[Rondec]

Typically I add vignetting anyway...

What's wrong with an optically perfect lens? Size, weight and price. If I can have 90% the quality at 1/2 the size and price, I'm happy. Especially when you'll only see the problems when pixel peeping.

The Friedman Archives Blog: The Most Distortion-Ridden Zeiss Lens Ever (and Why You Won’t Notice It)

There is a happy medium. As I said before, the DA limiteds are quite small and nicely corrected with minimal vignetting. I think it is a false choice: small versus well corrected. If you would say your choice is small versus wide aperture and sharp wide open, then I would agree with you.

[kadajawi]

There is a happy medium. As I said before, the DA limiteds are quite small and nicely corrected with minimal vignetting. I think it is a false choice: small versus well corrected. If you would say your choice is small versus wide aperture and sharp wide open, then I would agree with you.

Not sure I'd consider them small.

Not against this:


I mean, come on. It's the equivalent of our 18-55 3.5-5.6 lenses, and it's tiny. That's what I want. And if they have to correct the lens in software for that, so be it.

[Rondec]

Not sure I'd consider them small.

Not against this:


I mean, come on. It's the equivalent of our 18-55 3.5-5.6 lenses, and it's tiny. That's what I want. And if they have to correct the lens in software for that, so be it.

It is a slow lens. 28-84mm f7 to f11 full frame equivalent. I don't mind slow lenses, obviously you can make them a lot smaller. But I think we need to be honest about what you get. A lens like the DA limited zoom is pretty small due to its relatively slow aperture and small zoom range, but it is considerably faster than this lens. I'm not into equivalency, but it makes your system look smaller if your lenses have max apertures that are relatively slow.

They don't make lenses this slow for full frame and so it is hard to compare sizes. Does anyone make a 22mm f5.6 lens for full frame that would be equivalent to a 15mm f4 on APS-C? In the same way, there aren't any full frame zooms or primes that are as slow as micro four thirds lenses.

[JinDesu]

Not sure I'd consider them small.

Not against this:


I mean, come on. It's the equivalent of our 18-55 3.5-5.6 lenses, and it's tiny. That's what I want. And if they have to correct the lens in software for that, so be it.

The DA 15, DA 21, and DA40 are equally as small. They give up the zoom for much better quality.
Pentax was going to make a retractable zoom similar to the Sony 16-50 F3.5-5.6, which at 2.6"x1.25" vs the Olympus 2.5"x1" would be a better comparison if you want to make it. However, I assume because the k-01 didn't do so well, this small kit zoom from Pentax will not be made.

[pinholecam]

Typically I add vignetting anyway...

What's wrong with an optically perfect lens? Size, weight and price. If I can have 90% the quality at 1/2 the size and price, I'm happy. Especially when you'll only see the problems when pixel peeping.

The Friedman Archives Blog: The Most Distortion-Ridden Zeiss Lens Ever (and Why You Won’t Notice It)

Except that the lens you linked to is charging a premium, and giving you all this (ie. poor optical correction and correction in software)
So too many of the wider angle Oly, Panny (optical 25mm and lower) and Sony lenses.
They are not cheap.

The ones which are cheap are mostly the kit lenses and the lower end lenses.


Consider too than many other shooters (esp. those who shoot other genres) may prefer to get that choice to add vignetting or not.
Not have it w/o a choice.

Not sure I'd consider them small.

Not against this:


I mean, come on. It's the equivalent of our 18-55 3.5-5.6 lenses, and it's tiny. That's what I want. And if they have to correct the lens in software for that, so be it.

Not really.
Use one and you will know that the distortion characteristics is that of a 14mm-42mm.
The barrel distortion can be corrected (to a point mind you, it can still be seen) but the perspective distortion can't.
Its not the same as a 18-55.

Start to push your files a bit in PP and it breaks up sooner too, because it was already manipulated for the lens corrections.

Was a m4/3 user.
Been there, done that.

Does anyone make a 22mm f5.6 lens for full frame that would be equivalent to a 15mm f4 on APS-C? In the same way, there aren't any full frame zooms or primes that are as slow as micro four thirds lenses.

There is a Voigtlander 20/3.5 that is close in size, FL and speed (not optically -arguable)

[Rondec]

There is a Voigtlander 20/3.5 that is close in size, FL and speed (not optically -arguable)

Sure. But the Voigtlander (on full frame) is a good stop faster than the DA 15 limited. It's also manual focus, which decreases size somewhat. I bet it is at least as sharp at f5.6 as the DA 15 is at f4. I am not a full frame proponent, but I do know that it is easy to push the small size of four thirds and APS-C, not mentioning that the lenses are relatively slow in comparison to full frame lenses.

I always think about the DA 40 limited when it comes to small size, until I realize that it is based on a full frame lens. It vignettes a fair amount at f2.8, but it certainly would need less tweaking on full frame than some of the lenses mentioned in this thread...

[jogiba]

It is a slow lens. 28-84mm f7 to f11 full frame equivalent. I don't mind slow lenses, obviously you can make them a lot smaller. But I think we need to be honest about what you get. A lens like the DA limited zoom is pretty small due to its relatively slow aperture and small zoom range, but it is considerably faster than this lens. I'm not into equivalency, but it makes your system look smaller if your lenses have max apertures that are relatively slow.

They don't make lenses this slow for full frame and so it is hard to compare sizes. Does anyone make a 22mm f5.6 lens for full frame that would be equivalent to a 15mm f4 on APS-C? In the same way, there aren't any full frame zooms or primes that are as slow as micro four thirds lenses.

I agree, even my full frame 24-200mm F3.5-5.6 is faster.

[Clavius]

Wait what? I'm not following this... We're demanding slower lenses now?

[Rondec]

Wait what? I'm not following this... We're demanding slower lenses now?

I'm not demanding slow lenses. I'm just saying the "small size" in smaller sensor cameras is due to slow lenses, not so much due to the smaller sensor. You just can't have a great comparison when most full frame lenses are quite a bit faster than, say, the DA limiteds, or, Olympus zooms.

[Clavius]

I'm not demanding slow lenses. I'm just saying the "small size" in smaller sensor cameras is due to slow lenses, not so much due to the smaller sensor. You just can't have a great comparison when most full frame lenses are quite a bit faster than, say, the DA limiteds, or, Olympus zooms.

Ah, now I understand. My bad. I agree of course.

[Clavius]

Lenses that are optically bad need too much software intervention.
The result are the corrected areas break up earlier than the other parts of the photo.

Take the FE35 for example.
-0.9ev vignettee at f8.
That's an almost 1 stop correction needed.
if shot was exposed to the left to save the highlights., in post the shadows will have to be pushed back up say 1 stop.
So corners are pushed 2ev and center 1ev.
Add in color adjustments, etc and the noise starts showing earlier on the corners.


So lens should be generally good to begin with and let software tweak it a little to be better.
Not totally bad and do everything in software.
Worse, charge a premium for it like what Sony has.

The FE 35 Sonnar's vignetting is almost a full stop, yes... That isn't all that shocking for a very compact prime in that FL: Just to get things in perspective. According to Photozone's tests with the K10D the Pentax's best-of-the-best FA 31 ltd vignettes a full stop on APS-C format! (Not almost a full, but a full stop.) It goes away when stopping down, but mounting it on an FF camera, the format it is designed for, it will only get worse. So, following the same logic that you applied for the FE 35, at $1.296,95 such performance is a disgrace. Whilst the FE 35 Sonnar is a steal at "only" $800,- having its own motor, being more modern and having its own stabilisation.

[Rondec]

The FE 35 Sonnar's vignetting is almost a full stop, yes... That isn't all that shocking for a very compact prime in that FL: Just to get things in perspective. According to Photozone's tests with the K10D the Pentax's best-of-the-best FA 31 ltd vignettes a full stop on APS-C format! (Not almost a full, but a full stop.) It goes away when stopping down, but mounting it on an FF camera, the format it is designed for, it will only get worse. So, following the same logic that you applied for the FE 35, at $1.296,95 such performance is a disgrace. Whilst the FE 35 Sonnar is a steal at "only" $800,- having its own motor, being more modern and having its own stabilisation.

A lot of fast lenses have some vignetting wide open, but to have that much vignetting at f8 is somewhat problematic. The FA 31 certainly has much less vignetting at f2.8 (on APS-C) than the FE 35 has at f8 -- and that's corrected. FE 35 uncorrected has 2.6 EVs of vignetting wide open and 2 EVs at f8.

[Emacs]

EVF have come a long way.
Before end of 2012-2013, they were laggy between what was shown on evf and the actual scene (taking moving stuff was such a pain then), lacked resolution to do MF w/o magnification.
The good EVF's coming out since 2013 are all pretty good for most things.

A7 has longer lag than my NEX-5n. About twice longer. And this is very well noticeable