FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

SONY Carl Zeiss DT 16-80 vs MAF 24-105 vs KM 28-75

Page  123 6>
Author
Szabla View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 29 January 2007
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Posts: 135
Post Options Post Options   Quote Szabla Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: SONY Carl Zeiss DT 16-80 vs MAF 24-105 vs KM 28-75
    Posted: 13 March 2007 at 20:01
All shots taken with A100 mounted on Manfrotto tripod. 2-s self-timer (MLU). Resized in FastStone Viewer - it's great :-)

F=28 mm, f/4,5. JPEG Fine, originals 3,5-4,1 MB
from the left CZ DT 16-80/3,5-4,5 ; Minolta AF 24-105/3,5-4,5 oraz KM 28-75/2,8

______

F=28 mm, f/8. JPEG Fine, originals 3,1-3,4 MB

______

F=35 mm, f/4,5. JPEG Fine, originals 3,4-3,7 MB

______

F=35 mm, f/8. JPEG Fine, originals 3,7-3,8 MB

______

F=50 mm, f/4,5. JPEG Fine, originals 3,2-3,5 MB

______

F=50 mm, f/8. JPEG Fine, originals 3,5-3,7 MB

______

F=70 mm, f/4,5. JPEG Fine, originals 3,1-3,4 MB

______

F=70 mm, f/8. JPEG Fine, originals 3,4-3,6 MB

______




Edited by brettania - 18 March 2007 at 15:50
 



Back to Top
kiklop View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum owner

Joined: 14 July 2005
Country: Croatia
Location: Rovinj
Status: Offline
Posts: 10564
Post Options Post Options   Quote kiklop Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 20:20
Once again, thank you very much.
Your inputs are really appreciated !
Back to Top
Stueyman View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 01 March 2007
Country: Australia
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Posts: 242
Post Options Post Options   Quote Stueyman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 20:46
Thanks for the post. Looks like the 16-80 performs admirably to me.
Certainly swaying me towards it.
Back to Top
Szabla View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 29 January 2007
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Posts: 135
Post Options Post Options   Quote Szabla Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 20:48
Your Welcome :-)
Back to Top
kiklop View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum owner

Joined: 14 July 2005
Country: Croatia
Location: Rovinj
Status: Offline
Posts: 10564
Post Options Post Options   Quote kiklop Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 20:49
I have one question; did you had any problems with your 28-75D?
Performance at 28mm is quite surprising for me since i'm not used to get this softness stopped down to F4.5

based on these samples i would say that the new 16-80 lens certainly looks promising.
Back to Top
Szabla View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 29 January 2007
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Posts: 135
Post Options Post Options   Quote Szabla Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 21:50
No, I have many impressive shots taken with 28-75, but not often at full aperture.
Zeiss is very compact and well built. It's not as massive like 28-75, but turns very smoothly. Good construction.
 



Back to Top
Turerkan View Drop Down
Emeritus group
Emeritus group
Moderator emeritus

Joined: 11 February 2006
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Posts: 6252
Post Options Post Options   Quote Turerkan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 21:58
anyone who has looked at all the images? (lazy to do so:P)

whats the verdict?

Edited by Turerkan - 13 March 2007 at 21:58
Back to Top
Szabla View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 29 January 2007
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Posts: 135
Post Options Post Options   Quote Szabla Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 22:14
Zeiss rules :-)
Back to Top
Christel View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 04 January 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 35
Post Options Post Options   Quote Christel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 22:22
on first sight the CZ seems to be the sharpest one.
Back to Top
Maurus View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 23 June 2006
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Posts: 929
Post Options Post Options   Quote Maurus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 22:27
I agree with Kiklop; KM 28-75 at f4.5 usually performs much better (look at the left side of the image). - On the whole CZ 16-80 looks great, though.

Edited by Maurus - 13 March 2007 at 22:27
Back to Top
Szabla View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 29 January 2007
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Posts: 135
Post Options Post Options   Quote Szabla Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 22:40
It seems that my 28-75 isn't perfect. Maybe it can be fixed.
Back to Top
DyJohnnY View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 28 March 2006
Location: Romania
Status: Offline
Posts: 136
Post Options Post Options   Quote DyJohnnY Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 23:08
Thanks for the images.

I don't know about the two minolta lenses, but they are rather suprising....can the 24-105 be that soft?, leaving aside the 28-75 that is also too soft from what i pictured it to be, but sharpens up nicely at 50mm, the 24-105 is awful by comparison..., accros the board.

I'd like to see this test with the kit lens, just for fun, maybe this would reset the boundaries for "lowness"
Trying to creep back into my photo hobby.

Ignorance is bliss
Back to Top
mtiller View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 10 February 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 1171
Post Options Post Options   Quote mtiller Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2007 at 23:08
Zeiss looks excellent, but I thought that at 50mm f4.5 the 28-75 was sharper on the left of the image. But the Zeiss is going to be easier to get hold of :-)

Edited by mtiller - 13 March 2007 at 23:15
Back to Top
ckphoto View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 December 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Posts: 530
Post Options Post Options   Quote ckphoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 March 2007 at 01:31
The Zeiss did look sharper, with a touch more contrast throughout the range. One thing I did notice, the KM has a more marked barrel distortion at the wide end - the CZ is non-existent.
X-700 (MD28/2.8, MD50/1.4,Macro, MD135/2.8) Maxxum 7,9,a100, a700 (KM17-35/2.8-4, KM28-75/2.8, 50/1.7, 70-210/4, zeiss 16-80)

My Link
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk > A-mount lenses Page  123 6>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.094 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.