18-150mm vs 40mm 2.8 STM - not good for the 18-150

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
OP kb1dqh Forum Member • Posts: 83
Re: 18-150mm vs 40mm 2.8 STM - not good for the 18-150

Alastair Norcross wrote:

kb1dqh wrote:

Final conclusion! I returned my 18-150 and got a new copy. I really think it's a lot better. Take a look here. These are all crops based on the same original scene in the first post.

18-150 original copy

18-150 new copy

32 1.4 M lens (in love with it)

40mm 2.8 stm

18-150 original copy

18-150 new copy

32mm test

40mm test

And remember these were taken from the following scene. Each shot is unique, i.e. I took one for each focus point, yet results are consistent.

Lesson: There are copy variations in the 18-150. I think the new one is much better than before and, although not as good as the primes, not as different as before.

The crops from the new copy do look better than the old ones. The lighting is different, though too. Shutter speeds on the new ones are 1/2 and 2/5, but 1.3 sec on the old one (for same aperture and ISO). So there was over a stop more light for the second shots. I don't know whether that would affect the results, but it might (perhaps some camera movement during the 1.3 sec exposures?).

It's possible, but in the original the 40mm looked pretty good with the long exposure, it was only the 18-150 in all 3 shots that didn't. Now they look fairly close in all 3. It's a heavy duty tripod too. So it's possible, but I really think there's copy variation. Less scientific, but when zooming in on the screen after taking some pictures or trees and houses, the shots sure seem sharper than before. I'm not getting the same nervous sense I was getting before.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow