FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

minolta 28-70G vs zeiss 24-70 test shots

Page  <12
Author
niji View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 03 May 2007
Country: Australia
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Posts: 266
Post Options Post Options   Quote niji Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 January 2013 at 20:49
Originally posted by niji niji wrote:

... I toyed with a 3D printer to make a 28-70G hood at one point

Did you succeed to get a useful one ?[/QUOTE]

No, in the end I decided even if I did buy a 3D printer, my skill with the a modelling package would fail me. link
 



Back to Top
Blame View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 14 October 2010
Country: United Kingdom
Location: London UK
Status: Offline
Posts: 2626
Post Options Post Options   Quote Blame Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 January 2013 at 22:06
Sorry if I sound stupid but how can you print in 3D?
A900, Min 24-105, 35-105, Samyang 14/2.8, 35/1.4, Sig 70/2.8 Macro, ISCO Ultra 125/2, Tam 180/3.5 Macro, Sig 400/5.6 TeleMacro
Back to Top
Huge View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 03 August 2012
Country: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 186
Post Options Post Options   Quote Huge Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 January 2013 at 23:03
Originally posted by Blame Blame wrote:

Sorry if I sound stupid but how can you print in 3D?


With a 3D printer

It's a bit like a single nozzle inkjet, except that instead of ink it exudes melted plastic. It positions a blob then moves a bit and positions another blob. It carries on until it's laid down a 0.3mm thick layer of plastic onto the 'stage'. It then moves the print head 0.3mm up and repeats the process to lay the next layer of the object being printed.

RepRap

H
Timeo technocratos et donae ferentes
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 9918
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 January 2013 at 00:05
Originally posted by ddoctor ddoctor wrote:

Other than the colour tone and internal zooming mechanism. The Zeiss wins all the way. I got 3 Zeisslenses, but all of them stays in the dry cabinet. Prefer my sigma 50, tamron 28-105 f2.8 and 80-200 G's colour tone right now.

The Minolta also wins on bokeh imho.
You prefer the Tamron 28-105/2.8 over the Zeiss 24-70/2.8 because of colortone? Did you ever tried the Minolta? It might be the one for you.....

Re. MFD: I hardly ever find it a problem. When I expect it to be a problem, I take my 50/1.4 in stead of the Minolta 28-70/2.8.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
Lesuave View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 27 December 2007
Country: Guadeloupe
Location: Caribbean
Status: Offline
Posts: 433
Post Options Post Options   Quote Lesuave Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 January 2013 at 01:38
Originally posted by ifreedman ifreedman wrote:

Nice comparison! Both lenses produce lovely pics, but this makes me admire the Zeiss all the more. FWIW, Kurt Munger looks like he's limiting the lens reviews he does, and lenses like the Zeiss might not be reviewed in the future:

From his site:
"On another note; it looks like I might be soon finished with Sony full frame Alpha lens reviews. There isn't much interest anymore, most of the pageviews here are split between the DT and NEX stuff. I might be coaxed into reviewing the new Sigma 35/1.4 or another FF lens or two, but since time is precious right now, I'm going to concentrate on the more popular products as I just mentioned, plus the exciting micro 4/3 lenses."

Ian
Too bad. The dyxum database and Kurt's reviews have always guided my choice for buying a lens so far.
Back to Top
homeranger View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 March 2012
Country: United States
Location: Oregon, USA
Status: Offline
Posts: 1424
Post Options Post Options   Quote homeranger Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 January 2013 at 02:01
Originally posted by Lesuave Lesuave wrote:

Too bad. The dyxum database and Kurt's reviews have always guided my choice for buying a lens so far.

Maybe a fellow Dyxumer could volunteer to pick up where Kurt leaves off? Maybe Kurt needs a ghost writer?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/skipplitt/
a7rII|a900|a7II|RX100|Sony 28-70 GM|MAF 500mm|Sony 70-200mm G|CZ135mm ZA||Sony 100mm|Tokina 11-16mm
 



Back to Top
Lesuave View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 27 December 2007
Country: Guadeloupe
Location: Caribbean
Status: Offline
Posts: 433
Post Options Post Options   Quote Lesuave Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 January 2013 at 02:17
Originally posted by MichelvA MichelvA wrote:

Very good comparison, actually the best i've seen so far. Agree with Addy for the colors. For me/my 28-70G the differences at f/2.8 seem less, but still there. The contrast in back lit situations has been touched by me a long time ago. This is where the Minolta goes down. Unless - as you rightfully mention - if one like the hazy look.
Relevant link
Relevant link 2

Thank you.
I read the first thread you linked on. An old one. What I understand is that the coating seems to be the explanation of flare issues with the minolta.
I had read already the second thread before buying the minolta in order to replace the junk hood as soon as I could get the lens. Not sure but I think I stole the idea to mount the canon hood on the Sony minolta French forum. I remember I also was amazed by all the efforts you deployed to tinker a decent hood.
Back to Top
Jocelynne View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 17 June 2009
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 2819
Post Options Post Options   Quote Jocelynne Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 January 2013 at 02:58
My profound appreciation for this thread and for the professional quality testing and discussion. By coincidence, the lenses tested are the lenses which particularly interest me, currently. Your work and discussions provided practical material for a practical application for me.

Thank you, much.

JL
   
Maxxum 450si, Sony A300, A700, A900 and a cubic meter of Alpha lenses
Back to Top
Lesuave View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 27 December 2007
Country: Guadeloupe
Location: Caribbean
Status: Offline
Posts: 433
Post Options Post Options   Quote Lesuave Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 January 2013 at 22:29
This is an update as someone wanted to see some pics with a real model.
Same remarks about bokeh (minolta wins) and sharpness (zeiss wins). Colours are quite the sames.

Thank you wife and son.









A few more natural portrait:

Minolta @ 3.5


Zeiss @ 3.5


Zeiss @ 3.5
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 9918
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 January 2013 at 23:04
Yes indeed, the same results, very nice models this time

If I was a pro photographer I would get the Zeiss, but as it is I'm very pleased with my Minolta. Btw, I find the Minolta reacts well to some sharpening in post, I suspect the resolution is better then it seems, but it lacks in micro-contratst....
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk > A-mount lenses Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.062 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.