It seems like all I've been able to o is photograph in poor light lately! I didn't post anything yet because the photos are not that flattering; with all of the noise at high ISO and potential for motion-blur, I'm not sure it's "fair" to judge the lens, but maybe I can come up with something. It seems to focus pretty well with my Nex-6 even when light is not ideal, and at f4, it is still sharp in the center.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Does the Sony E 18-105 F4 G stands by its name?
- Thread starter ErnestMiami
- Start date
Please explain what does back focussing issue mean?! How would a contrast detect based focus system have issues with backfocussing?
Unless your focus dot is small enough and don't include the background then there is a chance that the camera thinks that you are focussing on the background. I've never had a "back focussing issue" with my e-mount AF lenses...
User errors is the most common issue with this lens, that is my guess ;-) Otherwise, can you live with the size (it doesn't change size during zoom) and the motordriven zoom then AND the fact that you will need a lens profile to correct distortion when using RAW then I have only heard really good things about this lens. Also this lens os quite unique in the camera world and pretty special for video work. Thumbs up to Sony to be brave.
Newer Nex cameras use PDAF-on-sensor -- still cannot have the same backfocus issue as DSLRs, where the PDAF sensor is in a different location.
I think this is what happens when people say "backfocus". It's focusing on the background or behind the target. I took some low-light photos, which are harder for the camera to focus, and the 18-105 did fine most of the time. One, I can see where it decided to lock onto the background a foot behind the target. It happens. I use multi-mode, although, people have posted that using a small focus area isn't a guarantee that the camera doesn't pick up the background. If I can recognize that that is what is happening, I can also use DMF.
If the camera focuses on the background 1 foot behind the target, the user might not notice. It's a bit harsh to call it a user-error, even though strictly-speaking it might not be a camera "error". The camera has to make a choice and sometimes it's good sometimes less so. How is the camera to know what you wanted to focus on?
I think where I start making it the "camera error" is with face detection on, and the camera STILL focuses on the bushes behind the faces, even though there are nice green boxes highlighting the faces. I think the Nex-6 is better than the Nex-5 in this regard, but there are still times where it prefers foliage.
hi, what you meant by "unique" about the OSS ? is the OSS better than the zeiss 16-70 ?
i need the "best" OSS lens as I'm a smoker so my hand can't stay still for more than 1 second
I didn't say that the OSS is uniquehi, what you meant by "unique" about the OSS ? is the OSS better than the zeiss 16-70 ?
i need the "best" OSS lens as I'm a smoker so my hand can't stay still for more than 1 second
I have read that the OSS is damn fine. The OSS on the SEL18-200 lenses however (except the LE version) have Active Steady Shot, as opposed to just steady shot, which would be kick ass in video when you walk around with the lens. A comparison test could be nice here.I think it is wrong to translate a DSLR PDAF problem to mirrorless cameras with on-sensor PDAF pixels. Unless there is proof we do not know what kind of issues are inherent to this new type of PDAF focussing.
I still think it is a user error. fair enough, understanding new cameras and there AF system is by no means easy and mistakes can easily happen, but it is still user errors ;-)
What you are referring to are software trying to be intelligent (recognizing a face etc). The software will very rarely be more intelligent than the user why you should be aware that software may make mistakes and of limitations. Always double check what the camera is doing for you.
Last edited:
One of my folder have some sample picture when i first get this lens last year, also check out the Vancouver fold some of the photo from this lens also.
Loading…
www.flickr.com
Last edited:
smallLebowski
Leading Member
- Messages
- 996
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 633
Yes, that older version fat silver lens 18-200 is unique lens. I saw a youtube video (not comparison) of 18-200 and it was amazing how it can stay stabilized when guy was literally running - impressive. I'm sure usual steady shot won't be able to do that. That 18-200 was made for video mostly. Nice lens.I didn't say that the OSS is uniquehi, what you meant by "unique" about the OSS ? is the OSS better than the zeiss 16-70 ?
i need the "best" OSS lens as I'm a smoker so my hand can't stay still for more than 1 second
forpetessake
Veteran Member
Just like any other lens. At night all cats are black. The softness due to the noise reduction completely obliterates the resolution of every lens.
Yes, and the newer SEL 18-100mm with power zoom has active steady shot as well.Yes, that older version fat silver lens 18-200 is unique lens. I saw a youtube video (not comparison) of 18-200 and it was amazing how it can stay stabilized when guy was literally running - impressive. I'm sure usual steady shot won't be able to do that. That 18-200 was made for video mostly. Nice lens.I didn't say that the OSS is uniquehi, what you meant by "unique" about the OSS ? is the OSS better than the zeiss 16-70 ?
i need the "best" OSS lens as I'm a smoker so my hand can't stay still for more than 1 second
Example video:
Last edited:
smallLebowski
Leading Member
- Messages
- 996
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 633
Correction: it's 18-105 not 18-100mm AND it does NOT have active steadyshot, unlike original 18-200Yes, and the newer SEL 18-100mm with power zoom has active steady shot as well.Yes, that older version fat silver lens 18-200 is unique lens. I saw a youtube video (not comparison) of 18-200 and it was amazing how it can stay stabilized when guy was literally running - impressive. I'm sure usual steady shot won't be able to do that. That 18-200 was made for video mostly. Nice lens.I didn't say that the OSS is uniquehi, what you meant by "unique" about the OSS ? is the OSS better than the zeiss 16-70 ?
i need the "best" OSS lens as I'm a smoker so my hand can't stay still for more than 1 second
Example video:
No, if you watch the video it is a comparison between sel18-200le and selp18-200Correction: it's 18-105 not 18-100mm AND it does NOT have active steadyshot, unlike original 18-200Yes, and the newer SEL 18-100mm with power zoom has active steady shot as well.Yes, that older version fat silver lens 18-200 is unique lens. I saw a youtube video (not comparison) of 18-200 and it was amazing how it can stay stabilized when guy was literally running - impressive. I'm sure usual steady shot won't be able to do that. That 18-200 was made for video mostly. Nice lens.I didn't say that the OSS is uniquehi, what you meant by "unique" about the OSS ? is the OSS better than the zeiss 16-70 ?
i need the "best" OSS lens as I'm a smoker so my hand can't stay still for more than 1 second
Example video:
So I meant the SEL 18-200 (not 18-100mm of course) with power zoom which also have active steady shot.
If you think the lens has a "back focus" issue you should send it in for service. The claims of PDAF not being able to have backfocus issues are only true with a prime lens in mirriorless NOT a zoom. The copy i am currently playing with has good parfocality. (put your camera on a tripod in good light aiming at a printer target. Put batteries or something in front and back of the target on a diag. Zoom in 100% and manual focus. Slowly zoom out and back in. The best way to do this is tethered or with a remote. Did the stuff stay in focus in the whole time? Did the close and far items come in and out of focus at about the same time? While you are doing this you may want to some basic tests for simple decentering.)
It should be easy to test for misfocus with manual and auto focusing on simple high contrast subject, e.g. Printed text - if the shots done in MF mode are consistently and visibly better than shots in AF mode, there's a problem.
In my tests, AF is very close to MF (of course in real life shots, AF may snap onto something other than what you want, but it has nothing to do with lens being defective)
I thought the "micro adjust" was just for adapted a-mount lenses? (DSLRs need the micro-adjust in case there's a difference between the normal sensor plane and the PDAF sensor plane.)
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum