Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
I got this lens yesterday and thought some samples would be of interest. Good and sharp as the scenic shows and nearly distortion free when shot straight on. A terrific lens, perfect on my M9.
Looks good to me. (That don't look like Eureka)
I've been considering this lens...
Try any flare-prone situations? Do you have/use a hood for this lens?
I got this lens yesterday and thought some samples would be of interest. Good and sharp as the scenic shows and nearly distortion free when shot straight on. A terrific lens, perfect on my M9.
Mmh, I would not call this "nearly distortion free", see some nice barrel distortion 😉
But, thanks for the first examples!
Here's a real technical report: I'm totally tickled with mine. The pictures I posted above are straight from the camera, just resized jpgs from my M9.
Here's a real technical report: I'm totally tickled with mine. The pictures I posted above are straight from the camera, just resized jpgs from my M9.
Yes, they look very good from what I can tell. But would there be any significant difference if shot with the f4? There is quite a price differential, especially if the lens shade is purchased.
The 3.5 is supposed to be better behaved with digital sensors. The 21 f4 tends to have magenta sides on digital.
Shawn
Here's a real technical report: I'm totally tickled with mine. The pictures I posted above are straight from the camera, just resized jpgs from my M9.
Can you post the original that wasn't perspective corrected?
I was going to ask the same thing. Mine is certainly sharp and rectilinear enough for anything that I will use it for 🙂
Roland.


