• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

next PZ lens test review: Sony E 18-105mm f/4 G OSS


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,323 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 09 November 2016 - 11:55 PM

http://www.photozone...-sony18105f4oss

 

Not so bad ... other than distortions.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#2 lwestfall

lwestfall

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 10 November 2016 - 06:55 AM

Great work! Looks like the lens's popularity is justified. It's like that pincushion distortion abnormally concentrates the center resolution. So how much exactly does the resolution go down with distortion correction? Any reason to choose the 16-70 Zeiss over this other than the wider wide end and smaller stowed footprint?

#3 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,323 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 10 November 2016 - 08:01 AM

Well, take a balloon with some text on it and stretch it. What happens to the text ? It gets bigger. Translated to lenses this means that the pixel are "stretched". Of course, pixels are discrete so their state is stretched into neighboring pixels causing a decrease in resolution. 

If you take an image at 105mm (at 6000x4000px), the left/right center loss accumulates to about 400px that have to be interpolated/stretched.
Note: I'm not sure whether this is a 'linear' loss or whether the relative loss increases the more you move to the borders. If it is not linear the interpolation effort rises accordingly (more blur).

 

Well, the Zeiss lens is wider. Personally I'm not a lover of that 18mm setting (vs 16mm). But as a package I would prefer the Sony G lens.


  • lwestfall likes this
Chief Editor
photozone.de

#4 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,448 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 10 November 2016 - 10:05 AM

So... really the king of pincushion distortions... and not only in the longer half of the range. This is nucking futs. How do we call this "anti-fisheye"... the "frog-eye"? :) Actually, no, the "frog" theme is reserved to the Laowa brand, so I'm open to suggestions. :P



#5 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,586 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 10 November 2016 - 11:01 AM

So... really the king of pincushion distortions... and not only in the longer half of the range. This is nucking futs. How do we call this "anti-fisheye"... the "frog-eye"? :) Actually, no, the "frog" theme is reserved to the Laowa brand, so I'm open to suggestions. :P

 

I don't know if evolution has figured out concave eyes?

My suggestion: oomph lens (vs fisheye lens). oomph being the sound one makes when being hit in the gut, which does create a concave belly for a moment.


  • mst and Rover like this

#6 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 10 November 2016 - 11:35 AM

"At the long end the image corners are soft but then how often do you require sharp corners at this setting "

 

Well, if you do landscape, it's important.

 

I understand the reason for which this lens is popular. Let's also recall that it's cheaper than the SEL1670Z. But, in the end, I'm happy I went with the latter, even though we know it's somewhat disappointing. The test by PZ is welcome, because it's possible to compare both lenses on the same methodology. In the past I saw comparisons based on images, and I could see that basically the two lenses are overapping - the wild sample variations probably can also change things. But I didn't like the idea of "losing" hundreds of pixels for the interpolation, as Klaus described. I'm not against IQ fixes in post-processing, it's a legitimate trade-off. For this lens, they went just too far. Since Sony advertises this lens mostly for videomakers, that interpolation might be fine for them.

 

At the end of the day, since these are the only APS-C lenses in this range, I think Sigma could be able to create some interesting competition here.


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#7 chrismiller

chrismiller

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 205 posts
  • LocationCambridge, UK

Posted 10 November 2016 - 03:07 PM

Typo many rather than may:

 

Some many not like the slight lag between turning the zoom/focus ring and...

 

thanks for the review.

 

:)


  • Klaus likes this

#8 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,323 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 10 November 2016 - 09:51 PM

"At the long end the image corners are soft but then how often do you require sharp corners at this setting "

 

Well, if you do landscape, it's important.

 

 

 

Well, we are talking about 105mm there thus "160mm".  Never say never but for landscapes that's very long. At 70mm (105mm) the corners are better.

 

However, of course, it is not a stellar lens (2 1/2 stars).


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#9 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,586 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 10 November 2016 - 10:02 PM

Many do shoot tele landscape, even 200mm on APS-C...



#10 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,075 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 11 November 2016 - 05:45 AM

Many do shoot tele landscape, even 200mm on APS-C...

I do 😊

#11 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,550 posts

Posted 11 November 2016 - 07:09 AM

  Are we giving it too much credit?  The lowly kit  Nikor 18-105mm VR lens beats it hands down.....

 

       and it's for peanuts!

 

 

(execpt F4 mid tele up)



#12 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,323 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 11 November 2016 - 02:42 PM

Well, the test was done on 24mp ... where the Nikkor was tested on 16mp.

 

I just finished the next Canon lab tests and the difference between 21mp and 50mp is ... well ... obvious.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#13 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,075 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 11 November 2016 - 03:53 PM

We have several lenses in this range the Nikon 18-105, Canon 18-135 and its three  variants and Sony.

My wild  guess from what I have seen on the build quality side it's Sony-Nikon-Canon, however optically speaking it is Canon -Nikon- Sony of course we are speaking about the STM or USM variants of the Canon lens.

Am I right ?



#14 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 15 November 2016 - 03:26 PM

I also do landscape with very long lenses. Actually, the only limit to me is atmospheric blur. 300/400mm in APS-C mode are generally fine, something longer can work depending on the subject distance and blur.

 

PS I think email notifications are out of order again?


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#15 Ralf Bauer

Ralf Bauer

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 21 December 2016 - 12:32 PM

@ toni-a  ..... i can confirm

 

The first thing I did after reading.  I took my Canon 18-135 3.5-5.6 IS (first version) ... bought seven years ago with my first DSLR Kit Canon D550 from the shelf.  Put a cheap EOS-NEX adapter on NEX-6 .... and tested. 

 

Works fine, fine fine. Manual focussing nails shots precisely. IS works,  EXIFs were saved correctly. Lightroom finds lens profile. Image IQ ..... I would not expect too much buying this Sony E 18-105 F4 G OSS (except AF);

 

Klaus, thanks you for this review!



#16 DrJon

DrJon

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 11 January 2017 - 05:57 PM

Can I quickly ask, on behalf of someone else who is having issues posting, are the sharpness results for this lens with or without corrections applied?

Thanks



#17 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,323 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 12 January 2017 - 08:24 AM

Without. Please note that distortion correction TENDS to decrease the MTFs.
CA correction has a limited, positive influence beyond 3px.
Chief Editor
photozone.de




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de