MrT-Man

But here’s the thing. If you have a suboptimal copy, how do you know what an ideal copy is capable of? Most suboptimal copies can take very pleasing pictures, albeit with less sharpness at large ...

Yes, clearly Lens Rentals’ extensive and methodical variance testing on 15 copies should be ignored... How many people have said something along the lines of “this is a great lens, it’s just not ...

You can crop the 25 to 35 while still having great resolution, and you can crop a 55 to 80 or 85 while still having great resolution. So personally I would go with the 25 + 55 over a zoom. Unless ...

I'm honestly worried about sending it in -- given how great my current copy is, and given that I had an absolutely terrible experience with Precision, the last time that I sent a lens in... (they ...

Just to be safe, test it again using manual focus at full magnification, rather than AF. But again I'd suspect your lens is bad.

My understanding is that they replace the whole optical group for the recall. In other words, you essentially have a completely different lens than the one you sent in. Assuming that your shots are ...

sjazz, how dramatic of a difference is there between your Sony and the Loxia? I’ve been thinking about getting the Loxia to supplement my Batis 85, as it seems to have more pop to it.

There's the Voigtlander 65/2, which is native, but macro. But by all accounts, it's a phenomenally good lens, even for non-macro use.

I've shot extensively with both, I stand by my statement. It's got smoother bokeh, less CA, and some extra pop. In my eyes, the 85 is a solid lens, while the 135 is a spectacular lens.

85 used to be my limit as well. But then I discovered that 135 is actually a better focal length for portraits than 85 (if you’ve got sufficient working distance, of course) as it’s noticeably ...

The filter sizes are marked right on the rim of the lens. 72mm for the 35 and 49mm for the 55. For an ND filter, I'd second the recommendation for Breakthrough filters over B+W due to less color cast.

AF or MF? If you're talking MF, I would say all the Loxias. The 35 is a controversial lens, but I actually much prefer it to the 35/2.8 for its color and contrast. I also prefer the 50 to the Sony ...

I’ve found the best way to answer these sorts of questions is to look at image samples from each lens on Flickr. That should give you a general sense of the rendering style of each lens. It’s ...

I believe the Sigma is known to have less fringing. But fringing is only one attribute of a lens. The Sony has nicer bokeh and rendering, to my eyes, than the Sigma. To me, that’s far more ...

Good luck finding *any* lens that can shoot backlit tree branches at f/1.4 with no color fringing, when corrections are turned off... Your expectations are unrealistic.

I disagree, the Sony 35/1.4 is actually quite sharp wide open, *if* you have a good copy (speaking as someone who has gone through multiple copies).

It's as good as you'd expect it to be. Great color, contrast, and sharpness with virtually no CA, and with quick AF. Really, the only downside is the fact that it's f/2.8. You'll get plenty of ...

Great work. I think I'm seeing a little more microcontrast with the Loxia and a little better corner sharpness with the Voigtlander. How do you feel they compare in real world use? (aside for the ...

Jim, I appreciate your testing and good work. My comments weren’t directed at you, but at others on this forum. And I do agree that there have been some awful test shots posted on this forum. I ...

As someone who has maligned this lens, all I know is that I tried four bad copies and I now have a great copy. I've made no claims about what proportion of them are bad, or whether or not Sony is ...