Re: If You Get A Good Copy It's AMAZING
highdesertmesa wrote:
MikeJ9116 wrote:
ProDude wrote:
MikeJ9116 wrote:
This type of lens is not for everyone but I think most would find it to be a very useful tool to have at their disposal. Dustin Abbott's review indicates the uniqueness and capability of this lens. He can have any lens he desires and he still sees the value of having the 24-240mm in his stable of lenses.
That's what I was trying to get across, when I was stumped by the usual snooties. Nobody is fussier then I when it comes to lens performance. But this case is an exception to the rule as far as I'm concerned.
I think a lot of people wrote the 24-240mm off as a garbage lens when they saw the corrections it needs at 24mm without looking at what it is really capable of delivering.
No, we (or at least I) wrote it off after trying it and seeing how terribly soft the corners are at 24mm after correction, especially for the retail price when it first came out. I'm glad the OP now has a copy that is not decentered, but the corners in the image posted are still soft/smeared – just zoom in far enough and you can see they look like they are blurred/swirly compared to the center. This lens from 24-40 is an APS-C lens stretched to fit full frame, and the results bear that out. For general use, though it's not *that* bad.
If this is all you did before writing it off then you are the very person I am referring to. Saying it is an APS-C lens stretched to a FF shows your lack of knowledge about this lens. Once off 24mm the corner corrections aren't needed and the lens performs very well. Maybe you missed this part of its ability. I have one, use it often and it is far from "not that bad" for what situations it can cover. It is actually surprisingly good.