FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Comparing many lenses on a7ii

Author
beeton View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 02 December 2014
Country: Canada
Location: Beeton
Status: Offline
Posts: 53
Post Options Post Options   Quote beeton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Comparing many lenses on a7ii
    Posted: 10 January 2020 at 18:53
Soon, as time permits, I will be shooting some comparisons between various lenses on my A7ii with and without an la-ea4.
I'm doing this to find some less expensive but fully acceptable alternatives to the FE lenses as they are darn expensive for casual shooting (IMO) and reducing the weight of my camera bag.
Some backgound: I pared down many lenses and settled on an RX10M3 plus an a6000 a few seasons back. The RX10M3 has an amazing range (24-600) and even doubled, the lens is super sharp. This allowed me to sell off my Sigma 175-500, not a stellar lens but useful albeit heavy. The a6000 was for my pocket and telescope. The A6000 moved out for an a7 which moved out for an a7ii (wanted ibis to allow for more non stabilized lens choices). My a77ii went to my son.
The Rx10iii lens is superb but while in Massachusetts, I took similar images with the RX10m3 and A7m2. The a7m2 had an la-ea4 and older Tamron 28-200 DI A03 (not the old, lumpy versions, the more recent-non stabilized version).
I found the RX images sharper with better contrast and saturation but at 100%, the FF images had so much better detail in the waves and clouds. Some cleaning up with DXO11 really improved the FF images taken with the Tamron to the point where they are almost on-pa with the RX images (but not quite as sharp in the corners).
So, to make things easier, I picked up an FE 24-240 and a 70-300 G (4.5).
I also have some more lenses coming: A Vivitar 100-400 (non APO I think), Sigma 70-210 f2.8, 24-50 Maxxum and a Maxxum 500 reflex... let's put the last one aside.

For the wider angle, I plan to shoot with an E 16mm (crop)24 maxxum, 24-50 maxxum and 24-240 (FF).
For the mid and tele, I plan to shoot at 70-200 for the 4 lenses and also beyond 200 for those lenses that have the extra reach.
I would like to compare, with real world images (of a local barn) how these lenses stack up out of camera and with some reasonable processing.
Much can be said about buying native lenses but when budgets don't allow (or justification isn't there) avoiding a $1200 optic for a $200 optic will be a better choice for many if they are willing to spend a few minutes with appropriate software.

More detailed results to follow but preliminary tests showed that:
The FE 28-70 is marginally better than the 28-200 Tamron, especially in the edges and the Tamron has strong vignetting at 28. Post processing evens things out.
The E 16 on crop does not match the 24-240 for sharpness across the field.
The 24-240 and 70-300 G are fairly close across the board but I have had more missed-focus shots with the 70-300.The 24-240 on crop brought up to +/- 300mm is comparable to the 70-300 G at 300mm. ALL images taken at the same ISO and F stops.

As for Ultra wide. I can't justify the FE lenses so I use a Tokina 11-16. Even on crop, a very sharp lens and better than the Sigma 10-20 (4) and way better than the Sony 11-18, again IMO.

See you in a few weeks but if you have compared older zooms on an laea4 against any modern versions, pipe in please.
 



Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.