Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,758
    weight..ppfffffffffffft

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Cool Ring-flash design

    The budget ring flash I have is designed to fit on the FRONT of the lens, so yes, unless you were using a wrap-around-the-lens type (wide-mouth) of ring flash (which usually is a much more expensive design) ... it is going to be seen. Most "starter" photographers do not even have a ring flash. It is usually the hot-shoe mounted device (the HVL-F42AM, for example), which would not be seen and due to the substantially shorter profile of the 24mm lens, you do not catch the bottom lens' shadow from using that flash, either.

    Also, forget about considering SONY's HVL-RLAM Ring Light, as a light source for the 24mm lens.

    Name:  24mm-w-rlam.jpg
Views: 301
Size:  277.0 KB

    While it looks impressive and is definitely wide enough to clear the FOV issue, I would be hard pressed to recommend it as a "NIGHT LIGHT", much less a photographic light source. Sheesh. How lame is this thing ... below is a

    f/8 - 1/4 sec -ISO-800 shot ... directly at the RLAM. It's not reflected light, this looking right at the thing!

    Name:  Lame-exposure.jpg
Views: 282
Size:  247.6 KB

    A flash would have literally turned the exposure to all white, even at 1/250 sec. ... nope ... not this thing. You have to wait over 30 seconds to have that many photons. I mean, c'mon ... who's got that kind of time?

    I have a standard CP-filter on the 24mm ... and I can see the corners when I use it on the FF camera at aperture f/2.8.

    Now, to be fair, when I am outside, I rarely use this size wide-angle lens and defer to my Minolta AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 "D" (how do you spell convenience?). The PRIME usually gets used in the studio w/o a UV or CP on it. If anything, I use an over-sized Cokin set up ... to avoid the "edge". The Cokin Filter System (<- click here for mfr website) also allows me exceptionally flexibility with nearly all my lenses.

    I was just mentioning it as a possible point of contention.

    The Zeiss 24mm f/2 does offer some addition low-light capability ... but, again, that is usually a consideration, indoors.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 04-04-2010 at 04:49 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    One thing I had forgotten to mention was how this SONY 24mm f/2 would be effectively act like a 35mm f/2 on the APS-C cameras.

    When Minolta made a real AF 35mm f/2 for their film cameras, it was quite a nice lens. I know one thing, it is hard as heck to find one of those and pretty expensive when you do.

    C'mon SONY ... deliver the goods.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    670
    I have also been waiting for an improvement over the Minolta 24/2.8, so when i heard the Zeiss 24/2 announcement, i was excited at the prospects. Unfortunately, looks like this lens is bigger than i thought: significantly bigger than the 24/2.8 and not much smaller than the new Nikon 24/1.4. Disappointing, because if you're going to make it f/2, at least make it appreciably smaller than a 24/1.4.

    Hopefully, Sony can come out with a new 24/2.8 with aspherics and ED glass that delivers better IQ across the frame and at wider apertures while staying close to the compact dimensions of the Minolta version.

    Nikon: D300, D700, Nikkor: 24-70, 70-200, 70-300/VR, 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.4G, 60/2.8G, 180/2.8,
    Sigma: 10-20, 50-150/2.8, 50/2.8, Tamron: 17-50/2.8, 28-75/2.8, Tokina: 12-24, Zeiss: 25/2.8
    Olympus: E-520, E-3, 7-14, 9-18, 11-22, 12-60, 14-35/2, 14-54, 35-100/2, 50-200, 25/2.8, 35/3.5, 50/2
    Panasonic: G1, Leica: 14-50, 14-150, 25/1.4
    Sony: A700, A900, 24-85, 35-70, 70-210/4, 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 50/2.8, T 90 macro, Zeiss: 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8
    P&S: Canon S90, Panasonic: LX3


  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL USA
    Posts
    935
    If you are in such need of a fast wide prime, why not look at Sigma's 24/1.8? Even new the lens is less than $500 which I would assume to be considerably less than the Zeiss.
    Nikon D300 | MB-D10 | Nikkor 12-24/4 | Nikkor 50/1.8 | Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VRI | Sigma 18-50/2.8 | SB-800 | SB-80DX (x4) | Radiopopper JrX Studio |

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    The Zeiss is designed to make optimal use of the SONY's ADI system, so consider that.

    The SIGMA's edge-to-center-to-edge focus is also a bit soft, wide open. It'll be a crucial test to see if the Zeiss delivers on that aspect.

    Again, seeing is believing.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    670
    Quote Originally Posted by VTEC_EATER View Post
    If you are in such need of a fast wide prime, why not look at Sigma's 24/1.8? Even new the lens is less than $500 which I would assume to be considerably less than the Zeiss.
    Sigma 24/1.8? <shudder> No thanks. Had it for the 4/3 mount. Not impressed. AF struggles in low light, unimpressive IQ, a little bulky, prone to flare, PF at large apertures.

    Nikon: D300, D700, Nikkor: 24-70, 70-200, 70-300/VR, 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.4G, 60/2.8G, 180/2.8,
    Sigma: 10-20, 50-150/2.8, 50/2.8, Tamron: 17-50/2.8, 28-75/2.8, Tokina: 12-24, Zeiss: 25/2.8
    Olympus: E-520, E-3, 7-14, 9-18, 11-22, 12-60, 14-35/2, 14-54, 35-100/2, 50-200, 25/2.8, 35/3.5, 50/2
    Panasonic: G1, Leica: 14-50, 14-150, 25/1.4
    Sony: A700, A900, 24-85, 35-70, 70-210/4, 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 50/2.8, T 90 macro, Zeiss: 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8
    P&S: Canon S90, Panasonic: LX3


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •