ADVERTISEMENT
Save & earn with MPB; trade-in and buy pre-loved

Latest Review Comments

Latest comments, thoughts and reaction to our recently reviewed Photographic Equipment, including the Canon EOS 100D DSLR Review.

Just Jas

Quote:Relatively high price
Relatively large lenses
RAW not available in some modes
4-way controller could be better implemented
Shorter battery life (due to reduced size battery)
Lacks panoramic mode
Wi-Fi would have been nice



1) Not a problem - just bought second hand.
2) Not a problem - using existing lenses.
3) Not wanted.
4) Not wanted - the less buttons on the back the better.
5) Not a problem - for me.
6) not wanted.
7) Not wanted.

Made by Just Jas on 15 Sep 2023 11:34PM, join in and reply to this comment!  Reply

Just Jas
Nice set of pictures, but how about some taken with the kit less?

Made by Just Jas on 15 Sep 2023 11:15PM, join in and reply to this comment!  Reply

Silverimages
I own the 24-200mm f:4/6.3 and am perfectly happy with sharpness, lack of distortion, indeed I would not trade it for a lens weighing in at 750gm yet offering less focal length than mine weighing 570gm. Sorry, carrying kit around all day and feeling comfortable is so important yet never receives credit.

Made by Silverimages on 11 Sep 2023 8:04AM, join in and reply to this comment!  Reply

sjjs
Those are quite exceptional MTF numbers at all focal lengths, right from wide open. I would really like it to have VR (and not just relying on IBIS), but for the price/size/weight, I just might consider selling off some rarely used gear and get this fella.

EDIT: although, on the "Bella" cat photo the AF missed the eyes entirely - it went for the nose/whiskers. Could that front focusing have been a settings error? I would not expect such a mistake on a flagship body widely praised for its AF capabilities.

Made by sjjs on 8 Sep 2023 4:36PM, join in and reply to this comment!  Reply

DaveO59
I disagree this can be called a true macro lens with its native 1:2 magnification. Even in the past it was incorrect to claim lenses that only did 1:2 that were true macro lenses so the assertion in the review that it can be called a macro lens because older lenses that only did 1:2 were also, is incorrect. You need the not inexpensive 2x teleconverter to get 1:1 on full frame.

There are also some other "cons" for a lens that costs £1750. It does not internally zoom (like the 200-600G) and it doesn't have an aperture ring as many modern G lenses do.

I also think the tripod foot is not arca-swiss compatible and can't be changed for one that is (unlike that on the 209-600G which can be changed).

Minor issues maybe but it does cost £1750 so I think valid.

Made by DaveO59 on 23 Aug 2023 12:22PM, join in and reply to this comment!  Reply

johnriley1uk
The cameras used for the two lenses in question were the same, even the same sample, so direct comparisons can be made. We found what we found and reported it accordingly. The only other variable is that lens samples can vary, but without testing several samples of each lens there's no realistic way of taking that into account.

Made by johnriley1uk on 19 Aug 2023 5:54PM, join in and reply to this comment!  Reply

roseblood11
The cheap Samyang 24mm f1.8 has better sharpness at all apertures?
That's hard to believe.

Made by roseblood11 on 19 Aug 2023 9:50AM, join in and reply to this comment!  Reply

NikitaMorris

Quote:Just a little correction: Minimum focus distance is 18cm, not 180cm.


We've updated this - thank you.

Made by NikitaMorris on 14 Aug 2023 2:46PM, join in and reply to this comment!  Reply

MoonMind
Just a little correction: Minimum focus distance is 18cm, not 180cm.

I own and really like the lens - optically, it's perhaps not quite as solid a performer as the Z 40mm f/2, but it's a much better fit for everyday photography on DX, and the f/1.7 maximum aperture is a real asset.

Made by MoonMind on 14 Aug 2023 7:57AM, join in and reply to this comment!  Reply

NatuRaOx2
At only 9 elements this should have great microcontrast for the Zeiss 3-d pop and rich detailed color depth. Many shades of grey in monochrome of course. 9 elements is hitting that limit on great microcontrast vs good with a couple more to bad .
You know the Zeiss lens coatings are going to have superior light transmission also for more microcontrast and detail.
I bet comparing image quality from this lens vs the Nikon and the Sigma this will be superior. I have looked at the Nikon VS the Sigma and with no bias because I didnít know what images were created with which lens . I picked the Nikon images almost every time over the Sigma . Iím a Sigma Art lenses owner of several also . I just got the Sigma 135 for my Z9 and itís awesome image quality. I have 2,28mm Art f/1.4ís a Nikon f and Sony e . 1,40mm Art f/1.4 and had the 50mm Art f/1.4 . The Nikon 105 had superior bokeh to me over the Sigma 105 and the microcontrast seemed better. Or a less flatted image I guess. The people seemed to have rounder details because of more shades than the Sigma. I see this with the 40mm Art also. The 135 Art is different from other Art lenses and so seems the 28 Art .

Made by NatuRaOx2 on 23 Jul 2023 5:54AM, join in and reply to this comment!  Reply