I would say that nowadays, you could use a lens that has great sharpness, good enough bokeh, and select the background very easily to reduce the contrast/clarity and get a dreamier look. However, you can't pull up sharpness when it's not there to begin with.
This has been true since there were digital cameras. How many people view an image at 100% though? If you don't you are just going to notice that very nice bokeh, and you don't have to mask it and postprocess it or ask the prompt to summon it
maybe you didn't notice but the profile selected automatically by Lightroom is not the right one - there was a Fuji profile selected, not Sirui (I would be surprised if Lightroom even had profile for this lens)
Buy this 33F1.2 version for Sony a6700. It's a shame because it's a real disappointment. It doesn't have the "sharpness" I was hoping for, really bad at F1.2 center and edges. Continue like this up to F5.6 to get something decent. I'm sorry to say that the Viltrox of equal focal length is of superior quality and not by a little. I expected an initial softness only in the edges at F1.2 with something decent in the center but no, that's not the case, the focus always remains "clouded". I would also add that the weight is notable compared to the competition which also boasts the external diaphragm ring. I think they should change their map, insert quality lenses (or better optical schemes) and charge a fair price for them and not offer lenses that then disappoint.
It’s a video lens brother, not the clinical stale type that is priority for photography. Viltrox and Sigma are definitely better if you are seeking sharp lenses. For video, these are some of my favorite, even for photo tbh. The “flaws” are pros for me, as I love vintage character
If you consider 20-30 seconds to type something in as “considerable time”, I would hate to see your attitude when waiting on your food at a restaurant. 🙄
![The Reason to Shoot UP-CLOSE [TAMRON 90mm f2.8 MACRO]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bmzcVtMN9VI/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you! If I buy a f1,2 lens, I would need it to be sharper below f4...
I'm glad to help out.
I would say that nowadays, you could use a lens that has great sharpness, good enough bokeh, and select the background very easily to reduce the contrast/clarity and get a dreamier look. However, you can't pull up sharpness when it's not there to begin with.
I agree that it is easier to reduce sharpness than to create it.
This has been true since there were digital cameras. How many people view an image at 100% though? If you don't you are just going to notice that very nice bokeh, and you don't have to mask it and postprocess it or ask the prompt to summon it
maybe you didn't notice but the profile selected automatically by Lightroom is not the right one - there was a Fuji profile selected, not Sirui (I would be surprised if Lightroom even had profile for this lens)
I did notice, but the correction was pretty accurate.
I think I'll stick with Nikkor for my 35mm purchase, I was looking at this cause I like the 23mm
Fair enough.
was hoping for a bit better image quality for these lenses. but my old minolta lenses are sharper than this and with less CA. too bad.
If you're looking for sharpness, then these lenses are a disappointment.
Buy this 33F1.2 version for Sony a6700. It's a shame because it's a real disappointment. It doesn't have the "sharpness" I was hoping for, really bad at F1.2 center and edges. Continue like this up to F5.6 to get something decent. I'm sorry to say that the Viltrox of equal focal length is of superior quality and not by a little. I expected an initial softness only in the edges at F1.2 with something decent in the center but no, that's not the case, the focus always remains "clouded". I would also add that the weight is notable compared to the competition which also boasts the external diaphragm ring. I think they should change their map, insert quality lenses (or better optical schemes) and charge a fair price for them and not offer lenses that then disappoint.
Sharpness is definitely not a strength.
It’s a video lens brother, not the clinical stale type that is priority for photography. Viltrox and Sigma are definitely better if you are seeking sharp lenses. For video, these are some of my favorite, even for photo tbh. The “flaws” are pros for me, as I love vintage character
Why do I have to google that this lens is only for apsc?
I actually specifically say that it is APS-C and that the focal length is 50mm equivalent
not in the introduction or in the description @@DustinAbbottTWI
Imagine the shock! You had to google yourself! Oh my! I think you need to make a compensation claim
Previous videos mentioned APS-C in the title. That saved me quite some time.
If you consider 20-30 seconds to type something in as “considerable time”, I would hate to see your attitude when waiting on your food at a restaurant. 🙄