How is the dynamic range....
All the studio pics look a little out of focus.......
Wedding photographer: DPreview, you are reviewing F0.95 lens, the main feature of this lens is ultra wide aperture 0,95.and people spending their dollars for this kind of products primarily for this feature.And they are ready to use heavy lens with manual focus primarily for this feature.
1) How much 0,95 images this sample gallery has?2) How much Examples of bokeh with F0,95 - only one ?3) Where Portraits of people with shallow depth of field?
Why your short on F8? it can be done with cheaper autofocus/kit lenses with similar quality and without visible differences.
How much is the fish?
I would hope at $1100 this would be better than a kit zoom at 10.5mm@F/8. Pictures at stopped down f stops would help show this thing's value at other f-stops.
Henrik Herranen: "The lens is neither especially small nor light, though for the specification it is a good deal more compact than a similar lens for a full-frame or even APS-C system."
Hmmh... 10.5mm f/0.95 lets in as much total light and has the same DoF as a FF 21mm f/1.9 lens. Canon's EF 24/1.4L II is both lighter and shorter, and lets in more than double the amount of total light. So what are the "similar lenses" that is won by this lens being "a good deal more compact"?
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Voigtlander isn't a useful lens. But I do believe that this article begins with an incorrect statement.
No, Androle said both field of view and aperture diameter determine the amount of light hitting the sensor. How much light can you gather from a sliver of a scene? Doesn't matter how big your aperture diameter is when you are zoomed in super far.
Good call out.
Physics are physics. It seems smaller format lenses at best maintain weight and size parity with larger lenses of the same max aperture diameter and field of view.... but they almost always cost more. Samyang 24/1.4 FF manual focus lens costs $350-500 new and is one of the best 24s out there.
Oh Nikon. Another month another recall.
sportyaccordy: They should have
- updated the 17-50 2.8 with VR and weight reducing tech- made this F/4 through the FL range and made it cheaper
or my favorite
- used these resources to make some wide fast DX primes. No way am I gonna pay $700 for an FX prime to use on a DX body when the 35 1.8 DX is $200. They need an 11 2.8, 16 2.0 and 24 1.8 in DX to go with that.
Sorry, I meant on the long end and through the range. I could see this being a big deal years ago when shooting past ISO1600 was iffy but 1 stop is hardly worth paying a 2-3x premium for. 2 stops maybe.
Opening to F/2.8 on the wide end requires additional + better elements to control aberrations, vignetting yadda yadda. That is why this lens is smaller + lighter + cheaper than the 17-50/2.8
F/4 to F/2.8 is only one stop. And that would make the lens smaller and cheaper.
PhotonCanvas: I am sure I am in the minority and will get a bath but... I still prefer Canon images to Sony's and I have both cameras. As far as focusing... action photographers need all the help they can get, others not so much.
Even though it's clear you are scared/jealous, you do make a good point. Different companies have different JPEG engines, and Sony's is not the best. Their RAW is also compressed which is the worst. However, both can be helped or fixed in firmware. Your Canon cannot get IBIS, mount and use AF on lenses from other mounts, increase its AF coverage or eliminate its front/back focus inaccuracies with a firmware update. I would rather have the camera with software issues than hardware issues.
Wild Light: OK so you get useless pics of sharp noses and mouths but with soft eyes with 3rd party lenses and I bet the eye detect focusses on the eye you don't want too as well.
I'll take manual focus please.
Lmao sour grapes much?
They should have
I don't see what the problem is. It looks competitive at the minimum and slightly more saturated RAW (which is a plus IMO). Can't see EXIF values here- how do the exposures compare? What lens did they use?
My big question is if the third party AF speed can be updated through firmware to older A7 bodies. Obviously they won't have the OSPDAF, but if they can get CDAF up to native body speed that could be a game changer.
I'm also curious about third party EF lenses through adapters... will that new Yongnuo 35/2 work? What about Sigma's zooms and primes? This can be a real gamechanger.
sportyaccordy: FE MOUNT PLEASE!!!!!
No it wouldn't. They could keep the lens as is and just change the mount and connections.
FE MOUNT PLEASE!!!!!
exapixel: Mirrorless, schmirrorless. I don't care if it has mirrors or not. Can you look at a large fine art print and tell me the price of the camera, its weight, and whether or not there were mirrors involved?
The image is all that matters. If I put an A7Rii on a solid tripod and shoot a landscape through a good lens with proper technique, process the raw output, and print carefully, will I get better results than I would with any other small format camera? That's really the only question in my mind when I read a review. If it turns out to be true, then it's upgrade time.
So I don't care about 4K video or the design points, like back-side illumination, that enable it. I don't care about weight, boxiness, price, image stabilization, or autofocus speed. I do care about bit depth, losslessness, dynamic range, shutter shock, "raw" artifacts, sensor reflections, and the "star eater" bug. I'm eager to read a real review for actual photography.
@exapixel I don't know man. As awful as it was in low light, the more I look at old pics, the more I see... my old D40 pretty much washed my NEX-C3 in good light... especially with a nice prime. I kind of miss it.
Mark Alan Thomas: Battery Life (CIPA): 290
Then go buy a Nikon or Pentax. I'd personally rather just buy a grip or carry some extra batteries. All the battery life in the world can't make up for IBIS, 4K and PDAF with third party adapters.
Get a grip ;-)
This almost reads like an April Fools joke. Spec wise, aside from teh goofy USB 2.0 ports they pretty much nailed everything. No matter for me, this will hopefully just push A7Rs down through the $1K floor.