RubberDials wrote:
PWPhotography wrote:
RubberDials wrote:
PWPhotography wrote:
RubberDials wrote:
justmeMN wrote:
RubberDials wrote:
Exactly! EF mount is Canon's crown jewels and they cannot afford to abandon or replace it. It is also not suitable for a mirrorless system.
Huh? Some owners of Sony FF mirrorless cameras use Canon EF lenses.
Well you can shave with a razor tied to a broom handle, but that doesn't mean it's a solution or desirable.
You don't know if you don't experience. If you try you will change your perception.
The point is not that you can't get good results adapting EF lenses to Sony but that EF mount is not suitable as a mirrorless mount for Canon.
Oh, that we don't know until Canon release a FF mirrorless. I agree EF lenses are not suitable on EF-mount mirrorless, but should work as good as e-mount on EF-M mount if Canon designed well.
There are a number of reasons for this which I'll go into if you want.
To me and many adapted lenses are both solution and very desirable, such as still the best 24-70L/2.8 II zoom from Canon in this category over all competitors including Sony own FE 24-70 GM, Canon is sharper at 70mm side and has (much) better sunstars.
The Lens Rentals bench testing of the 24-70 Sony shows it to be be slightly better than the Canon. I don't know about the sunstars.
Yes, I have read many happy owners. But in consensus, Canon version is better at 70mm side.
Did you look at the Lens Rental MTFs? The Sony is better than the Canon at 70mm. Ten samples tested.
Maybe on the outdated perception in some early tests I have seen, and from what I have read in Sony forum. But I did hear Sony has greatly improved QC on this lens and newer GM lenses after.
Guess similar to FE 16-35G/4.0 OSS that I used to own. At 16mm side, it's as sharp as and actually slightly sharper in center area than Canon EF 16-35L/4.0 IS that I currently adapted on Sony bodies, but Canon is sharper at 35mm side.
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/04/sony-goes-world-class-the-24-70mm-f2-8-gm-mtf-and-variance-tests/
I don't think Sony should even bother in designing and manufacturing TS-E lenses as Canon already done the best, and they are MF lenses anyway, just so much easier and effective on e-mount with EVF and focus assistant tools.
There is no burning need for Sony to design a TS lens, as you say and I don't think they will bother unless they can make an AF one. The A-mount STF lens was manual focus only and the new e-mount 100 STF is AF.
Don't think TS-E lenses can be AF But relative new FE 100mm STF is an awesome portrait lens, although I still will get one between 85 GM and forthcoming Sigma e-mount 85 Art (just patiently wait to see e-mount Art lenses), just more useful to me than specialized STF lens.
Well Minolta made an AF 500mm mirror and a 1-3x AF macro zoom in their day, and now Sony have made the STF autofocus so you never know with the TS lens!
Doubt it after T/S out and still can AF
I would love to own the 100STF but it is less versatile than an 85. Sadly it is always compared to 85 @f1.4, when it's real purpose is to be able to shoot portraits with the whole face in focus and the background smoothed out, not blurred away.
Have you considered the Batis 85? I don't like the design much but it is very sharp and resistant to flare. The GM is not the fastest focussing. A native Sigma Art in e-mount should be a bit smaller than the DSLR version because that has to fit Canon.
Just bought Batis 135mm recently on a sweet deal. Love it, one of main reasons is its relative compact size and light weight, half of Sigma 135/1.8 Art. Also it's my very first pure Zeiss lens. I can see Zeiss contrast and color. Despite it's a f2.8 lens but still has great background rendition and good bokeh due to 135mm FL.
85mm is a different story. I'd prefer faster aperture. 85 GM is fantastic with one of the best (if not the best) bokeh and smoothness, but it's a bit slow in AF from what I have read and generates a bit AF noise. Will wait to see Sigma 85/1.4 Art e-mount as it's great in EF/F mount. But will choose one of them, just not in high priority.
I have seen sunstars from FE 24-70 GM, not very impressive compared to Canon's version. Actually this is a general issue that Sony lenses so far are still not very good in sunstars which happen important to me as I shoot many evening cityscape photos, but some FE lenses are great in sunstars such as Zeiss Loxia 21 and CV 15mm primes. One of reasons I will keep EF 24-70L/2.8 II and likely will be the only EF lens keep after one or two years. Will replace EF 16-35L/4.0 IS with FE 16-35 GM and eventually will sell 500L/4.0 IS.
Rishi has praised the FE16-35/2.8 for its sunstars - and he was formally a 16-35LIII user. Maybe PM him about it - he might reply.
I will get FE 16-35/2.8 GM soon to replace EF 16-35L/4.0 IS. One stop faster and native e-mount are big deals. I am very impressed in its optical quality.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sony/fe-16-35mm-f2.8-gm-sel1635gm/review/
Although personally I have a concern in its sunstars due to 11-blade design so it generates 22 light rays that is a bit too many, and prefer 9-blade (18 rays). Also it seems you need to stop down to F16 and beyond to get good quality sunstars.
https://www.colbybrownphotography.com/review-sony-16-35-f28-gm-wide-angle-lens/
Still not as crispy as from EF 24-70L/2.8 II although understand it's in different FL range that has great sunstars even at F9 and can rival prime lenses such as Loxia 21 in sunstars quality.
from EF 24-70L/2.8 II at F9
