One more lens test/question of 12-24
Ok, this is my third question about my new 12-24, and I'm trying to make it my last.
I just don't feel qualified to judge this lens for it's relative sharpness vs. other WA's. Therefore, I ask your opinion on 4 final pics (the newspaper pics) located in this gallery:
Now, I shot these hand-held, of a newspaper taped to a brick wall on my house. I know this certainly isn't a scientific test, and the norm is to mount the camera on a tripod for testing of a lens. If you think this is a terrible idea, then go ahead and tell me so. However, in everyday life, I don't shoot with a tripod - most of my pics are travel/family related. Therefore, I decided to see how the sharpness came out shooting the way I normally would (although granted, I wouldn't normally be taking pictures of newspapers).
It seems to me, so far, that I can find pics I like with this lens, and others that I am left wondering about (maybe because of all of the propaganda out there). If this were a regular priced lens (for me), and not a $1K expenditure, I'd probably be less discriminating. But this is a lot of money and I just want to make sure I am getting my money's worth.
Bottom line, I'm trying to decide in the next day or so whether to keep this one or pack it up and send it back. If this is about a good a sample as I'm likely to get on a "random draw", then I'll keep it. Otherwise, I don't want to keep it.
Thanks for your help, once again. I look forward to hearing your opinions.
#1. "RE: One more lens test/question of 12-24" | In response to Reply # 0BJNicholls Charter MemberTue 28-Feb-06 06:06 PM
Hand held? You're introducing a huge variable. Your technique for hand holding and choice of shutter are critcal factors.
You can look at the images and judge distortion and chromatic abberation. At to the variability you see, that's not the lens, it's your technique.
Since you're rarely going to use a tripod and will shoot under less than optimal conditions (wide open and handheld), do you really need to buy this 12-24? The Tokina would cost you less and it's physically quite similar. The Tokina's performance is nearly as good. If you're not going to optimize your shooting, small differences in lens performance won't make a signficant practical difference.
Your images don't suggest this lens isn't performing as it should, so if you're only worried about getting a good sample I think this lens is a keeper.