If You Get A Good Copy It's AMAZING Locked

highdesertmesa wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

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.

False. The lens has soft corners from 24 to about 40mm. That's too much of the focal range that is compromised given the retail price at the time I purchased it. Performance is indeed very good from about 50-250.

They won't match a $3k lens but even at 24mm they are not to the point it ruins most shots.  With most shots taken casually corner sharpness is irrelevant.  For how my shots viewed, and who views them, corner sharpness is irrelevant to a great degree.  I have seen a lot of lenses with far worse corner sharpness and fringing at 24-40mm than the 24-240mm.  I would say that from 30-240mm the lens is very good for my copy but personal preference comes into play here also.  From 24-30mm the sharpness across the bulk of the frame is very good with corners suffering more the closer you get to 24mm.  I find this to be more than acceptable for having a lens with this range, size, weight and overall IQ.

Hey, if you're happy with the lens, don't let those for whom it's not good enough get you down. You be you, as they say.

The good thing is we all have the freedom to use the gear that works best for us.  In my younger days I used to be way more obsessed with the best IQ and other technical aspects of photography.  These days I have tempered this obsession and have been much happier on vacations, family gatherings and hiking.  A lens like the 24-240mm lets me satisfy that obsession a little more without incurring any additional penalties.