My latest Sony lens reviews (90 Macro, Loxia 35)

Discussion in 'Sony Alpha E-Mount Lenses' started by Jman13, Aug 7, 2015.

  1. Jman13

    Jman13 TalkEmount Regular

    Jul 4, 2014
    • Like Like x 7
  2. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Aug 6, 2011
    Great work as always, Jordan. I thought the Loxia was the strongest of all the native 35s when stopped down for landscape/architecture. Was surprised that you found the old Canon FD compared so well!
  3. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur Subscribing Member

    Nov 13, 2012
    Ad Dieleman
    Your review is a pleasure to read, thanks. My only point of criticism is the lack of access to full-res version of the sample pictures; I'd like to see for myself what's going on, preferably with raw files.
  4. Jman13

    Jman13 TalkEmount Regular

    Jul 4, 2014
    Yeah, I don't share RAW files or lots of full size because I sometimes sell prints or licenses for my images. I generally include one or two full/large size image per review, but no more. Other times I'll provide 100% crops.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. Austrokiwi

    Austrokiwi TalkEmount Regular Subscribing Member

    Feb 2, 2014
    22nd District Vienna
    Ian Fenn
    I had already read your review and it convinced me to buy the lens.....(with the A7rii) Problem is , for me much of my macro work has been done with enlarger lenses and old manual focus lenses... going to a modern native lens has provided a whole new learning curve. Soon after I got the camera and lens I tried to do a resolution comparison with one of the best, if not the best, resolving lenses for macro photography the Printing Nikkor 105mm F 2.8 ( the film scanner lens). I don't have a resolution test target, so I used a 10 Euro note. What was very nice to see was the 90mm appeared to be only slightly softer than the nikkor( at its design optimum of 1X and F2.8). Given all the compromises that have to be built into a commercial camera lens its impressive that the 90mm appeared to compare favorably to an uncompromised lens. Of course the micro printing on the note was significantly larger than what the nikkor is able to resolve.
  6. GabrielPhoto

    GabrielPhoto TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Jul 3, 2013
    I am not. :) 
    I have seen tests of both the FD 35mm F2 and 2.8 and even on the A7R it is an amazing performer showing superb resolution in the test charts.
  7. JerryB

    JerryB New to TalkEmount

    Apr 8, 2015
    Jerry Brendle

    I was just wondering if many owners/users of the Sony 90 Macro are seeing the all-too-often problems that are being discussed on other Sony e-mount forums? It seems many folks are seeing all kinds of lack of sharpness problems in the corners and poor centering with this lens.
    I myself had to return my first copy to B&H and try another one. It seems this second copy is pretty good though.
    • Like Like x 2
  8. davect01

    davect01 Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Aug 20, 2011
    Fountain Hills, AZ
    Pretty nice write up.
  9. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    I don't have the lens, but this is the first time I've heard of "all-too-often" problems. Could you give a link? Or a quick summary?
  10. JerryB

    JerryB New to TalkEmount

    Apr 8, 2015
    Jerry Brendle
    Many posts here:
  11. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Aug 6, 2011
    The OP of that thread subsequently realized that his testing methods were faulty and the lens was fine:

    I could tell from his first test shot that he was aiming askew at a near target.

    I've seen other reports of decentered 90 macro lenses on DPR, and a few people reporting that in general they are dissatisfied with Sony lens QC. Lloyd Chambers also published that both of his FE 35/1.4 and 90 macro lenses were faulty copies.

    My take is that:

    1) A lot of people are - like the OP of that DPR thread - not familiar with how to test a lens and will conclude a lens is faulty when it is okay.

    2) Most lens copies from all makes and models are slightly faulty. Very few show perfectly symmetrical performance when tested properly, and some testers - like Lloyd Chambers - will scream to the heavens when they encounter small, "within spec" faults.

    3) There are no doubt some very bad copies of these lenses out there. Whether they are more common than bad copies of other lenses of a different make and model, I couldn't tell you. But there are some. For example, one fellow on DPR seemed much happier with his second copy.

    The one copy of the 90 macro I tried was spectacular. Not perfectly symmetrical but none of my lenses ever are. Could be I'm just unlucky.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

  13. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Aug 6, 2011
    Oops, I just realized that was you!
    • Like Like x 1
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.