DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

More 16 F2.8 comparisons: corrected vs. uncorrected vs. JPG

Started Oct 20, 2021 | Discussions thread
Sittatunga Veteran Member • Posts: 5,406
Re: More 16 F2.8 comparisons: corrected vs. uncorrected vs. JPG

sportyaccordy wrote:

This lens is a mixed bag for me

Good price, FL and spec.......... but corrections rob you of a good bit of resolution. Just guessing it looks like a 1.1-1.2x crop which is like 20-40% of your MPs. For a lens that I imagine will be used for landscapes a lot that's kind of a bummer

That depends on the aspect ratio you use.  If you use 16:9 for example, and DxO PhotoLab (when they make a profile) you will lose a very small proportion of the pixels once the image has been stretched into shape compared with a 3:2 crop.  And the main reason people need a lot of pixels is for huge crops which rather defeat the purpose of a lens this wide.  Unless you're cropping to avoid converging verticals, in which case Canon would rather sell you a £2700 TS-E lens instead of this £320 job.   A lens this wide for half the price of a Sigma 50mm isn't a missed opportunity, it's a whole new ball game.

But I guess that's reasonable to expect for the price/size. Kind of seems like a missed opportunity like the RF 50 1.8

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

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