the 24mm TS-E distortion (low but visible) by applying the 24mm F1.4 II Canon lens profile @ 65% in Capture 1. Works for me.

 

[Pradeep]

I bought the Canon 24 TSE II when it first came out. Must say I was not impressed. Did not seem much sharper than my 24-105, sold it a few years later. It is possible that mine was not an optimal copy.

Now, the Batis 25 on my A7RII is about the sharpest combination of camera and lens in that format I've seen, and I've owned many of Canon's best at one time or the other.

The one thing we may be missing is that in the TSE plus Sony combo, the adapter is a big factor and may add quirks of its own. And then you lose AF because these are manual focus lenses. For me there would be no real reason to use a TSE lens since I do no architectural work and for panos I still find nodal stitching at slightly longer focal lengths shot in portrait orientation to be a better solution.