coma's reviews

  • Fujinon XF 14mm f/2.8 R

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    ultra sharp, light, little coma, good lens for astro photography

    This lens put Fuji on top of all mirrorless systems when it comes to (ultra) wide angles. It was a joy buying this, since Olympus doesn't have any outstanding wide angles.

    The lens is sharp, fast focussing, is optically corrected for most aberrations and works very good not only for landscapes but also astro photography.

    reviewed May 27th, 2016 (purchased for $600)
  • Sony FE 85mm f/1.4 GM SEL85F14GM

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    good sharpness, nice bokeh,
    big, expansive, slow focus, unusable in video, marketing

    I had really high hopes for this, since Sony marketing claimed this was probably one of the best lenses ever made.
    Thing is: it isn't. Sharpness is good in the center, but wide open it just lacks the last bit of sharpness one would expect.
    Same goes for Bokeh. It's nice. Really nice to be honest. But is it best in class? No. The Sony falls in line with Panasonic, Sigma and Fuji. In front of the Nikon but just not as good as the Canon 85mm. (Of course the Sony offers more blur than Panasonic and Fuji, but Bokeh as the quality of the blur, is't really better)

    Focus is slow and noise, I don't know what happened there.

    All in all a very nice lens. Optically probably the nicest thing Sony has to offer. But it just falls short of what the marketing claimed.

    reviewed September 2nd, 2016 (purchased for $2,100)
  • Fujinon XF 27mm f/2.8

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    sharp, small

    small, very sharp all across the frame. Focus is fast too (but you can hear it)

    Build quality is not Fuji XF like, but that means it's still above Sony or Canikon.

    For the current price it's a nobrainer

    reviewed December 15th, 2015 (purchased for $200)
  • Fujinon XF 90mm f/2 R LM WR

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    sharpness, color, bokeh, focus speed ...

    Didn't believe my eyes, when I saw the first pictures when I bought this lens. It's sharper than most of the glass I own, even when shooting wide open. Both sharpness and contrast are nothing but spectacular across the whole frame on all apertures.
    The bokeh is smooth but contrasty, the color is nice and the focus speed is good.
    If there is one thing not to like this lens it is, that there are not many of it's kind

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $900)
  • Fujinon XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    sharpness, build quality, contrast
    no WR

    It's a good lens and probably the best ultra wide zoom for mirrorless (even better than both the Olympus 7-14 pro as well as the Sony 16-35)

    It's sharp and contrast is high. Stopped down you get beautiful stars.

    Still, I prefer the 14mm for it's size - however a weather resistent f/2.8 ultra wide zoom would be appreciated.

    reviewed December 7th, 2015
  • Fujinon XF 23mm f/1.4 R

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    sharpness, build quality, contrast

    Like nearly all Fujinons, this one can match most of it's bigger SLR brothers in nearly every way.
    It's sharp and optically well corrected. And with 300g it's light too.
    The clutch AF-MF mechanism works great and focus speed on a X-T1 is good too.

    The only draw back is, that the lens hood is way too big for this lens.

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $700)
  • Fujinon XF 35mm f/1.4 R

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    character, bokeh, build quality
    a bit soft wide open, loud AF

    It was one of the first Fuji lenses. And it's a bit different. It's not as sharp as most of the others wide open. Especially the corners get very soft.
    But still, wide open this is great for portraitures. And it has character - the out of focus rendition is beautiful and it's hard to put a finger on it - bug this lens has something, that a lot of other lenses lack. Just looking at samples will show this.

    The drawbacks are that it is a bit soft wide open at the corners (stopped down this lens gets really sharp and is suited for landscapes) and that the autofocus motor is noisy.

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $400)
  • Fujinon XF 56mm f/1.2 R

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    f/1.2, sharp

    It is an spectacular lens, sharp already wide open. It was my go to portraiture lens - until the 90mm (which is probably one of the best lenses ever made) appeared.

    Still, the 56mm has a huge advantage - it's light gathering ability with f/1.2
    And you can use f/1.2 without problems because contrast and resolution are good and the focus is tack on (thanks to contrast detection/hybrid focus on mirrorless bodies).

    This lens is pretty versatile: great for portraiture, available light but also (stopped down) for landscape. I think it's maximum sharpness is greater than those of the Fuji 60mm or Zeiss 50mm macros.

    I'd call this one a must have for the systen

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $700)
  • Fujinon XF 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    sharp, very fast AF, constant aperture, WR

    At first I didn't want to buy this lens, since I thought the purpose of mirrorless was to be small. Furthermore I thought that I would miss the stabilisation I was used to (from both my Fuji 18-55 as wenn as IBIS in the Olympus OMD EM1)

    The 18-55 may be a great lens, but I was looking for an oustanding one. Especially with a constant aperture (for manual flash) and a fast autofocus system.

    And what do I say? The 16-55 delivers everything. It's sharp. It matches the 16mm and 23mm and is sharper than the 35mm f/1.4
    Only the 56mm is sharper. Furthermore the focus on this lens (with the X-T1) is incredible. I'd say it's on par with the Em1 and 12-40 pro.

    The con: the size, "disappears" as soon as you use it and notice that every cm and every gram where used to get this lens to be outstanding.

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $1,000)
  • Fujinon XF 50-140mm f/2.8 R LM OIS WR

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    sharp, incredible OIS, fast

    together with the 16-55 the 50-140 forms the duo of "to big for mirrorless but nothing but incredible"

    As with the 16-55 at first I thought this lens might be too big and heavy for a tiny mirrorless body.
    That might be true for an X-A1, but I think this lens was designed with the X-T1 and the battery grip in mind. And on that it performs splendidly.
    The optical performance is incredible and it matches the Canon f/2.8L II (of course the Canon is made for full frame, but considering optical design, contrast, sharpness and correction, this is on par)
    What I was positively shocked about is the OIS. It's nothing like the one on the 18-55 (with I would deactivate most of the time) but better than anything I have owned (even beating the EM1 IBIS).

    Focus is fast too.

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $1,400)
  • Olympus 75mm f/1.8 ED M.Zuiko Digital

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    best mFT lens, sharp, small
    too expensive, not weather sealed

    the first example of this lens wasn't good at all - but this happens with all manufactures. The second one was good. No, it was outstanding.

    It might be the best µFT lens (fighting the 42.5mm nocti). It's sharp and the images it delivers are stunning - especially considering the size!

    But there are a few drawbacks: the price. I paid nearly 1000€ - that's over 1000$. Too much for this lens. And it should be sealed (weather resistant).

    If I had one wish it would be: make the lens a bit bigger, but seal it and improve the image quality (which is good, but both sharpness wide open as well as bokeh are not perfect).

    The focus, like nearly all µFT lenses, was fast on an Em1

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $1,000)
  • Olympus 45mm f/1.8 ED M.Zuiko Digital

    7 out of 10 points and not recommended
    small, light, looks good, cheap
    a bit soft, not that great overall

    I only heard praise about this lens, but when I bought it I was a bit disappointed.
    Of course, it's a small, light and cheap lens, so don't expect too much - but since this lens was hyped a lot - I expected way more out of it.

    Imaged were soft, especially wide open and the focus speed was good (like with nearly all µFT lenses), but it was not outstanding.
    I thought I might have gotten a bad copy (and returned it), but at my photoclub both my buddies that ordered this lens, had the same problem.

    For it's size and weight and price the performance might be good, but don't expect the outstanding (notci like) performance you are told on the internet - it won't deliver

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $400)
  • Fujinon XF 18mm f/2 R

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    small, "special"

    It's construction is good and so is it's size. But it's probably the worst Fuji lens when it comes to image quality.
    Corners are soft even stopped down and the lens suffers form field curvature.

    Not much to add here - for about 200 bucks it's ok as a pancake - but personally I prefer the 16mm and 23mm

    followup: since I had the chance to test this lens again and I have to withdraw some of my complains. The new version was sharper than the first example, especially around f/5.6 and f/8. It had some CAs but those are expected from a pancake. Furthermore the build quality seems to have improved too. Aperture ring felt a lot stiffer.
    Still wouldn't say it's an outstanding lens and 16 and 23mm are better, but for it's size and price I will change my vote to recommended!

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $400)
  • Fujinon XF 60mm f/2.4 R Macro

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    sharp, wonderful bokeh

    This lens is the oposit to the Fuji 18mm
    While the 18mm focusses fast it's optically bad.
    This lens is slow. Really, really slow sometimes. But it's image quality is really good. The 56mm might be a tack sharper and has 2 more stops, but then again: this lens has character like the 35mm. It's something special.

    Furthermore the bokeh is really nice. At f/2.4 I prefer it to the 56mm at f/2.4

    If you are new to the system and are looking for a cheap way to do both macro and portraiture this is the lens to get. (For available light and improved portraiture go for the 56mm)

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $400)
  • Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro M.Zuiko Digital ED

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    build quality, size
    expensive, bokeh, optics

    The lens is good. But it's not outstanding. You notice this, as soon as you use a RAW converter, that doesn't automatically do some correction magic.
    Sharpness is good in the center, but the uncorrected RAW suffers from severe distortion and vignetting. Furthermore both sharpness and contrast reduce quite a bit when you go near 40mm.
    The lens is clearly underdesigned with electronic correction in mind and for that, it is way too expensive. 600€/$ would be appropriate

    While many things are good (focus speed, near focus distance) the one thing that disappointed me the most (and which even made me buy into another system) was the bokeh at greater distances. It can ruins pictures. (Also the sharpness when focussed close to infinity seems to be a lot less than at close range. It seems, that this lens was optimised for close focus and that is the reason why it performs quite well in measurements.

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $1,000)
  • Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro M.Zuiko Digital ED

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    sharpness, build quality, close focus
    bokeh, not best of class - price

    It's a really good lens. And there are some nice innovations in it, that make gear heads like me go nuts. Dual element focus (two groups each with linear motors). There seem to be some improvements in autofocus speed but primary a really, really close focus distance. This is great!
    Furthermore the lens is good optically. It might not compete with the best of the class (Canon 70-200, Fuji 50-140), but it covers a greater range than those two.
    But it's not cheap - I'd say it's worth it but probably should be few hundert bucks less.

    Again - the thing that disappointed me the most was, that this lens seems (like the 12-40) be optimised for close focus distances. The sharpness (while still great) gets a bit worse, when focussing at infinity. But the Bokeh is the main problem. If you have a busy background the out of focus rendering gets really bad. Don't know why Olympus is having so much problem with this

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $1,400)
  • Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 Pro M.Zuiko Digital ED

    9 out of 10 points and not recommended
    sharpness, build quality, close focus
    field curvature, too expensive, no filter thread

    I was really excited when Olympus announced this lens. And what to say - it's really a good lens!
    It's sharp and the close focus distance is really nice on an ultra wide angle zoom. Build quality is (as with all pros) really good.
    Chromatic abberations seems to be corrected well and so is the vignetting (but not the distortion). It seems that Olympus moved away from: "correct everything electronically" and now corrects a bit more optically (to the cost of size).

    The problems with this lens that I have? Two small things: it has no filter thread and it's a very expensive lens.
    And then there come two bigger drawbacks:
    1. the field curvature is enormous. It can put some parts of your image out of focus. This is a really, really drawback and everyone should be aware of it.

    The second thing is: I would take this over the Sony 16-35, but if you compare it to the Fuji 10-24 it's just not up there optically. The fuji is sharper (all across the frame), has a greater reach and is smaller, lighter and cheaper. (Of course the 7-14 is weather resistant, which the Fuji lacks).

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $1,300)
  • Sony FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* SEL55F18Z

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    sharpness, contrast, bokeh

    If you buy into the Sony FE system, this is the lens to get. Probably one of the best standard lenses overall.

    It's sharp already wide open (ok, f/1.8 isn't very fast by todays standards) and the bokeh is nice too.

    If I had to come up with a con it would be the price.
    But I'd say this lens is worth every penny

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $800)
  • Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* SEL2470Z

    7 out of 10 points and not recommended
    size, build quality

    It's a small and light lens and it's build quality is good. But that's about it talking about the pros.

    Optically this lens is a disaster. Corners never get really sharp (not matter which focal length or aperture you use), it suffers from chromatic aberration and distortion as well as vignetting.

    If you don't need the 24mm wide angle I'd say go for the 28-70

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $1,000)
  • Sony FE 28-70mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS SEL2870

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    better than the 24-70
    still not really good

    The lens is ok. (not tack sharp, but okay. Everything else is average too)
    At first I didn't get, why to go for such a slow lens with a full frame camera, but once I tried the subpar 24-70 I realised, it's the only acceptable option.

    Sony really has a standard zoom problem with their FE mount.

    reviewed December 7th, 2015
  • Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA Zeiss Distagon T* SEL35F14Z

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    center sharpness, bokeh
    size, price

    To make it short: most things about this lens are great. It's corrected beautifully and center sharpness is nothing but breathtaking.
    But I tried 3 lenses and all of them had one really soft corner (it was always another corner).
    Reading on the internet this seems like a common problem - it seems that Sony has quite some quality control and built issues.

    Furthermore size and price are way too high - even if all corners would be sharp

    reviewed December 7th, 2015 (purchased for $1,700)
  • Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* SEL1635Z

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    size, center sharpness, build quality
    performance >24mm, field curvature

    The Sony 16-35 is a really good lens. I'd say it's one of the better lenses in the FE system.

    At 16mm this lens performs astonishing. This is, if you get what you want in focus, since the lens suffers from quite some field curvature.

    Most things (distortion, CAs) are not corrected perfectly, but that's not expected by such a zoom lens. I'd say performance is very good.

    However the lens loses most of it's charm (and sharpness), when you go above 24mm. At 35mm I'd call the performance bad. But let's be honest: you don't buy this lens for the 35mm part, but the 16mm ;)

    Furthermore the size of this lens is really good! For an f/4 wide angle full frame lens it can be considered really small!

    reviewed December 7th, 2015
  • Fujinon XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    absolutely stunning image quality, optically corrected, sharp all across the frame, very nice bokeh
    there really is nothing I can think of

    I got this lens (and compared it against a Batis 25mm) and was absolutely amazed. It's incredible. Very sharp and nice rendition.
    The minimum focal distance is really small (just a few centimetres infront of the lens) and bokeh (with a wide angle!) is nice too.

    Then I came here and saw the measurements and was surprised. I had expected the lens to be (much!) better. Imo it's on par with the superb 23 and 56mm and is even a tiny bit sharper than the Batis 25mm.

    I did a few more comparisons and realised: Fuji seems to have optimised this lens for documentation. So if you are shooting people, this lens is ideal. Environmental portrait, documentation and even street - this lens it incredible. At infinity it get's a bit weaker but still is very strong. Stop it down and you have a superb landscape lens.

    Oh, now I can think of one Con: the lens has very visible coma at the corners (wide open). So it's not the best lens for shooting the stars. Or just do a panorama and it's ok.

    (I still think that the lens imaging-resources tested wasn't really good, because my personal comparisons show it perform much better!)

    Everyone owning the Fuji system should go for this. And everyone thinking about a mirrorless system: go for this one. At most things it's better or on par with the Batis 25mm and FT has absolutely nothing to offer at this focal length.

    reviewed June 15th, 2016 (purchased for $999)