• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Zony & Otus 55’s on a7R, D810 — edge sharpness

Zony & Otus 55’s on a7R, D810 — edge sharpness

May 28, 2015 JimK 1 Comment

This is a continuation of the real-world, informal testing of the Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 Sonnar FE (Zony 55) and the Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus ZF.2 lenses on the Sony alpha 7R (a7R) and Nikon D810 cameras. The overall scene is in the previous post. In this post, I’ll present edge captures at various apertures from all  three combinations that work:

  • Otus on a7R
  • Otus on D810
  • Zony on a7R

It is not possible to use the Zony on the D810 because the flange focal distance of the Nikon F-mount is too long.

I will not show the center crops, because they’re all pretty boring until diffraction sets in. Both of these lenses are capable of doing justice to sensors much larger than 36 megapixels in the center of the image.

All images were captured on RRS TVC-43 legs and an Arca Swiss D4 head, with RRS L-brackets on the cameras, and developed in Lightroom CC 2015 with ACR 9.0, with white balance set to Daylight and sharpening turned off. I used electronic first-curtain shutter (EFCS) on the D810 pictures at 1/2000 second and below; the D810 EFCS doesn’t work above 1/2000 second.  The a7R does not offer that feature. I used the 2-second self timer on the a7 and a three second shutter delay on the D810. The D810 was set to ISO 64, and the a7R to ISO 100. I used aperture metering mode. The edge crops are enlarged to 300% using Lightroom’s export algorithm with sharpening turned off..

The Otus at f/1.4 on both cameras, and the Zony wide open at f/1.8:

 

D810 Otus f/1.4
D810 Otus f/1.4
a7R Otus f/1.4
a7R Otus f/1.4
a7R Sony f/1.8
a7R Sony f/1.8

All the images are dark because of the corner falloff. The two Otus images are virtually identical in sharpness. The Sony image is very slightly softer, but is turning in an amazing performance, given its price.

At f/2:

 

D810 Otus f/2
D810 Otus f/2
a7R Otus f/2
a7R Otus f/2
a7R Sony f/2
a7R Sony f/2

Here’s a surprise. The a7R Otus image is a hair softer than the D810 one. Shutter shock? Hard to believe with a shutter speed of 1/5000 second. It’s a very small difference. The Zony image is definitely softer, but very credible. Outstanding performance for a lens fighting out of its weight class.

At f/2.8:

D810 Otus f/2.8
D810 Otus f/2.8
a7R Otus f/2.8
a7R Otus f/2.8
a7R Sony f/2.8
a7R Sony f/2.8

There’s a little smearing on the a7R/Otus image compared to the D810/Otus crop. The Zony image is softer yet, but not by a lot.

At f/4:

 

D810 Otus f/4
D810 Otus f/4
a7R Otus f/4
a7R Otus f/4
a7R Sony f/4
a7R Sony f/4

Same pattern: There’s a little smearing on the a7R/Otus image compared to the D810/Otus crop. The Zony image is softer yet, but not by a lot.

At f/5.6:

D810 Otus f/5.6
D810 Otus f/5.6
a7R Otus f/5.6
a7R Otus f/5.6
a7R Sony f/5.6
a7R Sony f/5.6

Now the two a7R images are much closer together, as the Zony edges closer in performance to the Otus. The D810 image remains sharper, but not by much.

At f/8:

D810 Otus f/8
D810 Otus f/8
a7R Otus f/8
a7R Otus f/8
a7R Sony f/8
a7R Sony f/8

I don’t see a lot of difference among these three images.

At f/11:

D810 Otus f/11
D810 Otus f/11
a7R Otus f/11
a7R Otus f/11
a7R Sony f/11
a7R Sony f/11

Diffraction is setting in noticeably. These look pretty similar. The Zony is maybe a hair softer.

F/16:

D810 Otus f/16
D810 Otus f/16
a7R Otus f/16
a7R Otus f/16
a7R Sony f/16
a7R Sony f/16

The images are getting pretty soft, with the Zony the softest. I have heard that the Otus doesn’t fall apart as fast as most lenses when you stop it down, and there seems to be some justification for that.

All in all, a darned impressive performance from the Zony 55. I think we all expected that kind of performance from the Otus. Both of these lenses cry out for 72 MP sensors. Maybe we’d see more difference with them.

The Last Word

← Zony & Otus 55’s on a7R, D810 — evenness Zony & Otus 55’s on a7R, D810 — corner sharpness →

Comments

  1. CarVac says

    May 29, 2015 at 3:27 am

    I’ve always wondered why some lenses don’t seem to suffer from diffraction as much. My Contax 28/2.8 seems to be better at the pixel level at f/11 than other lenses that are sharper at faster apertures, for example.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.