Posts: 7,712
Threads: 1,754
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
37
... it's time for a review again.
Next Sigma 18-50mm DC DN.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 1,226
Threads: 109
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
19
Woohooo!!
On a Fuji body I assume?
If so, will you test both 26 and 40MP?
Thanks :-)
Posts: 7,712
Threads: 1,754
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
37
I will stick to 26mp for the formal tests.
The sample images are already shot at 40mp.
The reason is that Markus has many 26mp MTFs in stock ... and there's still a faint hope that he'll finally publish them.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 2,856
Threads: 30
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
19
Is there anything we can do to help with that? Proofreading? Ghostwriting? :-)
Posts: 7,712
Threads: 1,754
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
37
Damn, the RF 24-240mm is not as bad as I thought. Was hoping for a 1* review ;-)
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 2,856
Threads: 30
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
19
Maybe the Sony version would give you that. :-)
Posts: 1,536
Threads: 20
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
7
(03-08-2023, 10:20 AM)Klaus Wrote: Damn, the RF 24-240mm is not as bad as I thought. Was hoping for a 1* review ;-) I mentioned as much quite a while ago. If I need a do all single lens setup, and can't bring anything much, it is my lens of choice. Does very well for its zoom range and price, if youd ask me. True, absolutely no bokeh monster, but that is not its purpose ....
For anything better and/or faster with a similar range you need a 2 or 3 lens setup, and you'd get into L-territory too ...
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
Posts: 7,712
Threads: 1,754
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
37
There is one odd/ugly/strange oddity with the 24-240mm - the auto-correction at 24mm
Straight JPEGs (and, as such, your viewfinder image) are more cropped than RAW files - converted e.g. in Adobe ACR (probably not via Canon DPP?)
Needless to say but Canon obviously thinks that the corner performance isn't there so they crop more than usual.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 2,856
Threads: 30
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
19
We're not going to be shocked. Over at Fred Miranda's forum (which I rejoined last fall after my account somehow got deleted after 10 years of devoted service...) people have shown how the 24-240 really looked at the wide end. I'm just curious if it's going to be as bad as the 16/2.8 formally... or worse. 
Posts: 2,508
Threads: 564
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
14
(03-09-2023, 09:47 PM)Klaus Wrote: Straight JPEGs (and, as such, your viewfinder image) are more cropped than RAW files - converted e.g. in Adobe ACR (probably not via Canon DPP?)
Unlike Sony OEM RAW converter Canon DPP is actually excellent and has a lot of features, for skin tones, it's by far my preferred, it came a long way since it was just a basic tool, and photos edited with DPP don't look exactly like camera JPG, so it would be interesting to know if it behaves like camera for cropping or differently.
|
