Up next in 10
Viltrox AIR 15mm F1.7 X-Mount Review (APS-C) | Budget Wide Angle Bliss?
0 views
Jul 28, 2025
Photographer Dustin Abbott shares a deep dive review of the Viltrox AIR 15mm F1.7 X - the widest lens yet from Viltrox's AIR series for APS-C | This episode is sponsored by Fantom Tracker. Visit store.fantomwallet.com and use code DUSTIN20 for 20% off.| Read the Text Review: | Purchase the Viltrox AF 15mm F1.7 @ Viltrox https://geni.us/Dustin15XF (use code DUSTINABBOTT for 5% off) | B&H Photo https://bhpho.to/4lIXiwx | Adorama https://howl.link/yfa79k463xiq6 | Amazon https://amzn.to/3TYcE4b | Amazon Canada https://amzn.to/45oskE4 | Amazon UK https://amzn.to/4f8Kj4V | Amazon Germany https://amzn.to/4m9jIH2 | Vitopal | Pergear Check out the DA Merch here: https://bit.ly/TWIMerch | Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/dustinabbott | On the Web: http://dustinabbott.net/ | Sign up for my Newsletter: http://bit.ly/1RHvUNp | Instagram: http://bit.ly/DLAinsta | Facebook: http://on.fb.me/1nuUUeH | Flickr: http://bit.ly/1UcnC0B | 500px: http://bit.ly/1Sy2Ngu Follow Craig @ https://www.instagram.com/craigstoffersen/ Want to support this channel? Use these affiliate links to shop at: B&H Photo: http://bhpho.to/1TA0Xge Adorama: https://howl.link/nt4zdz1goa7ql Camera Canada: http://bit.ly/DLACameraCan Sony Canada: https://www.thesonyshop.ca/?ref=abbott Amazon: https://amzn.to/3HrY64d Amazon Canada: https://amzn.to/3qG1p18 Ebay: http://bit.ly/DustineBay Into the AM Clothing: https://bit.ly/intotheAMda and use code DUSTIN10 for 10% off Fioboc Clothing: https://tinyurl.com/FiobocDA20 and us code DUSTIN20 for 20% off Make a donation via Paypal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/dustinTWI ============================= Table of Contents: ============================= 0:00 - Intro
View Video Transcript
0:10
Hi, I'm Dustin Abbott and I'm here for
0:12
yet another Viltrox Air series review.
0:15
This is the widest that they have gone
0:17
with their focal lengths on their APS-C
0:20
Air series lenses at 15 mm. And so we
0:24
have now a 15mm f1.7 that we're
0:27
reviewing today. And then there's a
0:28
25mm. There is a 35mm and then a 56
0:32
millimeter. All of them f1.7 lenses in
0:35
this series. Now, now today I'm going to
0:37
be filming the outdoor segments on a
0:40
E-mount version of the lens. I've
0:42
primarily reviewed the Xmount on Fuji at
0:45
this point of the lens. However, I got a
0:48
retail sourced copy of the E-mount
0:50
version just this week, and so I will
0:52
follow up with some specific details for
0:56
the E-mount version in a later review
0:58
today. However, we'll be covering it on
1:00
the uh Fuji platform, but fortunately,
1:03
we have the opportunity also to film on
1:05
it on Sony and so that you can get a
1:06
sense of the overall rendering and focus
1:09
tracking during these segments. This
1:11
lens is a little bit more expensive than
1:13
previous lenses in the Air series,
1:15
coming in at $239,
1:18
though you can get that discounted
1:19
somewhat if you look at the coupon code
1:21
that's in the description down below.
1:23
Even so, being a little bit more
1:25
expensive, usually these are sub $200
1:27
lenses. I find that if I look at the
1:30
competitors on the Sony platform,
1:32
there's an F1.4 lens that's going to run
1:34
between $8 and $900. on the Fuji
1:37
platform. There are 14 millimeter and 16
1:40
millimeter options that are often in the
1:42
$8 and $900 range as well. So, this
1:45
still stands out as very much a bargain
1:48
lens if it holds up optically. To this
1:51
point, that hasn't really been a problem
1:52
for the Air series, but maybe this will
1:54
be the exception. Let's dive in and
1:56
let's take a look. Today's episode is
1:58
sponsored by the all-new Phantom Tracker
2:00
2.0. Phantom has not only seriously
2:03
upgraded the visual look of the card,
2:05
but now we have a superior build
2:06
quality. Made with tempered glass and
2:08
metal alloys, this credit card size
2:10
tracker can be locally tracked via a
2:12
90de beeping noise, but also on a global
2:15
level via Apple's Find My Network and
2:17
its map. The addition of NFC means that
2:20
you can also use the card to trigger an
2:22
automation. Just tap it. The tracker
2:24
fits perfectly in any wallet or bag and
2:26
assures you won't lose your valuables.
2:28
It has a built-in rechargeable battery
2:30
that can be easily charged via any
2:32
wireless charger, and a single charge
2:34
can last up to 6 months. The Phantom
2:37
Tracker 2.0 makes for a seriously cool
2:39
gift. So, visit store.fanomwallet.com
2:42
and use code dustin20 at checkout for
2:45
20% off. That's store.fanomwallet.com
2:48
and use code dustin20 for 20% off. Now,
2:52
in full disclosure, this lens was sent
2:54
to me by Viltrox for evaluation. As
2:57
always, this is a fully independent
2:59
review and Viltrox has not seen my
3:01
findings before you do. So, let's talk
3:03
details about the build and handling. As
3:06
noted, the price is $239.
3:09
This is a 15 mm f1.7 lens. So, 15 mm on
3:15
a 1.5 times crop factor, which is what
3:18
we have got on Sony, Fujifilm, and on
3:21
Nikon, that comes out to a 22 1.5
3:24
millimeter full-frame equivalency. And
3:27
so it is uh it's wide, but I wouldn't
3:29
consider that to be ultra wide. So it's
3:32
a good focal length for a really a wide
3:34
variety of subjects. And I also found it
3:35
an interesting lens for just using in a
3:37
city walking around street type
3:39
photography. F1.7 is 1/ half stop slower
3:43
than f1.4. However, if you're looking at
3:46
the equivalent from like a zoom
3:48
perspective, the zoom lenses that cover
3:50
this focal range tend to be f2.8. And so
3:53
this is 1 and a half stops faster than
3:55
f2.8. 8, which means you're going to be
3:57
able to let in um you know, more than
4:00
two times about two and a half times the
4:02
amount of light compared to f2.8.
4:04
Obviously, very useful. Now, there are
4:07
no bells and whistles on these lenses,
4:09
but they aren't just plastic fantastics
4:12
either. The build quality, although it
4:14
is engineered plastics, is very nice.
4:16
It's the plastics feel tough and
4:18
durable, and I've used several of these
4:20
lenses for years now, and they have been
4:22
tough and durable during that time.
4:24
We've got a metal lens mount and there
4:26
is and on the lens mount there is a USBC
4:30
port for doing firmware updates. What
4:32
isn't here which is part of the formula
4:34
for these lenses is no weather sealing
4:37
gasket. So if you're looking for a
4:38
weather sealed lens you're going to have
4:39
to look elsewhere. This lens is
4:42
extremely lightweight for a lens in this
4:44
class. It weighs 180 g which is 6.34 o.
4:48
To give you an idea of a comparative
4:49
lens the Sigma 16mm f1.4. Again, it does
4:53
have that half stop brighter maximum
4:55
aperture, but it weighs 405 gram, which
4:57
is obviously more than twice as much as
4:59
what this lens weighs. It is very, very
5:02
slightly, just a millimeter or two here
5:04
and there, uh, larger than the 35mm or
5:07
the 25mm lenses in the series. Up front,
5:10
we have a 58mm front filter thread. Very
5:13
common, very easy to source, so no
5:15
problem there. The included lens hood is
5:18
quite shallow. It feels decent. I only
5:21
have one complaint and that is in the
5:22
process of actually mounting it.
5:24
Sometimes it's a little bit clunky when
5:26
you actually align it and press it on.
5:28
But when it locks into place, it does so
5:30
with good firmness. And I used it a lot
5:33
of times on a strap on either hiking or
5:36
again walking around for street. I never
5:38
had an issue where it bumped and the
5:39
lens hood shifted to where I had any
5:41
issue with that. So no complaints there.
5:44
Now, Fuji shooters are going to be moan
5:46
the fact that there is no aperture ring
5:48
here, but that has been true for the
5:49
entire series. There are nine aperture
5:52
blades inside. When you stop the lens
5:54
down, it produces a decent, but not
5:56
exceptional sunstar. 18-pointed sunstar.
5:59
You're going to get your best definition
6:00
at f-16, which is minimum aperture.
6:03
Minimum focus distance here is 23 cm.
6:06
That's not great for a lens in this
6:08
class. And so, the resulting
6:09
magnification is just 0.10 times. And so
6:13
not necessarily that the competing
6:15
lenses are exceptional in this regard,
6:16
but better than that. And so don't buy
6:19
this lens if you're looking for a macro
6:21
type lens. That really isn't its
6:23
strength. Overall, it's a simple design.
6:25
Manual focus ring works okay. We'll talk
6:28
a little bit more about that in the
6:30
autofocus section. However, overall,
6:32
however, a decent package and obviously
6:35
big takeaways. It's small, it's
6:37
lightweight, and inexpensive. Now, I own
6:39
cameras from four different brands and
6:42
routinely test on all of them, and Fuji
6:45
is unfortunately my least favorite
6:46
autofocusing platform. That being said,
6:49
I feel like the 15mm f1.7, it performs
6:53
quite well here on the Fuji platform.
6:56
You can see from my focus speed test
6:58
that indoors and a shorter focus pull
7:01
that focus is, if not instantaneous,
7:04
pretty close to it. My outdoor test, the
7:07
focus distance is a little bit longer.
7:08
And you can see just a little bit more
7:10
of a lag and acquiring subject from one
7:13
to the other. It's still fast and out in
7:15
real world shooting, I never noticed any
7:17
kind of focus slowdown. Other than one
7:19
situation where I was shooting in a very
7:22
bright setting and my wife was inside
7:24
kind of a darker doorway. And in this
7:26
case, because I was shooting at f9 at
7:28
the moment, I wasn't even aware that I
7:30
was shooting with the aperture that
7:31
small. And Fuji will focus with that
7:33
preset aperture. it was struggling to
7:35
actually nail focus in that, you know,
7:38
difficult situation. I opened up the
7:40
aperture to f 2.8 and it immediately
7:42
locked on and nailed it. So, it was kind
7:44
of a very case-pecific situation. In
7:47
general, however, I had no problem with
7:48
focus accuracy. I shot some shots
7:51
underneath a table of Nala who was
7:53
sitting under there in the shade and you
7:56
can see that focus results are nailed.
7:58
Got her eye nailed it really sharply.
8:00
Another shot here just kind of out on
8:02
the street. Some ladies asked my wife to
8:04
use their phone to take a picture of
8:06
them. And so I uh quickly pulled up the
8:08
camera and took a shot of of you know
8:10
the picture being taken of these ladies
8:13
and it locked on perfectly onto the
8:16
ladies even at f1.7 and give very you
8:20
well focused results. So when it comes
8:22
to stills autofocus I really don't have
8:24
any complaints. Um I don't love Fuji's
8:26
autofocus system all the time but I feel
8:28
like it did a good job here. I will note
8:31
that when it comes to manual focus, the
8:33
focus ring feels since I have both the
8:36
Sony and the X-mount version to compare,
8:39
I like the feel of the manual focus
8:42
better on the Sony lens. The focus ring
8:44
feels a little smoother, but more
8:46
importantly, there's a little bit less
8:48
of an input lag as it, you know, it's
8:49
focused by wire, so it has to route
8:51
through the focus motor um and then
8:53
through the camera system for all of
8:55
that to happen. and I found that it just
8:58
was a little bit more seamless, less lag
9:00
on Sony. But again, that's pretty much
9:01
part for the course. So, my video AF
9:03
tests actually were a little bit
9:06
reversed from what I typically see often
9:08
on Fuji. I don't get great results when
9:11
I do the touch to focus when trying to
9:12
force focus pulls from one subject to
9:15
another. In this case, however, while
9:17
focus pulls were not fast, and there's a
9:21
little bit of pulsing in there,
9:22
generally they really weren't bad. It
9:24
took a moment sometimes for it to
9:26
settle, but by and large I felt like the
9:28
focus pools were pretty well damped. And
9:30
what I didn't see that I so often see is
9:32
when I touched a focus, it didn't just
9:35
refuse to do anything. It always
9:37
consistently focused back and forth. And
9:39
so I consider that to be a success. You
9:41
will see some focus breathing there. And
9:44
unfortunately, you know, even though
9:46
it's a wide focal length, that is going
9:47
to be somewhat noticeable uh when you're
9:49
doing major focus changes like that.
9:52
where things were a little bit reser
9:54
reversed for me is that typically on
9:56
Fuji it does much better when it's able
9:58
to have a recognizable subject in frame
10:00
where the AI uh kind of overlay over the
10:02
focus system can do its work.
10:04
Unfortunately, in this situation, I felt
10:06
like when I did my f focus pulls that
10:09
there were just moments where there
10:10
really wasn't confidence as I moved from
10:12
the hand to my face, move my hand out of
10:15
the way. Sometimes there was either a a
10:17
rack in the wrong direction or in some
10:19
cases just a a some seconds where
10:22
nothing was in focus. And so I wasn't
10:25
impressed with that necessarily.
10:27
I did find when it came to static shots,
10:30
however, that focus was good and
10:32
consistent. Wasn't jumping around or
10:33
pulsing. And depending on the way that
10:36
you use the lens, uh, if you're using it
10:38
primarily to shoot static shots or, you
10:41
know, using it, you know, for example,
10:42
like this where you're moving towards
10:44
the camera, but not anything kind of
10:46
extreme, you'll probably find that it's
10:48
going to work just fine for you even on
10:51
Fuji. However, if you're wanting to do a
10:53
lot of dynamic focus changes, um, number
10:56
one, I don't think Fuji is your best
10:58
platform, but number two, I think that
11:00
this lens isn't necessarily topnotch
11:02
when it comes to that in general.
11:04
However, I mean, video f worked pretty
11:06
much the way that I would expect it to
11:08
on Fuji, uh, with the exception that I
11:10
expected it to do a little bit better on
11:12
my hand test than what it did. In
11:14
general, however, I got the clips that I
11:16
want. They look fine. No real
11:18
complaints. So, let's talk optics. This
11:20
is an optical design of 12 elements in
11:23
10 groups. And surprisingly, eight of
11:25
those 12 elements are actually special
11:27
elements or exotic elements, including
11:29
three extra low dispersion elements,
11:31
three high refractive index elements,
11:33
and two aspherical elements. You look at
11:36
the MDF chart and it shows that it is
11:38
great in the center of the frame,
11:40
exceptionally good in the center of the
11:41
frame, very strong in the center of the
11:43
frame, still above 80% in that range.
11:45
But then as you get out towards the
11:47
corner, it's outside of the rule of 2/3.
11:49
Basically, it falls off of a cliff. and
11:51
particularly when you get into the
11:52
extreme corner, it should be quite soft.
11:55
There's also an F uh or F8 MTF that is
11:58
shown on that same graph and it shows
12:00
that while it's weaker in the center,
12:02
it's about equal in the mid-frame and
12:04
much better in the corners. I will note
12:07
that again that Fujifilm's 40 megapixel
12:10
sensor, which I'm testing on here, is
12:12
the most challenging sensor platform
12:14
that I test on. That's the equivalent of
12:16
over 90 megapixels on full frames in
12:19
terms of pixel density. So, it's it's
12:20
rough on lenses. This lens holds up
12:23
pretty well outside of those corners.
12:24
However, if we look on the uh Sony
12:27
E-mount version for a moment, that
12:29
allows us to look at it how its coverage
12:31
is on full frame. We can see that there
12:33
definitely is some hard vignette towards
12:35
frame. Though, there isn't any of that
12:36
kind of like, you know, shape that comes
12:39
in there where it's completely blacked
12:40
out. As I cropped that that dark corners
12:44
away where the mechanical vignette is, I
12:46
found that I could get about 36
12:48
megapixels compared to the 26 megapixels
12:51
of an APS-C crop. And so, a little bit
12:54
more area, but I certainly wouldn't buy
12:56
this to use on a full-frame. For one
12:58
thing, the corners are already
12:59
struggling a bit on APS-C at wide
13:02
apertures. They're going to be even
13:04
worse when you get into that area that
13:05
is beyond the APS-C crop. If we look at
13:08
vignette and distortion, there is very
13:11
low distortion. So little that it's
13:14
hardly worth correcting, but what is
13:16
there is a little bit complex. You can
13:18
see that there's some pin cushion
13:19
distortion that's in the corners, but if
13:21
you try to correct that, you're going to
13:22
create some barrel distortion in the
13:24
center of the frame. So, best to let the
13:26
profile correct what little bit there is
13:28
to do there because it's really there's
13:31
really not enough there to really worry
13:32
about. In this cityscape shot, for
13:34
example, because I don't have any key
13:36
stoning, I was able to level it off
13:38
relative to the other buildings, you can
13:40
see that all the lines look nice and
13:41
straight. So, I wouldn't worry about any
13:43
kind of tiny distortion that is there.
13:46
When it comes to vignette, I needed to
13:47
use about a plus 59 to correct. So,
13:50
that's roughly two stops of vignette.
13:52
They're going to be situations where
13:53
you're going to want to correct that.
13:55
However, in this wide openen f1.7 shot
13:57
on a golf course, for example, you can
13:59
see a little darkening in the corners in
14:01
the sky, but uh maybe you wouldn't
14:03
notice it unless I drew your attention
14:05
to it. So, that's uncorrected. Probably
14:07
not a big deal there. When it comes to
14:10
longitudinal style chromatic aberration,
14:12
you can see that there is a little bit
14:14
on my test chart. However, they're going
14:16
to be very few situations where you're
14:18
actually going to be able to recreate
14:20
that in real world situations. I'm not
14:22
too concerned about it. More important
14:24
on a wide-angle lens is the lateral
14:26
style chromatic aberrations near the
14:27
corners. Unfortunately, I don't really
14:29
see any of those there. What's more,
14:31
another issue you can run into is in uh
14:34
for example, light coming through
14:35
windows that have dark frames and then
14:37
very bright kind of blown out. Sometimes
14:39
you can get fringing in those. And I
14:41
don't really see that here either. And
14:43
so both of those metrics are ones that I
14:45
would be more concerned about in a
14:46
wide-angle lens. And it passes those
14:48
with flying colors when we go on to
14:51
chart testing. And so I'm going to show
14:53
you the uh here's the the chart that we
14:55
use to look at. And the crops are going
14:57
to be shown at this is f1.7 crops from
15:00
the center, the mid-frame, and then the
15:02
lower right corner. As the MTF chart
15:05
suggests, the center looks great, the
15:07
mid-frame looks good, the corners look
15:10
soft, and so no surprises there. It
15:12
lines up with the real world testing um
15:14
as expected. If we look at real world
15:17
usage, you can see that in comparing an
15:19
f1.7 and then a f5.6 shot in the center
15:23
of the frame, you don't see much of a
15:25
difference. If we move off to the
15:26
corners, however, you can see that not
15:29
only is there more contrast there, but
15:31
the ability to kind of delineate those
15:33
fine details that are there is much
15:35
improved. So, it's not just a lack of
15:37
contrast or a stigmatism in the corners,
15:39
it's genuine softness, but that does
15:41
improve when you stop the lens down. So,
15:43
the good news is that if you're shooting
15:44
at typical landscape apertures, f5.6,
15:48
f6.3, f8, you're going to get nice
15:51
results that are sharp from corner to
15:53
corner, maybe just that tiny last
15:56
percentage or two in the extreme
15:57
corners. But again, that's probably not
15:59
really going to be a factor. And if
16:00
you're shooting on a lower resolution
16:02
sensor than the 40 megapixel sensor
16:04
here, the results are going to
16:05
comparatively appear even better there.
16:08
And so, I think you'll be perfectly
16:10
happy with that. Defraction is going to
16:12
show up as always. At f11, you'll start
16:15
to see some softening. And then at f-16,
16:17
it is more pronounced with definitely
16:19
less contrast and less detail showing
16:21
there. I found just in general in images
16:24
walking around that colors and contrast
16:26
look good. It seems to be a good match
16:28
for Fuji's color science, which I really
16:31
like, and colors look good. Flare
16:33
resistance is a slightly mixed bag. If
16:36
you're pointing right into the sun, uh,
16:38
as you, you know, you might be doing in
16:40
landscape type shots, not really a
16:42
problem. However, if you get the bright
16:45
light source off into corners or just
16:47
out of frame, you can get a little bit
16:49
more of ghosting or flashing type
16:51
effects that will take place there. And
16:54
this lens hood isn't really deep enough
16:56
to block a lot of those sidelight
16:58
situations. And so, that's just
17:00
something to watch out for. I suspect
17:01
that a deeper lens hood probably would
17:03
have created some additional vignetting.
17:05
And so that's why they went with that
17:07
smaller. The bokeh quality is okay. Um,
17:12
this isn't a bokeh type lens, a wide
17:14
angle, you know, lens like this. There's
17:16
going to be that you can't focus all
17:17
that closely. There's going to be few
17:18
situations that you strongly defocus a
17:20
background, but for example, I shot
17:22
these uh flowers that were overneath a
17:24
shop in Niagara on the Lake, Ontario,
17:27
and uh you can see that the image looks
17:29
nice, pleasing. The background is is
17:31
pleasantly defocused. It's just those
17:33
kind of situations are relatively rare.
17:36
I wasn't able to shoot the night sky,
17:38
but I did do some nightcapes. And what I
17:40
found is that there is a bit of coma
17:42
smear in the corners. Those light
17:44
sources kind of become a little bit
17:46
triangulated as if they're pointing out
17:48
of the frame. And so, it's an okay lens
17:50
to use for shooting the night sky, but
17:52
there are better options if that is your
17:54
number one priority. Uh there are good
17:57
lenses like a uh 12mm f2 for example
18:00
that work well for nightcapes. There's
18:02
one from Samyang that works well. Um I
18:05
know that Sony's own uh 12mm or excuse
18:08
me 11mimeter f1.8. If you're on the Sony
18:11
side of things, it's also pretty decent
18:13
for astro. So this is okay. And if you
18:15
own just this lens, then by all means
18:17
use it. But don't buy it specifically
18:19
for that application. In general,
18:21
however, as is often the case with this
18:23
Air series lens, this is a lens that
18:25
punches way above its weight optically.
18:27
And so, my conclusion on the Viltrox Air
18:30
15mimeter F1.7 is that above all, I was
18:34
excited when I Viltrox told me that this
18:36
was going to be a wider focal length. I
18:39
feel like pretty much everybody has done
18:41
lenses between 23 and 56 millimeters
18:43
over the past few years. We've got lots
18:45
of options there. What we don't have is
18:47
a lot of third-party alternatives at
18:50
focal lengths either wider or longer
18:52
than these. And so I was delighted to
18:54
see this lens at a wider focal length.
18:56
And of course, when you compare the $239
18:59
price tag uh to the alternatives that
19:02
are available out there, this lens is an
19:04
incredible bargain. And as we've come to
19:06
expect from the Air series, while
19:08
there's no bells and whistles, and of
19:09
course here on Fuji, no aperture ring,
19:11
and that's disappointing, but it is part
19:13
for the course. We knew what we were
19:15
getting with this lens. These lenses are
19:17
tough. They're well-b built. And of
19:19
course, they optically punch way above
19:21
their weight. And that's true even for
19:23
this lens, even though it tackles a more
19:25
demanding focal length. So, at the end
19:26
of the day, I suspect this is going to
19:28
be another hit for Viltrox because I
19:31
think there are plenty of people that
19:32
are looking for a wide angle prime for
19:34
their APS-C camera that they can easily
19:36
bring along whether they're traveling,
19:38
backpacking, or just want to put
19:40
multiple lenses into a small camera bag.
19:43
Now, if you want a deeper dive into
19:44
performance, you've got two options. You
19:46
can check out my full text review, which
19:48
is linked in the description down below,
19:50
along with some buying links and that
19:51
discount code that I mentioned there, or
19:53
for those of you that are interested,
19:55
we're now going to jump into a deep dive
19:57
of the optical performance. Stay tuned.
20:00
Okay, starting off, we'll take a look at
20:01
that full-frame coverage a little bit
20:03
closer. You can see here shooting on the
20:04
Sony version that there's definitely
20:07
some pretty dark vignette in the
20:09
corners. It's not completely hard and
20:10
that it's solid black, but it's not not
20:13
recoverable through normal means. Now,
20:15
you can see that that is considerably
20:17
wider than the APSC crop here. Now, on
20:20
the left side, I've cropped in on that
20:22
full-frame image to compare to the APS-C
20:24
crop on the right. And if I toggle the
20:26
information here, you can see that I've
20:29
got 7352x 4901 pixels as opposed to
20:32
6240x 4160. So, about 36 megapixels
20:36
versus 26 megapixels. So, yes, that is
20:40
some additional, you know, that's not
20:41
really captured by the uh the vignette.
20:45
However, you can also see here that it's
20:47
going to get increasingly soft as we get
20:49
off to that zone. So, I just don't know
20:51
that it's worth it. Now, as far as
20:52
vignette and distortion, you can see
20:54
here looking at this, it's a little bit
20:56
of a complex distortion. There's a
20:58
little bit of a pin cushion style in the
21:00
corner, but also a little bit of barrel
21:01
in the center. And so, what we are
21:04
seeing is very mild distortion, but it's
21:06
complex. And so trying to correct that,
21:09
if I try to correct the corners, I'm
21:11
going to exacerbate the barrel
21:12
distortion. If I correct the barrel
21:14
distortion, I'm going to exacerbate the
21:16
pin cushion distortion in the corners.
21:17
In most situations, it's going to be
21:19
best to just leave it. Looking at this
21:21
real world shot, for example, you can
21:23
see that as we look throughout the
21:24
image, the lines actually look really
21:26
quite good. And that's without any kind
21:28
of correction there. So, in most
21:30
situations, you're really not going to
21:32
have to worry about distortion. Now
21:34
coming back and looking at vignette, you
21:35
can definitely see some vignette that is
21:37
fairly concentrated in the corners. A
21:39
plus 59 will correct for it. Though
21:41
you'll see that there's just that little
21:42
bit of discoloration that's left behind.
21:44
I don't love that, but it does sometimes
21:46
happen. Now, as far as various kinds of
21:49
fringing, longitudinal style, there is a
21:51
bit of green fringing after the plane of
21:53
focus, but as mentioned previously,
21:55
because of the nature of this focal
21:56
length and aperture, there's not going
21:57
to be a lot of situations that you can
21:59
replicate this in out in the real world.
22:01
So, I wouldn't worry about that too
22:03
much. More important is lateral style
22:05
chromatic aberrations that come near the
22:06
edge of the frame. You can see here, not
22:08
really a concern. That's nice and clean.
22:11
And then what's more, as we look at
22:12
these windows and we punch in there,
22:14
even in these areas of high contrast
22:16
near the edges of the frame, we can see
22:18
that that's really handled quite nicely.
22:21
And so, we don't have fringing that's
22:22
coming through there. So, all of that is
22:25
positive. So, as alluded to previously,
22:27
this is a hugely demanding sensor,
22:29
particularly at 200% magnification. But
22:32
in the center of the frame, no problem
22:33
at all. It's super sharp. Nice high
22:36
contrast. Mid-frame also looks good.
22:38
Lots of detail there. No problem. And as
22:41
we kind of pan down this way, you'll see
22:43
it is sharper here than what it is here.
22:46
So, we're starting to see where that
22:48
drop off point is. And here, as you get
22:50
towards the edge of the frame
22:51
progressively, it just gets softer and
22:52
softer towards the edge. So for real
22:55
world shots at 100% magnification, you
22:58
can see here that that looks nice and
23:00
crisp there in the rule of third zone um
23:02
at all. If we look at this image for
23:04
example at f1.7 and we punch in at a
23:07
pixel level, you can see the detail
23:08
looks great. We can't quite read the
23:11
menu there, but you can see that it's
23:13
not a blur. It is finally resolved. If
23:15
we take a look at this image at f1.7 and
23:18
then at f5.6, we can see that in the
23:21
center of the frame, it's really not all
23:23
that different. But if we move off here
23:25
towards the side of the frame, you can
23:27
just see that on the f5.6 version,
23:29
there's a lot more information that's
23:31
being resolved there near the edge of
23:33
the frame. It's a little bit mushier at
23:35
f1.7. Definitely better detail even in
23:38
the grass here. You can see the fine
23:39
blades here. It's just kind of like a a
23:43
bit of a blurring together. Now, corners
23:45
don't really get sharp until f5.6. But
23:48
here we can see in a realworld shot,
23:49
even on 40 megapixels, the center of the
23:51
frame looks great as we would expect. As
23:53
we pan off to the side, it's still
23:55
looking great. And as we come towards
23:57
this corner, looking great there. And
23:59
this corner looking great there. And so
24:02
when you stop down to more typical
24:04
landscape apertures, you're not going to
24:05
have any problem. Likewise, here is
24:07
another shot. And you can see that
24:10
there's just really great detail all
24:11
across the frame. No problem with that.
24:14
I would be happy with that image any day
24:17
of the week. Now, as per usual,
24:19
defraction is going to start showing up
24:21
at f11. You can see it's looking softer
24:23
here in the center. By f16, which is the
24:25
minimum aperture, it looks softer still.
24:27
Now, here is the minimum focus distance,
24:30
and you can see that contrast is a
24:32
little bit lower. Um, we can see as we
24:35
look across here that it's just not as
24:37
crisp as what we have seen at a little
24:39
bit further distances. The plane of
24:42
focus is relatively flat, but you can
24:44
see it's not perfectly flat. It It's
24:46
kind of fading here towards the corners
24:48
a bit. Colors I thought looked really
24:50
nice out of the lens. I shot in a
24:52
variety of situations. And here I think
24:54
that the colors look very nice. This
24:56
image here, you can see colors are nice
24:59
and uh nicely saturated, but without
25:01
looking garish. This also gives us an
25:03
opportunity to kind of look at the bokeh
25:04
quality. As I mentioned, it's not going
25:06
to be often that we have a chance to see
25:08
the defocused area because it's not
25:10
going to produce it in a lot of
25:11
situations. But here, we can see that it
25:14
looks pretty nice. Likewise, here,
25:16
colors look good. The defocused area
25:18
looks nice. And this image, I think,
25:20
looks uh really nice. You know, I don't
25:22
necessarily love the shape of the
25:24
specular highlights here, but in
25:25
general, the background looks nice and
25:27
soft. And and looking at the subject
25:29
matter, it's got decent detail there.
25:32
All of it looks, you know, pretty nice
25:33
all things considered. Now, as we've
25:35
noted, flare resistance is it varies a
25:37
bit. Here, wide open, shooting right
25:39
into the sun. No problem. Even here,
25:42
stopped down to F-16 and pointing right
25:44
into the sun. I don't really see a
25:46
problem here either. I don't see any
25:48
loss of contrast, any kind of ghosting
25:50
artifacts here with the sun right out of
25:53
the frame. Again, I don't see a problem
25:55
here, but in this particular shot,
25:56
obviously, it's a pretty big blob there.
25:59
So, stop down. there's more to watch out
26:02
for and you just have to be careful in
26:04
your composition. Now, one final test
26:06
looking for coma here. So, if we look at
26:08
points of light uh in the middle of the
26:11
frame, you can see that, you know,
26:13
they're round. There's not any kind of
26:14
smearing that's taking place. If we move
26:16
off here towards the side, however, you
26:19
can see that it's the shape is just kind
26:21
of changing a bit. It's stretching and
26:24
uh pointing out towards the edge. And so
26:26
under these circumstances, you can just
26:27
tell that there is a bit of coma to
26:29
watch out for. Though again, it's not
26:31
the worst that I've seen. So, thanks for
26:33
sticking around to the very end. I hope
26:35
that the deep dive into the optics has
26:37
helped you to decide whether or not this
26:39
is the lens that you have been looking
26:41
for. As always, thanks for watching.
26:43
Have a great day and let the light in.