With a new optical layout, Sony has completely revised the optical construction, increasing the number of overall elements from 18 to 20. In addition to two Super ED elements, there are two further ED elements to control fringing and five aspherical elements, two being high precision XA (extreme aspherical) types to mitigate spherical aberrations. The lens features 11 aperture blades for improved circular highlights when stopped down, and it adopts Nano AR Coating II to reduce flare and ghosting. The lens design also minimizes focus “breathing” and focus shift, according to Sony.

The Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II zoom has four linear AF motors offering “advanced lens control” with quiet, smooth yet high-speed focusing even when tracking. A floating focus mechanism promises improved sharpness at all distances, and inner focusing offers a closer-than-expected minimum focus distance of just 0.21-0.3m (8.25-12”) with a maximum magnification of 0.32x.

Externally, the new lens features soft rubberized zoom and manual focus rings and a dedicated aperture collar with “de-clicking” and locking options for video use. It also features two (programable) focus hold buttons and controls AF.

Although the new lens has an 82 mm filter thread, it is claimed by Sony to be the smallest and lightest in its class at just 695 grams (24.6 oz.) and some 20% lighter than the original model. It is available now for around $2,300/€2,400.

You can view the results for all tested lenses and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

Key specifications:

• 20 elements in 15 groups
• 2 Super ED, and 2 ED elements
• 5 aspherical, and 2 extreme aspherical (XA)
• 11 blade, circular aperture
• 4 linear AF motors
• 82 mm filter thread
• Minimum focus distance: 0.21-0.3m (8.25-12”)
• Weight: 695 grams (24.6 oz.)

Test results

We tested the Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II on the 61 MP Sony A7R IV where the lens and sensor achieved an excellent overall DXOMARK score of 39 points. This rating places it at the top of recent test results for this focal range ahead of the original Sony GM lens and even slightly in front of the previous best models; the Nikon Nikkor Z 24-70mm F2.8 S and earlier, made for DSLR, Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM.

Strong points include exceptional sharpness as well as improved astigmatic behavior and lower distortion than its predecessor and, it should be noted, Sony has achieved this in a smaller and nearly 200g lighter package.

It’s always worth looking through the data to see how the lens performs at individual aperture settings and focal lengths. Note the results don’t include any lens profile corrections, so what you see presented here may differ in use with the profiles applied.

In-depth comparisons

Like the recently updated FE 70-200mm F2.8, the Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II is used to showcase the company’s most advanced lens technology and this focal ratio will appeal to a wide range of photographers. We’ve paired it here with the 61MP Sony A7R IV, Sony’s highest-resolution body.

We’ve also compared the new lens with its predecessor introduced in 2016, the similarly priced ($2,200, at launch) Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM, also on the Sony A7R IV. In our tests, there isn’t much difference between the original lens on the older 47.5 MP Sony A7R II and 61 MP A7R IV and likely the reason for the introduction of the new GM II model.

For an idea of how it might compare against a rival system, we’ve selected the $2,300 (again, at launch in 2019) Nikon Nikkor Z 24-70mm S F2.8 mounted on the 47.5 MP Nikon Z7. Although the Z7 has been replaced by the Z7 II, the sensor is understood to be the same and would give a similar if not identical result. The Nikkor Z 24-70mm S F2.8 and Nikon Z7 combination is a formidable pairing and highly relevant as a benchmarking exercise.

You can see an overview of this comparison in our database.

Sharpness

High-speed wide-angle zooms like this adopt complex designs and can vary quite a bit in performance across the zoom range, especially at their initial aperture. The new Sony GM II challenges that and has only a marginal difference from the wide to the tele end. Sharpness is also very high throughout the zoom range and it has very good to excellent uniformity, with greatly reduced astigmatic-like behavior over its predecessor. The improvement is particularly noticeable over the widest and longest focal lengths where the original GM model exhibited quite high levels. By contrast, the new lens shows some astigmatic behavior over the 35-50mm range but in general, it is very well controlled and almost on par with the Nikkor. Despite that, the Nikkor not to mention the original GM loses out in sharpness towards the longer end. It is particularly noticeable wide open at the longer focal lengths and both have to be well-stopped down before they approach the sharpness of the new GM II.

Chromatic aberration

Overall, the new Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II is exceptionally well controlled in respect of lateral chromatic aberration. Some fringing may be noticeable at the periphery on high contrast edges at the shorter focal lengths (peak levels of around 11µm at 24mm), but given that the results are without profile correction this is very impressive for a zoom. Levels are very low and well-controlled across the image field even in the extreme corners through the zoom range out to 70mm, though that can also be said for the other two even if they’re not quite at the same low level as the GM II.

Geometric distortion

Distortion characteristics of the new Sony have also been improved. At its widest 24mm, the GM II has the equivalent 0.8 % barrel as its predecessor, but it’s lower than the Nikkor, which is approaching a rather high 1.0 % (before profile correction), and the GM II is better controlled than both throughout the range. At 28mm, barrel distortion is just 0.3 % changing to -0.3 % pincushion at 35mm. After that, pincushion increases slightly to -0.5% at 50mm through to 70mm. That’s all rather remarkable given the reduced size and weight over the original.

Vignetting (corner shading)

With the GM II’s smaller size, you might also expect higher vignetting but that’s not the case here. Overall, the new lens has about the same levels when averaged, however, the characteristics vary between the two models. The new GM II has about the same peak values and a slighter smaller central core free of vignetting than its predecessor wide open at 24-28mm, but then that position reverses over the 35-70mm range. The new lens also mitigates the effects sooner than the original on stopping down over the same 35-70mm range, though it’s about the same over the more noticeable 24-28mm range. Against the Nikkor, the GM II is slightly better controlled at every focal length.

Transmission

Given this is likely to be a popular choice for video, it’s interesting to see how Sony has tackled the transmission values of the new lens. While the T3.2 is slightly higher than the original as well as the rival Nikkor, the consistent T3.2 value at every focal means there’s no unsightly density (exposure) change during zooming. It’s likely one concession to the smaller size, but exposure consistency in a zoom aimed at video and filmmaking is highly valued.

Conclusion

High-speed F2.8 zooms like this have been used to showcase the best in technology since the type was introduced, but rarely do we see such a considered and thorough overhaul between versions. With this update, Sony has revamped just about everything they could. With all of the enhancements, many would have been satisfied with it equaling its predecessor in optical performance; however, the result is not only the smallest and lightest of its type, but Sony has also raised the bar optically. Given the similar price range (at launch) and the overall improvements, the Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II is a solid choice over the original and highly attractive option for Sony users or indeed anyone considering the Sony system.

In this review, we have compared the Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II mounted on a Sony A7R IV to its closest rivals from other brands. Remember that the lenses may be used on various cameras with different sensors, or in some cases on different camera systems using different mounts, so the results will vary between them.

As usual, you can create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

The post Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II Lens test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Inside it has a relatively complex construction consisting of 11 elements arranged in 10 groups. The design adopts a single asphere and no less than 5 SLD low dispersion type glass elements to mitigate chromatic aberration.

The Sigma 90mm F2.8 DG DN | Contemporary uses a single stepper AF motor for smooth and quiet focusing. Sigma has also added internal focusing for improved responsiveness and, as an added benefit, there’s no extending barrel either. Also welcome is a closer-than-expected minimum focus distance of just 0.5m (1.6’), and a useful maximum magnification of 0.2x.

With a 55 mm filter thread, the lens is highly compact and lightweight at just 295 grams (10.4 oz). It is available now for around $639/€599.

You can view the results for all tested lenses and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

Key specifications:

• 11 elements in 10 groups
• 1 aspherical, 5 SLD elements
• 9-blade, rounded aperture
• Stepper motor with IF
• Metal build
• 55 mm filter thread
• Minimum focus distance: 0.5 m (1.6’)
• Weight: 295 grams (10.4 oz)

Test results

We tested the Sony E-mount version of the Sigma 90 mm F2.8 DG DN | Contemporary on the highest resolution body in the line-up, the 61 MP Sony A7R IV. The lens and sensor as a system achieved an overall DXOMARK score of 39 points, which is a good score but a little lower than others competing in the same space.

While the new model has excellent transmission, overall sharpness levels are a little on the low side, and they’re held back somewhat by astigmatism in the outer field. It also has relatively high levels of lateral chromatic aberration, peaking at 17 µm. Pincushion distortion, measured at 1.2%, is another weak point, which is unusual to see at this focal length. Finally, vignetting is also a little high given it is a modest F2.8 lens.

It’s always worth going through the data to see how the lens performs at individual aperture settings. Also bear in mind that the results don’t include any software correction.

In-depth comparisons

The Sigma 90 mm F2.8 DG DN | Contemporary is likely to be used for portraits and for selective framing generally, so we’ve compared the new lens with the around $800 Sony FE 85 F1.8. For an idea of how it might compare with a high-end model, we’ve also selected the $1,100 Sony FE 90 mm F2.8 Macro G OSS. While this lens might not look like a direct rival for your cash, many photographers choose a short tele macro for portraiture as it can also be used to crop in tightly. While Sigma has a much shorter minimum focus distance than many others at this focal length, a typical standard short tele would find closing in on facial details such as eyes and eyelashes or lips difficult or even impossible without an extension tube.

You can see an overview of this comparison in our database.

Sharpness

Short telephoto lenses like this are typically easy to design and usually have very high sharpness levels. While the older Sigma performs pretty well in the center of the frame from the initial aperture, levels aren’t quite as high as either the Sony FE 85 mm F1.8 or the more expensive Sony FE 90 mm F2.8 Macro G OSS at their respective initial apertures. Moreover, at F2.8 – F5.6 and particularly at F4, there are quite high levels of astigmatism in the outer field, which holds back sharpness overall. When stopped down to F8 and above, all three lenses have similar sharpness levels, albeit perhaps with the Sigma being just slightly behind the other two.

Chromatic aberration

With fringing peaking at 17µm on the Sony A7R IV, quite high levels of lateral chromatic aberration were measured in the lab. While this is considerably higher than either the “faster” or “brighter” Sony FE 85 mm F1.8 or the more optically complex but more expensive Sony FE 90 mm F2.8 Macro G OSS it’s not necessarily a deal-breaker as the high levels mostly occupy the corners and is easy to remove in software. The star here is the Sony FE 90 mm F2.8 Macro G OSS, which is well-controlled across the field.

Geometric distortion

Given the short tele focal length, the pincushion distortion measured at 1.2% is quite high. Both Sony lenses — the Sony FE 85mm F1.8 and Sony FE 90mm F2.8 Macro G OSS — show minor barrel distortion at 0.3% and 0.2%, respectively. Like the lateral chromatic aberration measurements, this and the vignetting don’t take any profile correction into account, so it’s likely that some software correction in your workflow will improve the outcome.

Vignetting (corner shading)

Vignetting is another shortcoming that’s easily controlled either using the camera or editing software to selectively lighten the corners. That may be just as well as the Sigma 90 mm F2.8 DG DN has quite high levels for a lens with a modest F2.8 initial aperture and it still has some visible vignetting at F5.6. While it’s not much of an issue, the Sony FE 80 mm F1.8 has slightly less at F1.8 and the Sony FE 90 mm F2.8 Macro G OSS has around 0.7 EV less at the maximum and a much larger central core without visible vignetting of the other two.

Transmission

Transmission is one area where the Sigma 90 mm F2.8 DG DN lens excels, and it’s an important attribute, especially with hybrid models offering video capture. At T2.9 the Sigma 90 mm F2.8 DG DN is just -0.1 EV lower than the manufacturer’s stated maximum F-number. While that’s a win for the Sigma lens, both Sony’s have good transmission as well, with the Sony FE 85 mm F1.8 being just -0.2 EV behind at T2.0 and the Sigma 90 mm F2.8 DG DN measuring T3.2 or -0.4 EV lower than the stated F-number.

Conclusion

Not everyone wants large and heavy high-speed lenses, so there’s clearly an opportunity for compact high-quality primes. With such strong contenders in Sony’s lineup at this focal length, though, it is perhaps no surprise to see Sigma offering something a little different with the Sigma 90 mm F2.8 DG DN | Contemporary lens. Despite some slight shortcomings, many of which can be overcome with software correction, image quality is very good overall. What’s more, if portraiture is your thing, thanks to its small size, great build, and relatively affordable pricing, the Sigma 90 mm F2.8 DG DN | Contemporary looks like a super-compelling option.

In this review, we have compared the Sigma 90 mm F2.8 DG DN Contemporary mounted on a Sony A7R IV to its closest rivals from other brands. Remember that the lenses may be used on various cameras with different sensors, or in some cases on different camera systems using different mounts, so the results will vary between them.

As usual, you can create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

The post Sigma 90 mm F2.8 DG DN (for Sony) Lens test appeared first on DXOMARK.

The lens features 9 elements in 8 groups and comes low-dispersion glass. Firmware is upgradeable via a USB Type-C port and a metal bayonet with gold-plated contacts promise durability and reliable communication with the camera body.

With a significantly lower sticker price than the more established competition the Yongnuo looks like a viable alternative for budget-conscious Sony photographers. Let’s see how it shapes up in our DXOMARK Lens tests.

You can view the results for all tested lenses and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

Key specifications:

• Nine elements in eight groups
• Nano-multilayer coating process
• Seven blade aperture
• DSM AF motor
• 58 mm filter thread
• Minimum focus distance: 0.8 m (30.5″)
• Weight: 346 grams (0.76 lb)

Test results

We tested the Yongnuo YN 85mm F1.8 S DF DSM on the 61 MP Sony A7R IV, where the camera sensor and lens together achieved a DXOMARK score of 51 points. This is an excellent score and makes the Yongnuo the best 85mm lens for full-frame E-mount cameras in our database, albeit by a tight margin of only 2 points over the Sony FE 85mm F1.4 GM.

The Yongnuo YN 85mm F1.8 S DF DSM delivers impressively sharp images, even at the maximum aperture. This is especially true at the center of the frame. Astigmatism is well under control when stopping down a little and transmission is on a similar good level as for comparable lenses.

It’s not all positives, though, and Yongnuo photographers will have to make some compromises. Our testers observed a lot of lateral chromatic aberrations and sharpness drops off significantly towards the edges of the frame. Vignetting is visible as well at all aperture settings from F1.8 to F4. Vignetting is visible as well at all aperture settings from F1.8 to F8.

In-depth comparisons

We compared the Yongnuo lens to the Sony FE 85mm F1.8 and the Carl Zeiss Batis 85mm F1.8 Sony FE all tested on the same camera. Both comparison lenses offer the same maximum aperture as the Yongnuo but are longer and heavier. Most of all they’re quite a bit pricier as well. Let’s see if the more affordable Yongnuo YN 85mm F1.8 S DF DSM can keep up with the competitors from the more established manufacturers.

You can see an overview of this comparison in our database.

Sharpness

The Yongnuo YN 85mm F1.8 S DF DSM performed especially well in sharpness (acutance) testing. It has very good center sharpness at the maximum aperture of F1.8 achieving a high acutance of just over 85%. However, there is a drop off towards the edges and corners where we measured acutance of around 70%. Stopping down to F4 will improve things at the edges and increase acutance to just under 80%. At F8 corner sharpness reaches its maximum and decreases when the lens is stopped down further.

Neither the Sony lens nor the Zeiss can match the Yongnuo’s center sharpness at F1.8 but the Sony is slightly better at the edges. When stopped down to F2.8 all three lenses are at a very similar level at the center but the Sony offers better corner sharpness than the Yongnuo and Zeiss, and pretty good uniformity across the field.

Chromatic aberration

The Yongnuo has pretty high levels of lateral chromatic aberration at all apertures and things get slightly worse as you stop down. Both the Sony and Zeiss control the effect much better, with lateral chromatic aberration much less noticeable. The more expensive Zeiss is a touch better than the Sony but there really isn’t much between them despite the price difference.

Geometric distortion

As you would expect at a 85mm focal length geometric distortion is well controlled on all three lenses but the Sony is a touch more uniform across the field than the Zeiss and Yongnuo.

Vignetting (corner shading)

Vignetting is quite noticeable on the Yongnuo YN 85mm F1.8 S DF DSM when shooting wide open. There is a noticeable improvement when stopping down to F4 but some corner shading remains even at the smallest aperture settings. At F1.8 the Yongnuo does well compared to the competition. It’s on a similar level as the Sony and noticeably better than the Zeiss. However, vignetting is reduced more on both comparison lenses by stopping down. From F2.8 onwards the Sony and Zeiss are noticeably better than the Yongnuo, with not much difference between the two at most aperture settings.

Transmission

The measured T-stop relative to the quoted F-stop is nice to know if you’re using your lenses for videography but it isn’t really relevant for stills. Transmission may indicate how the lens handles flare and ghosting, but that’s not what’s tested here. In any case, with a 1.9 T-stop measurement the Yongnuo is very close to the Sony and Zeiss which we both measured at 2. All three lenses show approximately a -0.3 EV difference against the reported F-stop.

Conclusion

Photographers who shoot with the Yongnuo YN 85mm F1.8 S DF DSM get excellent sharpness at the center of the frame but will have to make some compromises, especially in terms of corner softness and chromatic aberrations. Build quality and materials are also not quite on the same level as the comparison lenses from Sony and Zeiss but essentially the Yongnuo offers a high level of quality at a fraction of the price of its competitors, making it an enticing option for budget-conscious shooters.

In this review, we have compared the Yongnuo YN 85mm F1.8 S DF DSM mounted on a Sony A7R IV to its closest rivals from other brands. Remember that the lenses may be used on various cameras with different sensors, or in some cases on different camera systems using different mounts, so the results will vary between them.

As usual, you can create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

The post Yongnuo YN 85mm F1.8S DF DSM Lens review appeared first on DXOMARK.

In addition to two super ED elements, there are three further ED elements, with one also being aspherical to mitigate chromatic aberration. It also has three further aspherical elements, one being a high precision XA type to mitigate the grinding and polishing marks, or “onion” rings, seen in circular out-of-focus highlights.

In addition to optical stabilization, the lens has weather-resistant sealing, and the front element has a fluorine coating to aid in cleaning. The design also minimizes focus “breathing” and focus shift, according to Sony.

As well as modifying the optical construction, Sony has improved the AF and the new model adopts no less than four linear AF motors promising high-speed focusing and accuracy. It also has a closer-than-expected minimum focus distance of just 0.4-0.82m (15.7-32.3”), and a maximum magnification of 0.3x.

Externally, the lens is packed with controls. There are relatively wide rings for zooming and manual focus, programable focus hold buttons, focus limiter and IS mode switches, and a ‘de-clickable’ aperture control ring with a lock.

With a 77 mm filter thread, the lens is relatively compact and now weighs just 1045 grams (36.9 oz.). The new model is available now for around $2,800/3,000€.

You can view the results for all tested lenses and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

Key specifications:

• 17 elements in 14 groups
• 1 aspherical ED, 2 Super ED, and 2 ED elements
• 1 extreme aspherical (XA) and 2 aspherical elements
• Image stabilized
• 11 blade, circular aperture
• 4 linear AF motors
• 77 mm filter thread
• Minimum focus distance: 0.4-0.82m (15.7-32.3”)
• Weight: 1045 grams (36.9 oz.)

Test results

Our test engineers evaluated the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II on the 61 MP Sony A7R IV, where the lens and sensor are measured together as a system achieved an overall score of 41, which is the best-corrected lens in its class. While close overall in terms of optical performance to the previous 2016 version, the new model has higher sharpness and slightly lower lateral chromatic aberration and vignetting.

It’s always worth going through the data to see how the lens performs at individual aperture settings. Also bear in mind the results don’t include any software correction.

In-depth comparisons

While the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II is principally aimed at sports and action photographers, we’ve paired it with the Sony A7R IV as it’s the highest resolution body in Sony’s line-up and the best to test acutance and chromatic aberration. We’ve also compared the new lens with its predecessor, the around $2,000 Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS, on the same camera body so the results are directly comparable.

For an idea of how it might compare with a rival, our test engineers selected the $2,600 Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S mounted on the 47 MP Nikon Z7. While the Nikkor might not be as “stretched” on a body with a slightly lower resolution, which will probably be reflected in the acutance and CA comparisons, it remains useful when comparing between systems.

You can see an overview of this comparison in our database.

Sharpness

Telephoto zooms nearly always perform better in the mid to short focal lengths than at their longest, and we’re beginning to see manufacturers working to improve this. While the older Sony already performs well at 200mm wide open in the center at just over 80% acutance, the mid-to-outer zone has some astigmatic-like behavior and lowers sharpness slightly. With the new Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II, Sony has not only increased sharpness in the center to 85% acutance, but also has improved sharpness and uniformity in the outer zone.

At the other end of the zoom range, there’s an improvement in uniformity and while sharpness is at similar levels centrally, the new lens has better sharpness out to the corners. Where the Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S is a little weak at 200mm, by comparison, it performs well at 70mm and is slightly sharper than the new Sony wide open, at least in a small central core. One whole stop down from the initial aperture the differences between all three are minimal, but the astigmatic behavior of the older Sony is clear.

Chromatic aberration

The new Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II is very well controlled in terms of lateral chromatic aberration, especially at the longer end of the zoom range where the lens has the lowest levels of the three. Levels are far lower at 200mm than either its predecessor or its rival, the Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S. Given that the results are published without any profile correction applied to reduce the effect, this is all very impressive. However, with levels peaking around 10 µm at 70mm when wide open, the new lens isn’t quite as strong. While the results are still quite low, both the older 2016 Sony version and the Nikkor Z have lower levels.

Geometric distortion

Compared with the original GM version, the distortion characteristics of the new Sony are quite different. Most telephoto zooms show barrel-type distortion at the wider end changing to some pincushion at the longer lengths. While that’s typical of the earlier GM version, the new Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II has no measurable distortion at 70mm. Instead, there’s some slight pincushion after zooming in slightly, that gradually increases through the range to 200mm where it peaks at -0.6%. In that respect, the new Sony behaves much more like the Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S but even then all three have relatively low distortion.

Vignetting (corner shading)

Vignetting is another shortcoming that’s well-controlled in the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II. And in this group, it’s the best lens of the three. Even so, the heaviest effects are visible at the longer end. While there’s not much between wide open at 200mm, the new model has a wider central core free of vignetting than the other two and less darkening of the corners than the Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S or older Sony, in that order. What’s more, the new model is almost free of vignetting just one stop down from the maximum at every other focal length.

Transmission

With just about every mirrorless camera offering hybrid movie and stills capability, knowing the transmission may come in useful, especially with zooms where it might be possible to see the effects in the footage. In this regard, the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II performs well with a fairly consistent T3.1 and only a very minor difference between -0.2-0.3 EV from the stated aperture value. The Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S is very similar while the older Sony is slightly less consistent over the range, measuring -0.3-0.4 EV behind the stated aperture values.

Conclusion

The original Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS was already a very good performer, but it looks as if pressure from rivals (Canon’s RF 70-200mm F2.8 weighs just 1070 g) to lower the weight in this type has resulted in this newer GM2 version. Against its predecessor and the relatively new Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S (which at 1440 g is just 40 g less than the original Sony), the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II performs well and comes out in front, but it’s not by a large margin. While the weight advantage is nice to have the new model comes with quite a hefty price tag attached.

In this review, we have compared the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II mounted on a Sony A7R IV to its closest rivals from other brands. Remember that the lenses may be used on various cameras with different sensors, or in some cases on different camera systems using different mounts, so the results will vary between them.

As usual, you can create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

The post Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Lens test appeared first on DXOMARK.

The Lumix S 35mm F1.8 lens adopts a linear AF motor for smooth, almost silent focusing and has a closer-than-expected minimum focus distance of just 0.24 m (9.5”).

Like the previous F1.8 models, it shares the same dimensions and placement of controls, even similar weights, and center of gravity. This helps streamline integration with various video rigs and gimbals without the need for additional modification. The lens has a single control ring for manual focus and includes linear and non-linear options to alter focus speed and focus throw. The design also incorporates minimal “focus breathing,” according to Panasonic.

With a 67 mm filter thread, the lens is compact, and it is lightweight given the optical construction, weighing just 295 grams. It is available now for around $697/€659.

You can view the results for all tested lenses and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

Key specifications:

• 11 elements in 9 groups
• 3 aspherical and 3 ED elements
• 9 blade, circular aperture
• Linear AF motor
• 67 mm filter thread
• Minimum focus distance: 0.24m (9.5”)
• Weight: 295 grams (0.65 lb)

Test results

We tested the Panasonic Lumix S 35mm F1.8 on the 47 MP Panasonic Lumix S1R, the highest resolution camera with an L-mount. The lens and sensor combination achieved a DXOMARK score of 38 points. This is a good result for a moderate wide-angle lens, which in the main is due to high sharpness levels, even wide open at F1.8, and to exceptional transmission.

They’re the highlights, but factors limiting an even better overall score include higher than expected vignetting and distortion. Also surprising, despite the use of 11 elements and ED glass, is the presence of high levels of chromatic aberration. Where supported, however, distortion can be quite well-corrected in software that enables the embedded lens profiles in Raw files and from in-camera JPEGs. The same profiles don’t do anything to mitigate the effects of vignetting and chromatic aberrations.

As always, it’s worth looking through the data to see how the lens performs at individual aperture settings, though bear in mind the results don’t include any software correction.

In-depth comparisons

The Panasonic Lumix S 35mm F1.8 and Panasonic Lumix S1R is a relatively affordable combination aimed at enthusiasts, and so we’ve compared it with the Nikon Nikkor Z 35mm F1.8 S mounted on the Nikon Z 7, which has a similar pixel count. As an L-mount lens, it’s a good opportunity to compare the Leica APO-Summicron SL 35mm F2 on the Panasonic Lumix S1R against the Lumix S 35mm F1.8 paired with the same sensor.

You can see an overview of this comparison in our database.

Sharpness

As a modern lens with a complex optical design, we’re increasingly seeing high sharpness levels at the initial aperture, which we suspect is not only to improve image quality but also aid AF performance. And, so it is here with the Panasonic Lumix S 35mm F1.8. The results of our tests show it has high sharpness when wide open, at least in the center. Away from that central core, sharpness levels are a little lower due to astigmatic-like behavior. Sharpness progressively increases though through to F2.8, with the outer zones being similarly behind. It is not until F4, however, that peak sharpness is achieved and the outer zones reach the levels of the center, though there’s still evidence of the astigmatic-like behavior. Improved uniformity is seen at F5.6 but sharpness levels have by then taken a slight turn in the opposite direction, most likely due to diffraction.

Against the rivals, the Panasonic Lumix S 35mm F1.8 is sharper than the Nikon Nikkor S 35mm F1.8 wide open to F4. It’s only at F5.6 and onwards that the latter equals the newer Panasonic. Against the much pricier Leica APO lens, the Panasonic isn’t quite a match at F2 as the Leica is wide-open and, thanks to some field-curvature, the latter struggles somewhat to keep up, especially in the outer zones.

Chromatic aberration

The high levels of lateral chromatic aberration seem to somewhat belie the complex construction and use of ED glass. Fringing in excess of 20 µm at every aperture in the corners is unusual in a modern lens. Although the results are published without any profile correction applied, it appears there’s no lateral CA correction data in the RW2 Raw files anyway. Despite that, lateral chromatic aberration is typically easily removed in software, either using a third-party profile or an algorithm-based de-fringing slider tool.

Both the Leica and Nikkor lens are presented here without profile correction and are very well corrected optically. Additional correction provided by the Leica APO lens for longitudinal chromatic aberration is not likely to be revealed in this test.

Geometric distortion

Barrel distortion in the Lumix S 35mm F1.8 is high at -2.6%, which would be easily visible in scenes with straight edges. Fortunately, the embedded profile corrects this reasonably well, even if it leads to a reduction in the diagonal field of view (FOV). While this is normal for a lens like this, the decrease brings the FOV in line with that expected of a typical 35mm lens.

The best optically corrected of the three is the larger, more expensive Leica APO, which is negligible at just -0.1% and goes some way to explain the price difference. The Nikkor is also well-corrected at just -0.5%, though that might still be visible at times.

Vignetting (corner shading)

Vignetting is another shortcoming that’s usually compensated for by a profile and while often disregarded for aesthetic reasons, heavy correction can reveal noise in the lightened areas. The Panasonic raw files don’t contain any correction data, so the vignetting wide open at F1.8 in the corners is quite typical for a lens like this at -2.1EV. Vignetting remains when stopping down a stop to F2.8, albeit greatly diminished, and by F4 it’s negligible and completely free by F5.6.

By contrast, the Leica and Nikon have very slightly lower, and visually similar, levels at the maximum aperture, but they both have more vignetting at F2.8 than the Panasonic. More importantly, perhaps, both never totally clear the effects of the vignetting, even when stopped down at F4 and smaller apertures.

Transmission

High levels of transmission, where the measured T-stop is as close to the quoted F-stop, is useful to know when you’re using lenses for videography but is rarely needed with stills. Nevertheless, the high transmission may help with higher exposure values and reducing noise levels in image sensors and in that regard, the Panasonic lens performs very well. Indeed, it is one of the few we’ve seen where the lens has the same T-stop measurement as the reported initial aperture. The Leica APO 35mm is another example, however, and even the Nikkor has excellent transmission at T1.9, just -0.1EV below the reported F1.8 maximum.

Conclusion

Modern lens designs continue to offer lots of advantages in terms of high sharpness levels, even from the initial aperture, while the use of embedded profiles can help in reducing the size, complexity, and cost.

The Panasonic Lumix S 35mm F1.8 is relatively compact and performs very well in key areas such as sharpness and transmission. However, there are some tradeoffs that are only partially mitigated by the inclusion of correction data (profiles) in the raw files. Given the price ($697/€659), it’s an interesting alternative to the Leica L-mount alternative, and a solid choice if you’re on a budget.

In this review, we have compared the Panasonic Lumix S 35mm F1.8 mounted on a Panasonic Lumix DC-S1R to its closest rivals from other brands. Remember that the lenses may be used on various cameras with different sensors, or in some cases on different camera systems using different mounts, so the results will vary between them.

As usual, you can create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

The post Panasonic Lumix S 35mm F1.8 Lens test appeared first on DXOMARK.

It features nine elements, one of which has an aspherical surface, all arranged in seven groups, and it employs Canon’s Super Spectra Coating to reduce ghosting and flare. The lens adopts a stepper-type (STM) AF motor for smooth and quiet focusing. It has a minimum focus distance of just 0.13 m (5.1″) and a maximum magnification of 0.26x.

Externally, the lens has a single control ring for manual focus or it can be allocated with another function from the camera, if desired. With a 43 mm filter thread, the lens is highly compact for a relatively ‘fast’ ultra-wide and it’s lightweight, weighing just 165 grams (0.36 lb).

You can view the results for all tested lenses and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

Key specifications:

• Nine elements in seven groups
• One aspherical lens surface
• Seven blade, rounded aperture
• STM AF motor
• 43 mm filter thread
• Minimum focus distance: 0.13 m (5.1″)
• Weight: 165 grams (0.36 lb)

Test results

We tested the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM on the 45 MP Canon EOS R5, where the camera sensor and lens together achieved a DXOMARK score of 30 points. This is a good score for an ultra-wide lens and among the best tested in this range.

Touted as an affordable model, this new lens actually has very good sharpness, especially wide open at F2.8 and at F4 in the center. Stopped down, the sharpness remains relatively high in the centers, though there’s a drop in performance from the middle of the field and out to corners.

Transmission is another highlight, with it measuring an efficient T3.1. This is just -0.3 EV below the stated F2.8 full aperture. However, there are some downsides to using embedded profiles to supplement optical correction, which isn’t taken into account with our tests and DXOMARK score. Consequently, vignetting (peaking at -3.8 EV), barrel distortion (measured at 4.7%) and chromatic aberration (averaged at 27 µm) are all high without the correction profiles applied, which is how we present our results.

Overall though the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 lens is a good performer, especially given the price and compact size. As always, it’s worth looking through the more detailed data to see how the lens performs at the various aperture settings.

In-depth comparisons

The profile-assisted Canon RF 16mm F2.8 is the first ultra-wide fixed focal length lens we’ve tested in our lab for the RF mount. So, we’ve compared it on the 45 MP Canon EOS R5 with two retro-focus (inverted telephoto) designs for DSLRs at different ends of the price scale. The Samyang 14mm F2.8 IF ED UMC Aspherical is a competitively priced manual focus lens designed for the EF mount. We’ve mounted it on the 50 MP Canon EOS 5Ds R, which, according to Canon Japan, has a similar resolving power to the slightly lower pixel count sensor in the Canon EOS R5. We’ve also compared the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 with a state-of-the-art manual focus design from Zeiss: the Distagon T* 15mm F2.8 ZE, again fitted to a Canon EOS 5Ds R.

You can see an overview of this comparison in our database.

Sharpness

The Canon RF 16mm F2.8 performed especially well in sharpness (acutance) testing. It has very good center sharpness with average uniformity at the maximum aperture of F2.8 achieving a high 80% acutance in the center, falling gradually to just under 65% out to the corners. It has similar center sharpness at F4 as well, along with a slight improvement towards the edges and corners. However, there’s some slight astigmatism-like behavior in the 60-80% field position. After that, from F5.6 and onwards, sharpness levels in the periphery fall as it’s stopped down. In many respects, the more expensive Zeiss performs very similarly to the Canon over F2.8-4, including some slightly more pronounced astigmatism-like characteristics. From F5.6 and on, however, it has very slightly improved edge sharpness over the Canon. The Samyang, on the other hand, can’t quite match the sharpness of either the Canon or Zeiss until stopped down to F5.6, but it’s not far behind and at F8 it has very good uniformity across the field.

Chromatic aberration

RAW files and out-of-camera JPEGs are mostly compensated for by built-in (embedded) profiles with Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM, but some may be forced on with no option to turn them off, though that will depend on your choice of RAW converter. What’s more, the effectiveness of the corrections is likely to vary between converters. Without the profile applied the Canon has very high levels of lateral chromatic aberration, in excess of 25 µm at every aperture. Neither the Zeiss nor the Samyang adopts embedded profiles and both are well corrected. Of those two, it’s the more expensive Zeiss that has the lower levels of chromatic aberration but there’s not much between them despite the price difference.

Geometric distortion

Distortion is another aberration that’s automatically compensated for by an embedded profile in the Canon lens. Without it, though, it has exceptionally high levels of barrel distortion, measured at -4.7%. That said, when the profile is applied, RAW and JPEG files would be mostly corrected well enough. Like the final lateral chromatic aberration result, though, that would depend heavily on the effectiveness of the conversion software rather than the lens itself. As you might expect the Zeiss is the best optically corrected of the three, which accounts for the high price and large size. As a result, it has very low levels of barrel distortion (-0.5%) for an ultra-wide like this. The Samyang, by contrast, has significantly higher levels of barreling, measured at -1.6%, and would be much more noticeable.

Vignetting (corner shading)

Vignetting is the third aberration that’s automatically compensated for on the Canon lens, depending on your choice of RAW converter. While seemingly harmless and easy to correct by selectively adjusting the density, large corrections can leave unwelcome noise. As a result, the Canon’s uncorrected vignetting wide open at F2.8 in the extreme corners is very high, measured at -3.8 EV. And, vignetting remains high when stopping down, losing around -1 EV for each aperture stop down to F5.6, where after that it stays at around -2 EV regardless of the aperture setting. That’s in contrast to both the Samyang and Zeiss where the vignetting is lower: close to three stops in the former and just over two stops in the latter, when set at their respective maximum apertures. What’s more the pricier Zeiss maintains the lower levels when stopped down, which is what you might expect in a high-grade lens.

Transmission

The measured T-stop relative to the quoted F-stop is nice to know if you’re using your lenses for videography, and Canon suggests the lens might appeal to vloggers, but it isn’t really relevant for stills. Transmission may indicate how that lens handles flare and ghosting, but that’s not what’s tested here. In any case, this is one area where the Canon lens isn’t affected by a built-in profile and it performs well in that regard. It has the same 3.1 T-stop measurement as the Zeiss, which is -0.3 EV difference against the reported F-stop. The Samyang measures 3.5 T-stop, which is -0.5 EV behind the stated F-stop (F2.8).

Conclusion

With the introduction of the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM, Canon continues to explore new and innovative lenses for the RF mount. In an effort to reduce the optical complexity, thereby driving down the size, weight and cost, lens correction profiles make a lot of sense. Even without taking software correction into account, in our DXOMARK Lens test, the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM performs very well in certain key areas. It has, for example, similar sharpness and transmission to the larger and pricier Zeiss Distagon T* 15mm F2.8, while being much smaller and lighter. More importantly, especially for anyone on a tight budget, it’s around one-eighth of the price of the Zeiss and around the same price as the Samyang 14mm F2.8, making the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM a highly tempting option.

In this review, we have compared the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM mounted on a Canon EOS R5 to its closest rivals from other brands. Remember that the lenses may be used on various cameras with different sensors, or in some cases on different camera systems using different mounts, so the results will vary between them.

As usual, you can create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

The post Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM Lens review appeared first on DXOMARK.

While all S-type Z lenses are intended for pros and serious amateurs, the faster lenses appear better made than that of the other slower models. The Noct features an all-metal outer and eschews autofocus for manual focusing using a huge, finely machined focus collar, with close to a long 350-degree focus throw. It also features a highly complex optical system with no less than 17 elements arranged in 10 groups and has a 0.5 m (1.64 ft) minimum focusing distance.

Of those 17 elements, the Noct has three aspherical elements with one being an expensive large-diameter and ground type rather than molded to help with correction of coma and spherical aberration. In addition, it has four ED (extra-low dispersion) elements to help mitigate chromatic aberration. The lens also has Nikon’s full complement of Nano, Arneo and SIC coatings to improve ghosting and flare, as well as a fluorine coating to help when cleaning.

It also has slightly different cosmetics and features including a small OLED panel that can display the aperture setting, as well as the option to display focus distance with a depth-of-field scale below. There is also a customizable control ring to select exposure or compensation setting and a L.Fn button that allows access to the camera-based Fn functions, found on the camera body.

You can view the results for all tested lenses and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

Key specifications:

• 17 elements in 10 groups
• Three aspherical and four ED elements
• 11 blade, rounded aperture
• Manual focus only
• Programmable control ring and Fn-button
• 82 mm filter thread
• Minimum focus distance: 0.5 m (1.64 ft)
• Weight: 2000 grams (4.4 lb)

Test results

We tested the Nikon Nikkor Z 58mm F0.95 S Noct on the 45.7MP Nikon Z 7 where the camera and lens combined achieved a very high score DXOMARK score of 55. Indeed, it’s the highest score achieved by any lens and camera combination that we’ve ever seen.

This unique lens in the Z system has very high center sharpness even at the initial aperture which, given that it’s F0.95 is, frankly, a remarkable result. There is some fall off in sharpness starting in the mid zones and out to the corners, but let’s not forget this an F0.95 lens. By F1.2 the central zone of sharpness seen at F0.95 has expanded substantially beyond the mid zone/mid field and the corners have improved dramatically. From F1.8 onwards sharpness becomes more consistent and by F5.6 this is apparent across the field, albeit at the expense of central sharpness.

Geometric distortion is very low (below -0.2%) with some pincushion evident at the edges of the frame where it’s generally more noticeable. The Noct also has very good transmission, measured at 1.1 T-stop, some 0.3 EV behind the reported F-stop. Even though the lens is enormous vignetting is noticeable at the initial aperture but that’s not really a surprise, at least it doesn’t persist much beyond F1.8/2.

Where this lens shows some weakness is in its levels of lateral chromatic aberration. However, even that is debatable given the challenge of producing a ultra-high speed lens like this. We measured the fringing at up to 9 µm wide in the extreme corners, though it has very low levels across the frame, so even then it could be said that it’s well-controlled generally.

All things considered then, this Nikon Nikkor Z 58mm F0.95 S Noct has the optical performance to match its company’s credentials.

As always though, it’s well worth looking through the more detailed data to see how the lens performs at individual aperture settings and various focal lengths.

In-depth comparisons

We’ve compared the Nikon Nikkor Z 58mm F0.95 S Noct on the 45.7 MP Nikon Z 7 with arguably the most serious rival model from Nikon’s DSLR days the manual focus Zeiss Otus 55mm F1.4 ZF.2 mounted on the 45.7 MP Nikon D850, one of the best performing Nikon DSLRs ever made. At around $3,999, the Zeiss Otus 55mm F1.4 in F-mount is half the price of the Noct.

We’ve also compared the enormous Noct with one of the most svelte of Nikon’s current Nikkor Z lenses, the Nikon Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S similarly mounted on the Nikon Z7. This combination allows direct comparison with its far pricier sibling, the Noct. While seemingly quite modest with an F1.8 maximum aperture, the Nikon Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S has a high-grade optical system and a price of around $599 today.

You can see an overview of this comparison in our database.

Sharpness

In years past, ultra-high speed lenses like this usually weren’t particularly sharp at the maximum aperture, however with what could be called “over designed” lenses like this that trend has been reversed. The new Noct is very sharp wide open. Admittedly there’s a drop in sharpness from the mid-zone and onwards to the corners but even at F0.95 it’s sharper than either the Zeiss Otus 55mm F1.4 ZF.2 or the Nikon Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S at their respective initial apertures. At least that’s the case in the center, it’s only the Otus that can claim slightly higher sharpness in the outer zone though even that displays some astigmatic behavior.

Stopping down the Noct maintains superior sharpness over rivals’ respective F1.4 and F1.8 settings, including in the mid- and outer-zones. At F2.8, however, rivals’ center sharpness is on a par with the Noct, though the more affordable 50 mm F1.8’s edge weakness is still apparent. It’s not until F4-F5.6 that the Noct exhibits its most homogenous and uniform performance, with the edges closest in sharpness to the center. However, that is at the expense of overall sharpness. Even then the Noct has the best edge performance of the three. After that, the performance of all three is very similar with the most affordable just trailing the Noct and Otus, in that order.

Chromatic aberration

Lateral chromatic aberration appears in the image plane and the effect, shown as colored fringing, increases out towards the edges and particularly into the corners. While this effect is usually mitigated in software without loss in image quality, the separating of wavelengths reduces sharpness in the first place. High-grade optical designs can be used to overcome this, but this is reflected in the complexity, and thus, size, weight and price.

In this respect, the Noct performs very well over most of the frame even at the initial aperture. However there are quite high levels, peaking up to 9 µm in the extreme corners (90-100% field position) at F0.95, which is higher than that found on either the Zeiss Otus 55mm F1.4 ZF.2 or the Nikon Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S. While in the mid-zone (30-60% field position), levels are generally lower or at least no worse, higher levels of fringing remain throughout the aperture range.

Geometric distortion

Geometric distortion correction is another aberration that’s best corrected optically, and although the Noct has practically unnoticeable levels (measured at -0.2%) it may well be noticeable with certain subjects, such as normally straight edges that end up parallel with the image frame. Both the Zeiss Otus 55mm F1.4 ZF.2 and the Nikon Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S show similar levels, however, they both display barrel distortion whereas the Noct exhibits pincushion type. This is typically associated with longer focal lengths.

Vignetting (corner shading)

We were promised that vignetting would be mitigated by mirrorless designs. Be that as it may, the Noct displays quite high levels at the maximum aperture, with it peaking at around -2EV in the corners. This compares to around a maximum -1.6 EV for the two rivals in this comparison. However, just looking at the peak results can lead to erroneous conclusions. When looking at the vignetting profiles or field maps, the Noct’s visual weighting at F0.95 is not dissimilar to the Otus’ at F1.4. And it’s the “slower,” more accessibly priced Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S that shows a smaller central core, and arguably “heavier” visual weighting out towards the corners.

Transmission

High transmission is not only a highly sought-after characteristic it aids IQ with regards to noise levels, as a lower ISO setting can be selected for any given exposure level. It, therefore, has quite a bearing on our DXOMark score. Although the Noct measured T1.1 at the maximum aperture, which is some -0.3 EV from the reported F-stop and ‘worse’ than the more accessibly priced Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S at just -0.1 EV, it is still ahead of the Otus. The Zeiss, with a T1.7 maximum aperture, is some -0.5 EV behind the reported F-stop.

Conclusion

Like the original Noct-Nikkor was showcasing Nikon’s optical expertise back in the ’70s and ’80s, so too is the new Nikkor Z 58mm F0.95 S Noct. It has a phenomenal optical performance. Indeed, the new Noct on the Nikon Z 7 achieved the highest score by any lens and camera combination that we’ve seen to date. However, at close to $8000, it’s pricey and both the size and weight, not to mention the long-throw manual focus, are all sure to limit its appeal. Movie studios and rental houses won’t flinch though, nor will the well-heeled seeking the signature look of a highly-corrected ultra-high-speed lens, but for everyone else, it’s the kind of lens that people only dream of.

In this review, we have compared the Nikon Nikkor Z 58mm F0.95 S Noct mounted on a Nikon Z 7 to its closest rivals from other brands. Remember that the lenses may be used on various cameras with different sensors, or in some cases on different camera systems using different mounts, so the results will vary between them.

As usual, you can create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

The post Nikon Nikkor Z 58mm F0.95 S Noct Lens review: Ultra-high speed with high sharpness appeared first on DXOMARK.

Autofocus uses a linear motor for fast, quiet focusing and it has second stepping-type motor, giving control over two groups for aberration correction at close range at all focal lengths. It also has a mechanism to mitigate “focus-breathing,” making it well-suited for filming.

Externally, it has three customizable control buttons and a separate focusing collar with a focus clutch that allows fast switching between AF and MF. It also features separate focus limiter and OIS switches, and comes with a removable tripod collar complete with a built in Arca-style compatible foot.

You can view the results for all tested lenses and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

Key specifications:

• 22 elements in 17 groups
• Three ED elements, three UED and one aspherical
• 11-blade, rounded aperture
• Linear and stepper AF motors
• Stabilization up to 7-stops correction combined with in-body IS
• Dust- and moisture-resistant
• 82 mm filter thread
• Minimum focus distance: 0.95 m ( 3.12 ft)

Test results

We tested the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S on the Panasonic Lumix DC-S1R, currently the highest-resolution camera in the maker’s lineup, with the combination achieving a DXOMARK score of 34. Given that we test the RAW files from the lens with a camera body, it’s worthy noting that the choice of camera affects the results. Different results would be expected with other camera models, especially those with a sensor with a different resolution.

The Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S has good sharpness at almost every aperture and focal length, the exception being f/22, where sharpness decreases significantly due to diffraction. It has good center sharpness and it’s a strong performer at the longer end when stopped down a little. The lens is also well corrected for geometric distortion, which is always lower than 0.5%, and it has low levels at longer focal lengths.

Slight vignetting or corner shading is visible at the maximum aperture and particularly at either end of the zoom range. In general, though, it is very well controlled throughout. The Panasonic lens also has excellent transmission, measured at T2.9 at 70 mm, however, it’s not as consistent as rivals throughout the focal range. The transmission drops to T3.1 above 70 mm, though it is quite consistent at that stage in the zoom range. If there’s one slight drawback, it’s in suppression of lateral chromatic aberration, as it has rather high levels towards the longer focal lengths, and especially at 200 mm.

Overall, though, the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S is a good performer generally.

In-depth comparisons

We’ve compared the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S on the Lumix DC-S1R against the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS model from Sony on the Sony A7R II. The Sony A7R II is the closest to the Lumix DC-S1R in pixel count and likely in resolution (resolving power) in our database. This should better facilitate direct comparisons when assessing sharpness between the two systems. At around $2,600, the 2016 Sony lens is the same price as the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S.

We’ve also compared the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S with the Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S on the Nikon Z7, a high-end model like the Lumix DC-S1R with a similar-resolution sensor. The Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 S version cost around $2699 at launch.

You can see an overview of this comparison in our database.

Sharpness

The Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S has impressive sharpness in the center of the frame at all apertures and focal lengths. However, while it has very good sharpness centrally at f/2.8 at 70 mm, corner sharpness is well behind. Stopping down one stop to f/4 improves sharpness only slightly and it takes stopping down three stops to f/8 for the corners to come up to the center. This weaker performance in the outer zones and corners is restricted to the shorter end. At 105 mm and longer focal lengths up to 200 mm, closing down just one stop sees much better, more consistent sharpness across the image field.

The Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 S has slightly higher sharpness wide-open in the centers at all focal lengths and it has much better corner sharpness at shorter focal lengths, particularly at 70 and 85 mm all the way through to f/11. As you zoom through the range, though, corner sharpness in the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S gradually catches up by 200 mm.

Against the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS, the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S has similar sharpness levels wide-open, but the Sony has the better center and corner sharpness at 200 mm. Stopped down, from f/4 onwards, the two have very similar sharpness profiles, but the Sony has higher levels at each aperture, and taken as a whole, it’s the sharpest of the three overall.

Chromatic aberration

Despite the adoption of six ED glass elements, including three ultra-low dispersion types, the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S still has slightly higher than expected levels of lateral chromatic aberration (LCA). Although this is relatively easy to remove in software, fringing can reduce sharpness levels, and that is difficult to remedy in post-processing. At shorter focal lengths and all the way through to 135 mm, the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S has low levels and mitigates the effects very well, but it has very high levels at 200 mm — exceeding 15 microns at every aperture. Both rivals in this comparison mange to keep levels in check, though at 200 mm they also show higher levels than at other focal lengths.

Geometric distortion

Control of geometric distortion correction is best achieved optically rather than in-camera or later in software, and the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S performs well in this regard. It has low levels of barrel distortion, measured at just 0.4 at 70 mm and increasing to a still very low 0.3% pincushion at 200 mm. It’s the best of the three overall when averaged, though the Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 S has the lowest barrel distortion, measured at just 0.1% at 70 mm and rising to 0.6% pincushion at 200 mm.

Vignetting (corner shading)

One of the highlights of the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S is its relatively low vignetting. Like most 70-200 mm f/2.8 zooms, the Panasonic has less vignetting at the shorter end, with shading becoming increasingly more noticeable throughout the zoom range. In measurement terms, its highest level is just -1 EV in the corners, and that value is actually pretty consistent throughout the zoom range. However, visually the effect has more weight at 200 mm, where there’s a smaller central core that’s free of shading. Both the Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 S and the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS peak at around -1.4 EV in the corners at 70 mm, increasing to around -2 EV at 200 mm.

Transmission

High transmission is a sought-after characteristic and particularly so when it’s consistent in zoom lenses, otherwise it can lead to a distracting change in exposure levels during zooming. While the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S lens is consistent from 85 mm through 200 mm, there’s a +0.2 EV difference at 70 mm, which may be troubling to resolve during filming. In terms of consistency, it’s a little worse than the Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 S — and both the Nikkor and the Panasonic are well behind the leader in the group, the more consistent and “faster” Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS at T2.9.

Conclusion

Many professionals rely on a 70-200 mm f/2.8 on a daily basis and it has become an important benchmark in any manufacturer’s lineup. For Panasonic, only recently entering the full-frame market, the performance of this lens is crucial if it’s to entice users away from the “big three” — Canon, Nikon, and Sony. In many respects this lens is a very good performer, with good central sharpness at all focal lengths and both low distortion and vignetting, but it can’t quite match the consistent sharpness of the Nikkor wide-open at all focal lengths, and it lacks the higher sharpness of the Sony once it’s stopped down. It’s good, even very good, but not quite at the same level as its rivals.

In this review, we have compared the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S. mounted on a Panasonic Lumix DC-S1R to its closest rivals from other brands. Remember that the lenses may be used on various cameras with different sensors, or in some cases on different camera systems using different mounts, so the results will vary between them.

As usual, you can create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

The post Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200mm F2.8 O.I.S. Lens review: Good performer but not class-leading appeared first on DXOMARK.

It also has slightly different cosmetics and features, including a small OLED panel that can display aperture or focal length, as well as the option to display focus distance with a depth-of-field scale below. It also has a customizable control ring and separate focusing collar.

The stabilized lens has a complex optical design consisting of 21 elements arranged in 18 groups and includes no fewer than six ED (extra-low dispersion) elements, one fluorite (FL) element, and a shortwave refractive (SR) element to help mitigate chromatic aberration. There are also Arneo and Nano Crystal coatings to improve ghosting and flare, as well as a fluorine coating to help when cleaning the front element.

Autofocus uses twin stepper motors for control of more than focus group and provides smooth, quiet focusing down to just 0.5 m (1.64 ft) at 70 mm, albeit increasing to 1.0 m (3.28 ft) at 200 mm.

You can view the results for all tested lenses and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

Key specifications:

• 21 elements in 18 groups
• Six ED elements, one FL and one SR element
• Optical image stabilization
• Nine-blade rounded aperture
• Twin AF stepper motors
• Dust- and moisture-resistant
• 77 mm filter thread
• Minimum focus distance: 0.5 m (1.64 ft) to 1.0 m (3.28 ft)
• Weight: 1360 grams (2.99 lb)

Test results

We tested the Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S on the Nikon Z7, where the camera with its high-resolution 47 MP sensor and lens together as a “system result” achieved a DXOMARK score of 38. Note that using other camera bodies (where tested) will affect the overall result. It’s the second-best-performing 70-200 mm f/2.8 model in our database, with just one point separating it from the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS — meaning that they’re very closely matched despite different optical characteristics.

This new lens has very high and consistent sharpness across the field (that is, from the center out to the edges and corners) at almost every aperture, except at f/22, where the effects of diffraction on sharpness levels are especially noticeable. One highlight of the new Nikkor is excellent sharpness wide-open at f/2.8 at all focal lengths, even at the longest, where tele-zoom lenses tend to lose some sharpness.

Geometric distortion is very low at the shorter end, with some pincushion starting at around the 105 mm mark that increases slowly up to 200 mm. Vignetting is generally quite well controlled throughout except at the initial aperture at 105 mm and longer, though the effects are soon mitigated somewhat by stopping down. It also has good and highly consistent transmission, measured at 3.1 TStop, throughout the focal range

The new Nikkor Z lens also has very low levels of lateral chromatic aberration generally, and although it has slightly higher levels at 200 mm than at the other end of the zoom range, it’s still low.

Overall, this Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S is an outstandingly good performer. As always, though, it’s well worth looking through the more detailed data to see how the lens performs at individual aperture settings and at various focal lengths.

In-depth comparisons

We’ve compared the Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S with its rival, the 2016 FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS model from Sony on the 45.7 MP Sony A7R II. Although we have compared (and you can also compare) its performance on the A7 RIV, the A7R II is an older model but is closest to the Nikon Z7 in pixel count. The reason for choosing this older body is that it’s easier to compare lens sharpness performance between manufacturers, which is affected by the sensor’s resolution.

We’ve also compared the Nikkor Z lens with the 2009 AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8 ED VR II on the Nikon D850, another model with a 47 MP sensor. While not the highly praised, fluorite-touting F-mount version from 2016, this ED VR II model was nonetheless highly acclaimed.

You can see an overview of this comparison in our database.

Sharpness

On telephoto zooms like this it’s not usual to see the sharpness drop towards the end of the zoom range, but the Nikkor Z bucks that trend and holds on to every pixel. Admittedly, there’s a slight drop in sharpness in the periphery at f/2.8, but you would be hard-put to notice. It’s not only sharp but very consistent right across the frame, with no real astigmatic-like aberrations to be seen, save for a slight amount at 135 mm and mostly at the initial aperture. Sharpness improves a little when stopped down as you might expect, but most of the improvement is in terms of consistency or uniformity across the frame. Edge-to-edge sharpness doesn’t get much better than this and it’s quite an improvement over the 2009 AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8 ED VR II. Mitigation of astigmatic behavior in the outer zones (where sharpness suffers in the older model) is another benefit of this newer design.

However, things are little different against the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS. The Nikkor Z is evenly matched overall for the most part, though it is strongest is at the initial aperture, where it has slightly higher sharpness over the Sony throughout much of the focal range. While the Sony comes close at 200 mm, some non-uniform, astigmatic-type performance holds it back. When stopped down though, fortunes reverse, and it’s the Sony that’s slightly ahead.

Chromatic aberration

Lateral chromatic aberration, or lateral color, appears in the image plane as colored fringing on either side of high-contrast edges, and the effect extends progressively out to the edges and corners. While this is typically easy to remove with software, color fringing can reduce sharpness, so if price allows it’s always better to use high-grade optics to correct it in the first place. The Nikkor Z does extremely well in mitigating the effects at practically all apertures and focal lengths. If there’s some weakness compared to the two rivals, it’s at f/2.8 at 200 mm, where there are slightly higher levels mid-frame. While the Sony comes close, the Nikkor Z is the best of the three in controlling it overall, especially at the shorter focal lengths.

Geometric distortion

Like lateral chromatic aberration correction, control of distortion is best achieved optically, as using a profile or software to make corrections can stretch an image and lower the sharpness. To that end, the Nikkor Z performs well at the shorter focal lengths, with minimal barrel at 70 mm (measured at -0.1%); it is better corrected than the older F-mount Nikkor and substantially better than the Sony. However, this changes over to pincushion distortion quite quickly at 85 mm (measured at 0.2%) and continues to increase to 0.4 % at 105 mm and to 0.5% at 135 mm, which is slightly higher than both the older Nikkor and the Sony (measured at 0.3%). All three perform identically at 200 mm, where each model has relatively low levels of pincushion (measured at 0.6%).

Vignetting (corner shading)

Corner shading is highest in the Nikkor Z when wide-open at 200 mm and lowest at 70 mm, which is to be expected, and is the same for both the F-mount lens and the Sony. However, the best corrected overall is the F-mount, while the two mirrorless lenses perform quite similarly. Visually the effect is heaviest for the Nikkor Z at 200 mm, though between it and the Sony, the Nikkor Z has a larger brighter central core at f/2.8, though slightly darker edges. That said, it’s the Nikkor that clears up the quickest between the two mirrorless lenses, with all traces of shading disappearing by f/8.

Transmission

Transmission is a good measure of the effectiveness of the lens’s coatings, and it’s useful to know if you’re using your lenses for video. Furthermore, it can even vary between camera models, so it’s worth taking that into consideration. With zoom lenses, uneven transmission can alter brightness levels during a change in focal length, so keep an eye out in our results for large deviations in brightness throughout the zoom range. In this regard, the Nikkor Z is highly consistent from 70 mm all the way through to 200 mm, varying just 0.1 EV over the range. The Sony is similar in that respect, but it also has the highest transmission of the three, averaging T2.9, versus T3.1 for the Nikkor Z.

Conclusion

Over the years, 70-200 mm f/2.8 lenses have become one the most important products in a manufacturer’s lineup, as its performance is considered a barometer for the rest of the high-end lenses in the system. As such they’re regularly updated and feature the latest optical advances, so it’s unsurprising to see the Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S easily outperform the old 2009 AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8 ED VR II, which is now two generations behind. With the new SR element backing up the fluorite and ED elements, the new Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S is a great performer optically and is a fine addition to the Z system overall. If sports, wildlife, photojournalism, or even portraiture is your thing, it would make a great choice.

In this review, we have compared the Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S mounted on a Nikon Z7 to its closest rivals from other brands. Remember that the lenses may be used on various cameras with different sensors, or in some cases on different camera systems using different mounts, so the results will vary between them.

As usual, you can create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image lens comparison tool.

The post Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S Lens review: Great optical performance appeared first on DXOMARK.