Reading mode: Light Dark

Andy Westlake: Did you turn off SSS and use mirror lock-up?

Go to last post
rrcphoto said:
andrea buso said:
I supposed you guys took the test photos at around f8, which is the
best compromise for all lenses and gives enough DOF on most of
applications.
I do not see anything wrong with this test.

I think the fact that the raw test does not look as sharp as it could
be on the a900, because the zeiss 85mm is not as sharp as the Canon
85mm 1.8 at f8.
Click to expand...
so you're telling me that the 85mm 1.8 $400 or so dollar lens is
sharper stopped down than a zeiss 85mm 1.4?
Click to expand...
At f8 my copies were behaving like that.
rrcphoto said:
what actually would have been more fair is if the D700 results were
using the 85mm 1.4 D, and the 5DII was using the 85 1.2L II .. but
the results then would have looked worse .. the 85 1.2L at f/8 or
so, still beats out by a visible margin the 1.8 counterpart.
Click to expand...
I had all the 4 lenses mentioned above and I'm not so sure about what you say.

then with different copies we also get different results. so it is hard too be sure.
in any case the Zeiss 85mm at f8 or 9 is softer than at f4.
rrcphoto said:
btw.. after seeing the slrgear results on the 28/2.8 zeiss ZF .. it
sounds like the name is more important than quality at times :(

However a point to A900 and 5DII against the D700 in that test...
both the A900 and 5DII would have been suffering from diffraction
effect at f/9 which it was shot at, while the D700 would have
suffered less because of a much larger pixel size .. and thus the
D700 would "appear" more pixel sharp.

but stopped down, at f/9 .. both the zeiss and the canon should have
been as sharp as they can get, and I believe the zeiss has rounded
blades, which should have been a better overall appearance to the
effect of diffraction.
Click to expand...
the 85mm zeiss is sharper at f4 then at f9.
http://www.photozone.de/sony-alpha-aps-c-lens-tests/374-zeiss_za_85_14?start=1
 
Here at DPReview we pretty much live, breathe and (almost) sleep with the cameras or lenses we're testing. The result is that these effectively become our cameras for personal work.

Now I always shoot RAW + JPEG, and process important stuff from RAW. And for my own purposes I normally use Capture One, no matter what camera I'm using, as I prefer its overall rendition and approach to noise reduction to ACR. This is true no matter what camera I'm using; and over the past year I think I've used essentially every DSLR on the market. If you play with NR sliders in ACR then you can get results about as good as Capture One, it's just harder work.

Point is this. The brand defenders on every forum have their own favourite converter they think we should use. But after personally processing thousands of RAW files from different brands, I simply don't see ACR favouring Canon in the way you suggest (and Canon users don't either, they think DPP is best). ACR is simply a consistent converter which applies its own look pretty much evenly to all cameras, not to mention being essentially an industry standard.

--
Andy Westlake
dpreview.com/lensreviews
 
I'll prefer if you used Capture NX for Nikon reviews but I certainly wouldn't whine about your choice of ACR as I can understand the logic behind the choice.

It is a reasonable baseline although it may not the best out there. The other option is to use each maker's tool for their cameras but I am sure the Sony Zealots would howl "bias" even then.

I certainly don't want to see Bibble used and C1 is clearly made for Canon anyway.

I'll say just ignore the brand warriors and get on with it.

--
http://dakanji.com

'I make statements based on fact not predictions.'
KMSEA: 12:33:17 PM, Saturday, November 12, 2005 (GMT)
 
andrea buso said:
I had all the 4 lenses mentioned above and I'm not so sure about what
you say.
then with different copies we also get different results. so it is
hard too be sure.
in any case the Zeiss 85mm at f8 or 9 is softer than at f4.
Click to expand...
they all are - it's called diffraction.

at f/8 or f/9 they are all leveled.
 
rrcphoto said:
andrea buso said:
I had all the 4 lenses mentioned above and I'm not so sure about what
you say.
then with different copies we also get different results. so it is
hard too be sure.
in any case the Zeiss 85mm at f8 or 9 is softer than at f4.
Click to expand...
they all are - it's called diffraction.

at f/8 or f/9 they are all leveled.
Click to expand...
No kidding! Is it called diffraction?
In any case the canon 1.8 peak its performance at f8 while the Zeiss peak at f4.

If you have used those lenses extensively you should know it. With the zeiss the difference between f4 and f8, in real life shooting, is quite significant.
But it seems that you have seen the Sony Zeiss 85mm only on the web page of B&H.

so at f8/9 they are not all leveled, because one lens is performing at its best and another it is not.

what eventually happens at f8/9 is that edges performance increase and there will be less discrepancy between the center and the edges.

charts and bottles shots are not the best way to judge lenses, thought it is the most practical way to do it on a web site.

as for the two lenses in question, even if the canon 1.8 will show more detail at a certain enlargement on a computer screen, the final photos will look better and will have more perceived sharpness and depth when printed, if taken with the Zeiss 85mm (or the Canon L for example) due to the characteristic of the glasses.
 
Andy Westlake said:
Here at DPReview we pretty much live, breathe and (almost) sleep with
the cameras or lenses we're testing. The result is that these
effectively become our cameras for personal work.

Now I always shoot RAW + JPEG, and process important stuff from RAW.
And for my own purposes I normally use Capture One, no matter what
camera I'm using, as I prefer its overall rendition and approach to
noise reduction to ACR. This is true no matter what camera I'm using;
and over the past year I think I've used essentially every DSLR on
the market. If you play with NR sliders in ACR then you can get
results about as good as Capture One, it's just harder work.

Point is this. The brand defenders on every forum have their own
favourite converter they think we should use. But after personally
processing thousands of RAW files from different brands, I simply
don't see ACR favouring Canon in the way you suggest (and Canon users
don't either, they think DPP is best). ACR is simply a consistent
converter which applies its own look pretty much evenly to all
cameras, not to mention being essentially an industry standard.

--
Andy Westlake
dpreview.com/lensreviews
Click to expand...
andy look here.. This is a test of RAW converters with the BASE input..

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=30998483

Is here a place we can get your test RAWs...And try them in other converters.

Most people looking like and even choose Bibble on both systems.. (That is a level playing field)

Also Andrea on this thread has pointed out that while you chose two good lenses that Canon was closer to its sweet spot while the Sony has a sweet spot a wider aperture.

I have no clue why you don't pick a good Sigma or Tamron premium prime so all cameras have the same lens or at least look at the aperture that each lens is best.

Phil is the front page quite praising Bibble.. but for tests he uses ACR...which plays with RAW before even giving you a BASE starting places.

by the time you use lenses with different favored apertures and a RAW convert that has NR profiled towards one brand before you even get to start PP you have stopped testing the camera.

The Canon 5DMKII sensor is very nice its like 9 MP APS..

But there is no way the A900 is as different as you show on some of the shots if you neutralize all the variables properly vs adding more variables.

---------
Ken - A700 Owner..
Some of my work at:
http://gallery.cascadephotoworks.com
 
andrea buso said:
rrcphoto said:
andrea buso said:
I had all the 4 lenses mentioned above and I'm not so sure about what
you say.
then with different copies we also get different results. so it is
hard too be sure.
in any case the Zeiss 85mm at f8 or 9 is softer than at f4.
Click to expand...
they all are - it's called diffraction.

at f/8 or f/9 they are all leveled.
Click to expand...
No kidding! Is it called diffraction?
In any case the canon 1.8 peak its performance at f8 while the Zeiss
peak at f4.
If you have used those lenses extensively you should know it. With
the zeiss the difference between f4 and f8, in real life shooting, is
quite significant.
But it seems that you have seen the Sony Zeiss 85mm only on the web
page of B&H.
Click to expand...
chuckling .. nice .. perhaps you should also know what you are talking about - I made the mistake of assuming you did. so here we go.

okay, on photozone.de the zeiss is tested using a 12Mp cropped body, the canon 85mm 1.8 is tested using a 8Mp cropped body, therefore the starting influence will be difference between those two tests because of the pixel pitch involved. (and btw, the 85 1.8 does start to tail off in performance at f/8).

diffraction effect has a direct correlation between pixel pitch and aperture.

the pixel pitch difference between a 12Mp 1.5 crop and a 8Mp 1.6 crop is significant - which is what you are seeing there, however, the pixel pitch difference between a 24Mp FF and a 21MP full frame is not.

Therefore, the resolving power, and diffraction effect will equalize out between the two as long as the two sensors are close to the same pixel pitch - the differences will not be significant as you are attempting to imply. neither one will be at their ultimate sharpness point at F/8 or F/8 on a high density FF sensor.

what is potentially not correct however, is shooting the D700 versus 5DII and the A900 at f/9 - as diffraction will effect the 5DII and A900 to a greater degree than the D700 - at 100% inspection - again by the aspect of the aperture and pixel pitch.

but if you honestly think side by side the 85mm 1.8 beats out the Zeiss - then what the heck are you purchasing over here?
 
rrcphoto said:
andrea buso said:
rrcphoto said:
andrea buso said:
I had all the 4 lenses mentioned above and I'm not so sure about what
you say.
then with different copies we also get different results. so it is
hard too be sure.
in any case the Zeiss 85mm at f8 or 9 is softer than at f4.
Click to expand...
they all are - it's called diffraction.

at f/8 or f/9 they are all leveled.
Click to expand...
No kidding! Is it called diffraction?
In any case the canon 1.8 peak its performance at f8 while the Zeiss
peak at f4.
If you have used those lenses extensively you should know it. With
the zeiss the difference between f4 and f8, in real life shooting, is
quite significant.
But it seems that you have seen the Sony Zeiss 85mm only on the web
page of B&H.
Click to expand...
chuckling .. nice .. perhaps you should also know what you are
talking about - I made the mistake of assuming you did. so here we
go.

okay, on photozone.de the zeiss is tested using a 12Mp cropped body,
the canon 85mm 1.8 is tested using a 8Mp cropped body, therefore the
starting influence will be difference between those two tests because
of the pixel pitch involved. (and btw, the 85 1.8 does start to tail
off in performance at f/8).

diffraction effect has a direct correlation between pixel pitch and
aperture.

the pixel pitch difference between a 12Mp 1.5 crop and a 8Mp 1.6 crop
is significant - which is what you are seeing there, however, the
pixel pitch difference between a 24Mp FF and a 21MP full frame is not.

Therefore, the resolving power, and diffraction effect will equalize
out between the two as long as the two sensors are close to the same
pixel pitch - the differences will not be significant as you are
attempting to imply.

what is potentially not correct however, is shooting the D700 versus
5DII and the A900 at f/9 - as diffraction will effect the 5DII and
A900 to a greater degree than the D700 - at 100% inspection - again
by the aspect of the aperture and pixel pitch.

but if you honestly think side by side the 85mm 1.8 beats out the
Zeiss - then what the heck are you purchasing over here?
Click to expand...
Actually you need to know what you are talking about... Try this..

SLRGear has not tested the Sony Primes yet.. but one might look at how Zeiss designs their optics.

If you have not been here before click on the colored graph up pops a tool that will show you the sharpness of each lens at several fstops and for Zooms at key focal lengths

What you will find is that all lenses do not get better at f8. That is a rule of thumb good for low cost lenses with average optics. From my experience which is much less than Andrea Zeiss specialized in give you sharper wider aperture which make for exceptional portraits and narrow DOF shooting

Here is a CZ 24-70
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1181/cat/83
Here is the Canon Prime.
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/154/cat/10

And interestingly the Sony zoom beats the Prime at F4 all focal lengths and the Prime is only better than the Zoom at F8 and F22. Odd they picked the aperture where the Canon lens is better than the CZ and picked the RAW converter that favors Canon. (Probably because they know what works for Canon and assume it works as well for other things)

Not saying it was on purpose.. but from not fixing errors in specs etc. over the years.. there is no real interest in a "level playing field" "passes as OK for most" is the standard at DPR.

---------
Ken - A700 Owner..
Some of my work at:
http://gallery.cascadephotoworks.com
 
Dayo said:
I'll prefer if you used Capture NX for Nikon reviews but I certainly
wouldn't whine about your choice of ACR as I can understand the logic
behind the choice.

It is a reasonable baseline although it may not the best out there.
The other option is to use each maker's tool for their cameras but I
am sure the Sony Zealots would howl "bias" even then.

I certainly don't want to see Bibble used and C1 is clearly made for
Canon anyway.

I'll say just ignore the brand warriors and get on with it.
Click to expand...
Actually if they use the tools the camera came with.. I would have accept that.. It would be bad for Sony and it would be Sony's fault.. I have suggest a few times to them they license a version of Bibble over what they have now.. Write a Sony plug in for matching the camera settings.

Some would scream.. but hey if the free tools are better that is a valid value point for the camera as a product and if Nikon's tools in the box are better.. its not fair to Nikon to pass that over.

What bothers us is the false assumption that ACR is a level playing field for all cameras it is not.. because they do NR on first render the user can not turn off and it appears the NR profile is tuned to Canon. Where good NR tools know you need profiles for each camera.

these test have the pretense of being "scientific" with controls when in reality the controls themselves introduce more variables.. its like testing water samples in plastic cups that bleed off chemicals at lower Ph values. Junk Science.

---------
Ken - A700 Owner..
Some of my work at:
http://gallery.cascadephotoworks.com
 
dw73 said:
dpreview seriously needs to show a little more class in how it treats
its customers. What you have essentially done in your response to
Click to expand...
I didn't know DPR was selling anything. What have you bought from DPR? :D
 
It was really just a play on words - of course I don't buy anything here, so look at the question this way - dpreview has this great site that, for free, allows everyone to get all of this great information, right? So, regardless of whether it's money or providing a free service, I just considered all of us "customers".

Thanks to dpreview, because they allow for this forum, they put up with all the accusations, etc.
 
Ken_5D said:
Actually you need to know what you are talking about... Try this..
SLRGear has not tested the Sony Primes yet.. but one might look at
how Zeiss designs their optics.
Click to expand...
I do, I've been using Zeiss optics for alot longer than they've been out in a Sony mount.
Ken_5D said:
If you have not been here before click on the colored graph up pops a
tool that will show you the sharpness of each lens at several fstops
and for Zooms at key focal lengths
Click to expand...
Again, that is in correlation with the pixel density and/or pitch of the actual camera used as the baseline test as the point of influence on sharpness - not of the lens elements itself.

MTF's or base optical chactertistics do not change as you stop down the aperture unless it's diffraction based loss of resolution. the lens will sharpen up as it starts to use less and less of the full elements, and then progressively weaken after diffraction starts to play more of a role.

Diffraction will cause a loss of resolution - the degree of influence of that will be determined by the pixel pitch when viewing at 100%.

if all things are equal, the len optics isn't the barrier to resolution - it's the aperture - which is why on a A900 it looks as good as it gets around F/5.6 (most likely actually around 6.3). The 85mm 1.4 will also look better than the 85mm 1.8 on the same pixel pitch simply because zeiss is using a more rounded and I dare say, better aperture arrangement than the much cheaper canon.

if both systems are at f/9 then both are duly affected the same by the effect of diffraction.

in this example, both lenses are well beyond their optimimum level of sharpness based upon diffraction .. this isn't a zeiss versus sony versus canon .. it's simply a by product of a higher density sensor.
 
rrcphoto said:
andrea buso wrote:

but if you honestly think side by side the 85mm 1.8 beats out the
Zeiss - then what the heck are you purchasing over here?
Click to expand...
I did not see it beat it, what does mean that. beat it....

I only said that on a bottles test at f8, the 85mm canon may shows a sharper image. that does not mean that it "beats" the zeiss at all. there is a lot more than sharpnes at a given aperture. Because at the end a photo taken with the 85mm Zeiss will look better than one taken with the 85mm Canon 1.8, the Canon gives to the images a final look that is flatter and contrasty at the same time, which is typical of many 300 bucks lenses. that is enough for me to spend 1300$ for the zeiss. Then again from f1.4 to f 5,6 the zeiss will be better than the canon. not mentioning bhoken, colors and tonal transition

among the 85mm i had the canon and nikon 1.8, the canon 1.2 and now the zeiss 1.4, over all the Canon 1.2 and the Zeiss deliver better image quality than the other two.

over all the canon 1.8 is the one that focus fastest, followed by the zeiss, the canon 1.2 II is still quite slow on AF speed. There are reason for using the 1.8 over the 1.2 canon in certain circustamces. one should own both lenses.

The zeiss is a more all round lenses than both canons and I found the same for the 135mm Zeiss, and some Sony lenses. That is one of the among many reasons why i'm using sony ( and phase one) instead of N and C.
 
We don't pay anything to visit here or read the articles, but don't believe for 1 second that they don't get paid for our presence here. We view and (hopefully, in the advertisers view, anyway) click on their ads. That generates revenue from advertising. So much so, that Amazon purchased this website...

So yes, indirectly, we are customer, creating revenue for this "store". If the store doesn't have the product you're looking for (reviews, forums, whatever), you'll take your time (business) away, and they will lose money.

--
-Matt
Rent Alpha Mount Lenses! - http://www.alphalensrental.com
http://www.ouatphotography.com
 
Ken_5D said:
My apologies. I work for a French company I should avoid those
mistakes :)
Click to expand...
Do not worry at all. You should se my mail since when I live in the States, well also when I was living in Paris, I got wrote Mrs. before my name many times LOL

After all Italy is the only country that I can think of, where we name boys Andrea, without an "s" or any other letter to make it sound more masculine.

The hirony of this name is that he comes from the ancient Greek "Andros" which means "man", if I stand correct.
 
dw73 said:
dpreview seriously needs to show a little more class in how it treats
its customers. What you have essentially done in your response to
destiny is provide an insult rather than say Yes or No.

Seriously, AW - what do you take us for?

Absolutely amazing seeing the dpreviewer insult its customer...

I guess Sony's unstoppable emerging presence in the dslr world is
getting somebody on edge!
Click to expand...
You pay to read the reviews and use the forums here at DPR?

If you don't like how they 'treat' you here take your money somewhere else. ; )

--
Neil
http://thewarmland.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top