35mm 1.8 OSS Test

Started Jan 18, 2013 | Discussions
Pal2012
Regular MemberPosts: 316
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to sean lancaster, Jan 19, 2013

Its probably user limited (me), low light at a party or gig I have trouble shooting my freinds or people, I should probably learn how to hold the camera still, like you say the people will move and OSS won't help with that, but I have played around with the kit lens turning the oss off and the ISO up really high just to get a feel and I prefer being able to have it, there is a definite improvement in my shots when its on.

I do want the Z24, but I hesitate to shell out $1000 especialy with the FF coming.

Cannons 24 F2.8 has IS $850 It might not be as fast and it may not be a Zeiss, but I think most admit that the E-mount Zeiss is actually closer to good Cannon glass than a real good Zeiss , yet here we are on our non stabilized Nex bodies and $1000 for IS on a lens is too much to ask?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sean lancaster
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,319Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to Pal2012, Jan 19, 2013

Pal2012 wrote:

Cannons 24 F2.8 has IS $850 It might not be as fast and it may not be a Zeiss, but I think most admit that the E-mount Zeiss is actually closer to good Cannon glass than a real good Zeiss , yet here we are on our non stabilized Nex bodies and $1000 for IS on a lens is too much to ask?

I largely use an RX1 at that focal length, but I have nothing but good things to say about the Zeiss 24. Like I noted, it can focus very close (6") so there are shots I can get with the Zeiss that the Canon you note just can't do. I flirted with a Nikon D600 and the new Sigma 35/1.4 for the same focal length as the Zeiss 24. The Sigma 35 is $900 and it's minimum focusing distance is nearly twice as far back as the Zeiss so I lose out on a lot of shots going that route. For example, from exactly 6" away with the focus on the autumn leaves the Zeiss captured this:

I like those kinds of shots (or food shots, too). Some people don't want or need closer range. But I don't think it's productive to compare Emount lenses to Canon or Nikon prices because Sony clearly charges a premium for Emount lenses compared to the bigger DSLRs (and rarely is a direct comparison possible - the lens you noted loses about a stop of light). Sometimes we get OSS on Emount lenses and other times we just get smaller size compared to the Nikon or Canon equivalents. But the market seems to justify the price of the Zeiss so that will keep the price high for a long time, I suspect. And Emount won't go anywhere when a FF NEX emerges because most NEX users have no intention of spending the amount required to go FF even if many here will do it. People shooting APS-C will still want quality AF lenses. And people who don't need or want AF can easily find a worthwhile 24 to use instead of the Zeiss 24.

 sean lancaster's gear list:sean lancaster's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha 7 Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pal2012
Regular MemberPosts: 316
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to sean lancaster, Jan 19, 2013

Good points, I really do appreciate being able to get up close, 6" is really good and I am a bit more compelled to keep an eye out for one at a decent price.

Thank you.

Paul

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lee W
Regular MemberPosts: 200Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to Lee W, Jan 19, 2013

Hi Everyone,

This is interesting. I thought I would very quickly attempt to improve the 1.8 raw shot in LR4. This literally took me 20 seconds (& of course we could make a preset). I bumped up the clarity to +25, sharpness amount to 50, radius 1.2, detail & masking were left at default.

I then removed the CA by using the eyedropper.

I think it's fair to say the improvements are considerable!

Comments?

Cheers,

Lee

www.leewarrenphotography.co.uk




 Lee W's gear list:Lee W's gear list
Sony a5100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alphabart
Regular MemberPosts: 308Gear list
Like?
Good test! But show real world examples at F1.8
In reply to Hollanda75, Jan 19, 2013

Hey I loved the test but these test don;t give an idea on real world examples. As you can see people think its not usable at F stops lower then F2.8, but I shoot lower then F2.8 a lot of the time.

35mm F1.8

35mm F2.0

35 F2.0 Made a wanted poster on advice of a DPreview forum member

 Alphabart's gear list:Alphabart's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DtEW
Senior MemberPosts: 1,792Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to Lee W, Jan 19, 2013

When I read the title, I thought this thread was going to be about the SEL35F18's stabilization characteristics, which considering all the samples we'd already seen of this great lens, seemed to be the thing necessary.

Well, I have no formal tests, but I just received the lens at work today and took these hand-held long-ish exposure shots on my way home.

I think 1/20s is going to be the reliable go-to long-ish exposure for this lens for me.

 DtEW's gear list:DtEW's gear list
Canon PowerShot G11 Canon EOS 6D Sony a6000 Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM +16 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
m1ti
New MemberPosts: 13
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to Lee W, Jan 19, 2013

For what's its worth, here's a comparison with Zeiss Biogon 2.0/35mm (both @ f2.0)

I bought the Sony lens after browsing this forum (and even though the Zeiss is clearly sharper at maximum aperture and looks to have a better T-stop) because I want the OSS which is giving me at least 2.5 stops for low-light shooting. On this account, it's a better lens.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alphabart
Regular MemberPosts: 308Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to m1ti, Jan 19, 2013

The right one is better. So if thats the sony, the sony beats te zeiss af F2.0

 Alphabart's gear list:Alphabart's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kalabalik
Junior MemberPosts: 28Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to m1ti, Jan 19, 2013

Another quick test. These were taken in decent window light with camera resting on table at minimum focusing distance from the box. OSS disabled. NEX-5N, aperture priority, fine jpeg straight out of camera, cropped using Paint.net. 100 % crops.

f1.8, 1/200, ISO 100

f2.0, 1/160, ISO 100

f3.5, 1/50, ISO 100

f5.6, 1/20, ISO 100

f8, 1/10, ISO 100

 Kalabalik's gear list:Kalabalik's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lee W
Regular MemberPosts: 200Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to Kalabalik, Jan 19, 2013

Kalabalik wrote:

Another quick test. These were taken in decent window light with camera resting on table at minimum focusing distance from the box. OSS disabled. NEX-5N, aperture priority, fine jpeg straight out of camera, cropped using Paint.net. 100 % crops.

f1.8, 1/200, ISO 100

f2.0, 1/160, ISO 100

f3.5, 1/50, ISO 100

f5.6, 1/20, ISO 100

f8, 1/10, ISO 100

Thanks for posting.

My images were unprocessed raws. As you shot Jpegs, the in-camera correction is taking care of the CA on your images & is also adding sharpness.

Can you post some unprocessed raw samples please?

Cheers,

Lee

 Lee W's gear list:Lee W's gear list
Sony a5100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
m1ti
New MemberPosts: 13
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to Alphabart, Jan 19, 2013

Really?

May be my example isn't very good because it is the really center (I have to stay further than 0.7m away from the box for focusing).

Here's a superimposed version with the same 2 RAWs - the brighter middle being Zeiss @ 2.0 (no brightness adjustment)

You can probably see better here that Sony has a dose of CA reducing the sharpness of the outline of the lens drawing. Also, in my opinion, the letters on the Zeiss is actually sharper.

The brighter Zeiss exposure is another advantage. Both pictures were on full manual with identical settings so by my guessing, Zeiss is around T-2.1 or T-2.2 at worst where as Sony is probably T-2.5.

I also probably need to take pictures of newspapers later to show the edge performance which I think is not exceptional for Sony whereas Zeiss, being a full frame lens, is better because the NEX corner is still within the lens sweet spot

In any case, as I probably implied earlier, Sony is a better lens after 6pm because of the OSS but for the daytime, I would take Zeiss.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kalabalik
Junior MemberPosts: 28Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to Lee W, Jan 19, 2013

Lee W wrote:

Can you post some unprocessed raw samples please?

I'll give it a try since I actually shot both jpeg and raw. Here I have imported the raw files into Adobe Lightroom 4.3, cropped them and exported as jpeg in maximum quality (100) without applying any resizing.

There is a very noticeable difference in detail in favor of the raw files. Open original size of both jpeg (my previous post) and raw (this post) and look at the grey dots. In the latter you can actually see that the grey dots are made up of a bunch of smaller dots.

f1.8, 1/200, ISO 100

f2.0, 1/160, ISO 100

f2.8, 1/80, ISO 100

f3.5, 1/50, ISO 100

f5.6, 1/20, ISO 100

f8, 1/10, ISO 100

 Kalabalik's gear list:Kalabalik's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
losangeles
Contributing MemberPosts: 655Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to Lee W, Jan 19, 2013

Interesting, but isn't all the added detail now fake, in the sense that sharpening in post can never recover detail that was lost by the lack of lens sharpness?

Lee W wrote:

Hi Everyone,

This is interesting. I thought I would very quickly attempt to improve the 1.8 raw shot in LR4. This literally took me 20 seconds (& of course we could make a preset). I bumped up the clarity to +25, sharpness amount to 50, radius 1.2, detail & masking were left at default.

I then removed the CA by using the eyedropper.

I think it's fair to say the improvements are considerable!

Comments?

Cheers,

Lee

www.leewarrenphotography.co.uk




Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lee W
Regular MemberPosts: 200Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to losangeles, Jan 19, 2013

losangeles wrote:

Interesting, but isn't all the added detail now fake

Lee W wrote:

Hi Everyone,

This is interesting. I thought I would very quickly attempt to improve the 1.8 raw shot in LR4. This literally took me 20 seconds (& of course we could make a preset). I bumped up the clarity to +25, sharpness amount to 50, radius 1.2, detail & masking were left at default.

I then removed the CA by using the eyedropper.

I think it's fair to say the improvements are considerable!

Comments?

Cheers,

Lee

www.leewarrenphotography.co.uk




Hmm, not really, as you can't add detail that isn't originally there, you can only enhance it. The lens isn't actually soft, it just seems to suffer from CA & lack of contrast when wide open & up until around f2.8.

The adjustments I made are no more than I would make to most images when shot in raw. It is only what most in-camera processing would do if shooting in jpeg but allowing a finer degree of control.

Cheers,

Lee

 Lee W's gear list:Lee W's gear list
Sony a5100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
losangeles
Contributing MemberPosts: 655Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to Lee W, Jan 20, 2013

I see. What about the NEX's in camera JPEG processing? How does it compare to that you achieved with LR4?

Lee W wrote:

losangeles wrote:

Interesting, but isn't all the added detail now fake

Lee W wrote:

Hi Everyone,

This is interesting. I thought I would very quickly attempt to improve the 1.8 raw shot in LR4. This literally took me 20 seconds (& of course we could make a preset). I bumped up the clarity to +25, sharpness amount to 50, radius 1.2, detail & masking were left at default.

I then removed the CA by using the eyedropper.

I think it's fair to say the improvements are considerable!

Comments?

Cheers,

Lee

www.leewarrenphotography.co.uk




Hmm, not really, as you can't add detail that isn't originally there, you can only enhance it. The lens isn't actually soft, it just seems to suffer from CA & lack of contrast when wide open & up until around f2.8.

The adjustments I made are no more than I would make to most images when shot in raw. It is only what most in-camera processing would do if shooting in jpeg but allowing a finer degree of control.

Cheers,

Lee

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lee W
Regular MemberPosts: 200Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to losangeles, Jan 20, 2013

losangeles wrote:

I see. What about the NEX's in camera JPEG processing? How does it compare to that you achieved with LR4

Hi,

Good question, so I have just done a quick LR4 processed raw vs jpeg (in-camera processing) test.

As you can see, LR4 can do a much better job than the in-camera processing engine. In LR4 you can remove all CA, extract more detail & do a much better job adding contrast.

Best viewed at 100%.

Hope this helps,

Lee





 Lee W's gear list:Lee W's gear list
Sony a5100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
losangeles
Contributing MemberPosts: 655Gear list
Like?
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test
In reply to Lee W, Jan 20, 2013

Very nice, thanks.

Wish I knew the equivalent settings in Aperture. Will play around a bit with it and post here if I can figure it out.

Lee W wrote:

losangeles wrote:

I see. What about the NEX's in camera JPEG processing? How does it compare to that you achieved with LR4

Hi,

Good question, so I have just done a quick LR4 processed raw vs jpeg (in-camera processing) test.

As you can see, LR4 can do a much better job than the in-camera processing engine. In LR4 you can remove all CA, extract more detail & do a much better job adding contrast.

Best viewed at 100%.

Hope this helps,

Lee





Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
losangeles
Contributing MemberPosts: 655Gear list
Like?
Aperture settings to reduce CA
In reply to losangeles, Jan 24, 2013

I have been playing around with Apple Aperture but have not been able to find equivalent settings to your LR4 ones to remove the chromatic aberration present in the lens at large apertures. If anybody can help here, please do.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
losangeles
Contributing MemberPosts: 655Gear list
Like?
New firmware!!
In reply to Lee W, Feb 5, 2013

Hey Lee, I'd be very curious to hear if you find any improvements to the in-camera processed jpegs after the firmware update that came out today? Please let us know!!!

Lee W wrote:

losangeles wrote:

I see. What about the NEX's in camera JPEG processing? How does it compare to that you achieved with LR4

Hi,

Good question, so I have just done a quick LR4 processed raw vs jpeg (in-camera processing) test.

As you can see, LR4 can do a much better job than the in-camera processing engine. In LR4 you can remove all CA, extract more detail & do a much better job adding contrast.

Best viewed at 100%.

Hope this helps,

Lee





Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads