Originally posted by jddwoods am curious what primes you have that are sharper than the 16-85 and if you are comparing in crop mode.
My lenses are listed in my signature...
I did not say "sharper", I said optically better. Sharpness is a part of that, but also are rendering, colours, bokeh, aberrations, distortion, etc.
For the record, the lenses I can compare it with are the DA21, DA40, FA43, FA77, DFA 100 macro WR, DA 60-250. I
really like the 16-85, it's reliable and with few flaws, what it lacks when compared with those other lenses is the small magical touch...
Originally posted by northcoastgreg However, I've only shot the 16-85 on APS-C and the 28-105 on the K-1
That's the intended use case, so it's fair, and useful.
Originally posted by northcoastgreg How much of that is due to the lens and how much is due to larger sensor might be a point of contention.
If you use an APS-C sensor with more than 16 MP, resolution per surface area is actually higher on APS-C. So comparing sharpness between the two skews the interpretation in favor of the 16-85.
Originally posted by northcoastgreg However, I do suspect the 28-105 is a little better. It seems to have better edge to edge sharpness throughout its entire range (on FF) than the DA 16-85 does on APS-C. Contrast is about the same. The 28-105 seems (I'm merely guessing here) to have a bit more distortion and light fall-off toward the edges.
If I understand correctly, the differences would be in favor of the 28-105, but minimal in all cases? In essence, optically I would be on familiar ground and wouldn't risk losing anything?
Originally posted by northcoastgreg Perhaps a more informative point of reference would involve comparing the DFA 28-105 to the FA 20-35, which I also own. The DFA 28-105 is very slightly sharper in the center (at, say, F 11). It's sharper at the edges and significantly sharper in the corners. The DFA also features slightly better contrast and richer color signature than the FA lens.
That's interesting, as I've acquired the 20-35 recently. It's a lens I like, but find needs some time to learn. It's not as easy to use as the DA21 for instance. For starters, my copy needed AF adjustment, second I find it a bit overly contrasted. But it's also able to create beautiful starbursts, is as sharp as the DA21 in the APS-C area (I agree it's not as sharp in the corners), its AF is pretty good and it doesn't create much distortion. I should probably shoot more in RAW and benefit from the extra dynamic range with this lens.
Keep the comments coming! They are informative, and may have me sell my 16-85 sometime in the future.