Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next OL lens lab test - Tamron 24mm f/2.8 Di III OSD M1:2
#1
https://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaf...amron24f28

More of the same
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#2
The 20 will be entertaining. EPZ found 8.1% native distortion which is the record value. Can it be called a fisheye when uncorrected, or does that term describe something more specific?
#3
“The Tamron 24mm f/2.8 Di III OSD M1:2 stays a bit short of the optical quality that we have seen from the Tamron 24mm f/2.8 Di III OSD M1:2 ”

I think the latter should be the 35mm.

"... it still feels like an answer to a question that nobody has asked"

The reason for this triplet of lenses is macro capabilities, otherwise they actually don't make a lot of sense.

"The 20 will be entertaining. EPZ found 8.1% native distortion"

Yep, it's huge!
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 Æ’/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm Æ’/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm Æ’/2.8, Samyang 8mm Æ’/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm Æ’/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.
#4
I didn't see 8% but it's bad, yes.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#5
Maybe it depends strongly on focus distance and their use (and testing) case was more conducive to revealing it, who knows. Their finding for the 24mm was 6.1%, so a bit more than what you discovered, for some reason. Even for the 35, they found 1.2%.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)