[normhead]

In this poll, just decide which lens you like best and select it's number, all images of the same number are the same. Sorry about the colour balance, the sun went in during the test. No need to guess which lens is which, just indicate a preference. All are shot at ƒ5.6 except one is shot at ƒ4. You can guess which one is the ƒ4. You can also guess which one is the Super Tak.

The only PP was white balance and levels. No sharpening, contrast or other effects were used.

The camera used was my K-5.

I had changing light conditions, please don't use colour rendition in your evaluation. The light isn't constant.

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


Here are the helper, pixel peepers.

Center


Edge


Out of focus. (Bokeh)


The lenses used, in no particular order are the DA 35 2.4, the Super Tak 35mm 3.5, the Tamron 17-50, the FA 35-80, the FA-J 18-35, and the DA 18-135 and the DA 18-55. You don't need to guess which is which lens is which just a preference. Results in 4 days.

---

Last edited by normhead; 01-30-2016 at 07:52 AM.

[bertwert]

hard choice. Six I think...

[debakarma]

the 5th & 6th are the best of the lot -

[Alex645]

Cool comparison. Thanks! I almost wish you didn't identify what we were looking at, as I know it almost altered my vote. Hard to choose as some have better color rendition, while others sharpness, etc.

[beachgardener]

5 it is

[Conqueror]

5 I think... took me awhile to decide though (between 5 and 3)... I'd put 3 as 2nd

[ivanvernon]

I. 5
II. 4 or 5
III. 6
IV. 5

So I have already voted on number 5. Very curious to see which lens this is! Nice test.

[Claudiu]

5 for me also...after that, 3;
We waiting the surprise...

[Nicolas06]

Beware ! On this test really the most visible difference are:
- what is in focus really... It change from pictures to pictures. The 5 for example is clearly focussed on the back calendar and the front is slightly out of focus... And of course there no really that much bokeh, you can see the printing artifacts from the background on the 5th picture. Looking the picture with the most sharp foreground (3, 7) are the one with the most blury background (3 & 7 again).
- for most other lenses the focus, while not always on the same part of the picture is more on the front plane.
- the white balences and colors? How is it linked to the lenses and to the shoting conditions or camera? On my monitor (far from perfect), 3,4,5 have a blueish cast. The 1 and 6 have the better colors (to my liking) because the exposure for me is better, suit the subject better.
- there different magnification levels, the 1,6,7 pictures have significantly less magnification than the 2,3 and 4...

So?

Well for me 1,2 and 4 are have really nothing sharp... Either that's photographer error or that not so great lenses in term of sharpness, really. The 6 is like a bit of the same, the 6 borders are not that good... even if 1 and 6 have the best colors, I would assume this is a white balence and incoming light issue.

To me the picture with the most potential is picture 5.

The 6 get lot of vote because to me because the white balence really better and it has a sharp center. Still I vote for 5.

But really there as much here from variations and photographer technique than there is to lenses. Maybe even more.

[RuiC]

I prefer #6 followed closely by #7

[normhead]

But really there as much here from variations and photographer technique than there is to lenses. Maybe even more.

Where are your lens comparisons Nicholas? It would be interesting in noting how you got better results... oops, you've got nothing. Just blowing hot air as usual. In absence of perfect, the imperfect will have to do.

Methodology used.

All shots taken from the same position with the same camera.

- I continued shooting with each lens until I got a good sharp image, some lenses required 20 images before they produced a sharp image... after 20 images I'm satisfied that this is as good as I'm going to get. But some produced a tak sharp image (for that lens) in the first five tries.

- All the images I relied on AF, which if you'll remember tested better for stationary objects than comparable Nikon or Canon cameras with over 95% of it's images in acceptable focus for stationary objects. Most cameras tested were below. I was looking for a little be better than "acceptable focus", I was looking for "the best the lens can do" irregardless of how many tries it took to get it.

-in the case of the Tak, I didn't have enough light to focus stopped down when I used it, and I end up doing 15 images with a small rotation after each image until I got an image that compared favourably with the DA 35.

- a two second delay (and subsequent mirror lock) was used

-as noted above, the sun went behind cloud while I was shooting, and later in the test came back out. I don't own any pro lighting that would have enabled me to completely control the light. Contributions are welcome.


-the camera was focused on the top of the greenish feeater in the middle of the frame, but in the end, the ragged edge at the bottom of the pixel peeper centre comparisons, disregard what Nicholas said about different focus point. If that feather tip was sharp as i could get it with that lens, I used that image. Sometimes the dude just doesn't have clue what he's talking about.

images were shot in batches of 5, and reduced to the best, then either used in the trial or reshot. Altogether there were four rounds. The DA 35 and 18-135 DA 18-55 and Tamron 17-50 produced good sharp images in the first round. The FA 35-80 and FA-J 18-35 in the second, it took 4 rounds to get the Takamur, but, that was as much because of lack of light coupled with manual focus as anything else.

All in all the test was quite simple yet still took most of an afternoon. Someone with endless amounts of time, a testing bench and a controlled lighting set up in their basement could do better, if you have that stuff, have at her.

However, I don't use a testing bench, controlled lighting or endless amounts of time. This is a real world test in real word conditions.

For a general walking around lens, IMHO, all lenses were acceptably sharp, but a few were exceptional.

[timb64]

I think Nicholas would like an option 8 "Gallic shrug emoji"!

[Andy123]

In this poll, just decide which lens you like best and select it's number, all images of the same number are the same. Sorry about the colour balance, the sun went in during the test. No need to guess which lens is which, just indicate a preference. All are shot at ƒ5.6 except one is shot at ƒ4. You can guess which one is the ƒ4. You can also guess which one is the Super Tak.

The only PP was white balance and levels. No sharpening, contrast or other effects were used.

The camera used was my K-5.

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


Here are the helper, pixel peepers.

Center


Edge


Out of focus. (Bokeh)


The lenses used, in no particular order are the DA 35 2.4, the Super Tak 35mm 3.5, the Tamron 17-50, the FA 35-80, the FA-J 18-35, and the DA 18-135 and the DA 18-55. You don't need to guess which is which lens is which just a preference. Results in 4 days.

Nice comparison ... Difficult choice particularly between 3, 4, 5, and 6. I ended up picking 4, I just liked the color and contrast best, focusing on the right side, but noting that the comparison was on an ipad which may effect the choice. If I get a chance, I may look again on a computer. Thanks again great test.
Andy

[normhead]

Cool comparison. Thanks! I almost wish you didn't identify what we were looking at, as I know it almost altered my vote. Hard to choose as some have better color rendition, while others sharpness, etc.

I had changing light conditions, please don't use colour rendition in your evaluation. The light isn't constant.

[Nicolas06]

Where are your lens comparisons Nicholas? It would be interesting in noting how you got better results... oops, you've got nothing. Just blowing hot air as usual. In absence of perfect, the imperfect will have to do.

Man I'am sorry if you take it personnaly but there no denying of variation in color rendering, exposure, white balence and focus between shots. The 5 clearly is focussed on the background were we clearly see the dithering from printing on your bokeh crop while the others are blury.

Maybe I am 100% wrong and the 1,2 and 4 picture come from the best lenses you have and the 5 from the worst. We will see when you'll give the results.

If you want me to do the tests, you can send me your lenses, I have only the 35mm f/2.8 ltd covering 35mm you know. We discussed this quite a few time already but I tend to not have 10 lenses covering the same range. I like to keep a small and light bag. I am not collecting lenses and I'am not that interrested in spending the afternoon doing tests... I reckon, the most liekly results is that I would make an error somewhere and that the test would not be very meaningful. Sure that it would have been interresting to have a set of high end lenses too like FA35, sigma 35 Art of FA43 ltd, but I don't think it would be fair to expect you to rend or buy them for the test. Don't expect me to buy lenses I have no use so I could just do a comparison test you would have the opportunity to criticize.

Finally for a test I would be most interrested in a landscape to check distant sharpness performance or bokeh for the pop and subject isolation. We have different interrest and subjects matter.

I took your test for what I think it was: a fair try to provide lenses comparison, the best you could. To me like in the previous one it show that the lenses were the less important factor in the actual outcome of getting a pleasing image. I think this is also the conclusion you tend to have for yourself but I may be wrong.

But this is also tailored in the test being done. Quite easy focal length, quite easy apperture. It is difficult to find a faulty lens at such settings. The only challenging part really is the near focussing distance...

This is a real world test in real word conditions.

Real world test? Real world conditions? Really ? And how often do you shoot calendars with tripod taking 20 nearly identical shots keeping the best one outside of test sessions ?

You did try to do the best, and i think you methodology was good except for using AF and relying on changing lighting conditions. I guess that why reviewers use artificial lighting and MF. You could just have closed the windows and used artificial light, the one you use to see at nigh and I would agree this is quite boring thing to do.

But I don't think any of us shoot this way in the field, except maybe people doing product photography.