lenstip测试：适马新180mm F2.8微距镜头分辨率比蔡斯APO-Sonnar T*2/135差不少啊

测试机身都是D3X

适马180微分辨率
http://www.lenstip.com/355.4-Lens_review-Sigma_180_mm_f_2.8_APO_Macro_EX_DG_OS_HSM__Image_resolution.html蔡司的135/2
Carl_Zeiss_Apo_Sonnar_T*_135_mm_f_2.0

http://www.lenstip.com/388.4-Lens_review-Carl_Zeiss_Apo_Sonnar_T*_135_mm_f_2.0_ZE_ZF.2_Image_resolution.html

改进工艺后的FLD是S35，S120-300 SPROTS和S50A这代开始
ART镜头都值得购买

S180/2.8 MACRO是适马老山木社长时期研发的老黄圈镜头，较旧的FLD镜片工艺，紫边较大，抗眩光能力也较差
不值得花8000-9000购买

还是等ART版本的S180 MARCO吧

蔡司135ZF/135ZE分别是目前尼康和佳能机身上的最强镜头

不是适马180微这个老旧金圈头可以比的

赶快更新ART版吧Conclusions
Wide open, the Sigma lacks bite, but it appears to at least match if not actually outperform the vaunted Leica 180/2.8 APO-Elmarit-R particularly at ƒ/2.8, hence it deserves lavish praise overall in apparently mastering one of Leica’s finest APO lenses.

The focus shift of the Sigma 180mm f/2.8 APO DG HSM is the one serious thing to criticize in its performance, a conclusion reached on a very different outdoor scene as well. The problem is that focusing wide open and then shooting at (for example) ƒ/5.6 will not result in peak performance. One must compensate for the focus shift somehow: there is a workaround for tripod use at least: focus in Live View with the lens stopped down to ƒ/3.5 or ƒ/4, and this eliminates most of the shift.

The Voigtlander 180mm ƒ/4 APO-Lanthar is a very good lens at ƒ/8, a little less good at ƒ/5.6 and while sharp at ƒ/4, unacceptably low in contrast (hazy).

Conclusions
Some allowance must be made for varying reproduction ratios here (looking for nuances is not appropriate), but certain general behaviors leave little doubt overall.

All the lenses show at least traces of secondary color and most show a bit of lateral chromatic aberration as well. In short, none are perfectly corrected for color.

The Sigma APO macros do very well in maintaining neutral color across the frame in defocused areas, but the Nikon 70-200 zoom and Voigtlander 180/4 APO do at least as well also.

The big surprise is that the Leica 180mm f/2.8 APO-Elmarit-R shows the strongest effects of uncorrected secondary color , and takes the longest to “clean up”. It might be that the nature of its optical computation and defocus characteristics were optimized for peak micro contrast (hints are there of very high micro contrast), but due to various effective focus and size differences here, it is hard to evaluate the lenses fairly on this basis.

Conclusions
The Leica 180mm f/2.8 APO-Elmarit-R establishes its dominance in this comparison; its performance is a notch higher in almost all areas of the frame. This is a distance comparison, where it likely is at its very best.

Both lenses disappoint in a frustrating way: the eminently useful ƒ/5.6 sees a pronounced loss of micro contrast from ƒ/4. The only plausible explanation is focus shift. For this reason, ƒ/8 is to be preferred over ƒ/5.6, because ƒ/8 offers more depth of field with very little difference from ƒ/5.6 in micro contrast. Aperture ƒ/11 is defensible as well, since ƒ/5.6 and ƒ/8 have already “given away the store” on micro contrast.

For both lenses for overall performance: choose ƒ/4 unless ƒ/8 is needed for depth of field. The Leica 180 also offers peak performance at ƒ/2.8 if one is careful to nail the focus precisely as here.

Conclusions
At 1:1 the Sigma 180mm f/2.8 APO Macro DG HSM shows the limits of its chromatic correction. But this should not be be too surprising because the huge amount of defocus necessarily emphasizes even the smallest errors.

Sharpness and micro contrast are at very high levels and worthy of praise.

The performance is a high-grade one, but perhaps the 180/2.8 APO does a little better at a 1:2 magnification than at 1:1.

Conclusions
It’s hard to quarrel with the very pretty results, seemingly free of any chromatic issues even at the orange/green boundary.

The working distance of 180mm is most welcome for this type of shooting.

Conclusions
Images taken in the outdoors show the same high level of color correction as at closer range, with only the faintest hint of lateral chromatic aberration at medium distances.

Sharpness is very high, but generally difficult to assess on these types of images due to the shallow depth of field. In practice, actual sharpness probably depends more on technique and pinpoint focus than actual lens performance. 本帖最后由 衡阳会战 于 2014-9-16 12:52 编辑

赞同后者,玩微距,上放大头,分辨率好

180OS这镜头全开色散还是较大的水平

比120-300 OS SPORTS版有相当的差距

能自动对焦么？能微距么？这头对焦行程那么长，太不实用，要分辨率找放大头，把摄影头爆出翔

都是光圈全开测试

适马180/2.8全开成像松散

蔡司135/2全开成像扎实

蔡司的135/2这个镜头比适马的180/2.8要更好地修正了大光圈下的像差

测试连接：

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=924&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=919&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

本帖最后由 九评索尼大法 于 2014-5-14 21:14 编辑

暂时独孤求败的佳能口和尼康口中的第一牛头？Carl Zeiss APO Sonnar T* 2/135 ZE.ZF

ZE/ZF口的Carl Zeiss APO Sonnar T* 2/135与蔡司在2012年前发布的一些光圈全开下像差大，色散大的老旧镜头比如蔡司35/1.4，蔡司85/1.4，蔡司MP 100/2不同

2012年之后，给蔡司代工单反镜头的日本Cosina公司采用了日本旭硝子公司的全新超低色散玻璃材质(SIGMA公司也是从该公司获得SLD与FLD材质的玻璃制造镜头)，同时Cosina公司积极采用更多的非球镜片去消除大光圈下的像差，做到了光圈全开也能做到极其锐利的边角画质

从www.the-digital-picture.com网站上，我们可以看到

1）
24L II和24G 1.4光圈收到F2也无法和光圈全开的ZE/ZF.2 Distagon T* 2/25相提并论

2）
尼康的连自己的看家镜头14-24/2.8在和蔡司Distagon T* 2.8/15的同光圈对比也中败下阵来，佳能14L II嘛，就更不用提了

3）
Otus的Distagon T* 1.4/55对岸的评测称其为“接近光学理论的完美”，成为135最强标头

4）
ZE/ZF口的Carl Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 2/135则是几乎“达到光学理论的完美”，尼康佳能的全部长焦头在分辨率，色散控制，畸变控制上均无法望其项背

ZE135对比佳能135L，均为F2光圈全开韩国tistory.com网站评测，对比135L

http://lcap.tistory.com/entry/APO-Sonnar-135mm-f2-Review

不合规外链图片,不直接显示，谨慎点击

不合规外链图片,不直接显示，谨慎点击

不合规外链图片,不直接显示，谨慎点击

不合规外链图片,不直接显示，谨慎点击

不合规外链图片,不直接显示，谨慎点击

不合规外链图片,不直接显示，谨慎点击

Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 2.0/135

分辨率1274
对比度1207
色彩973
焦外1359
星芒1127
畸变控制1093
暗角控制1048
抗眩光1158
倍率色散抑制1179
轴向色散抑制1389
综合得分1207

Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM

分辨率1235
对比度1177
色彩1040
焦外1652
星芒1102
畸变控制1284
暗角控制1481
抗眩光1143
倍率色散抑制1388
轴向色散抑制1691
综合得分1338

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM
分辨率1134
对比度1053
色彩951
焦外1195
星芒928
畸变控制1174
暗角控制1188
抗眩光1003
倍率色散控制1084
轴向色散控制1374
综合得分1132

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
分辨率933
对比度839
色彩941
焦外872
星芒841
畸变控制989
暗角控制844
抗眩光598
倍率色散控制822
轴向色散控制875
综合得分859

来自http://www.lenscore.org/

小白兔200mm f/2.8端分辨率相当垃圾

让子弹飞一会儿，我是说让这个头二手再降价一会哈哈

我是宾得用户，我对分辨率、锐度倒是没有什么追求。。。。其实真想上这个镜头，就是这个版本没有宾得口.........

这个镜头价格便宜，我只是担心买了之后调焦偏硬，用了几个适马镜头感觉就是没有宾得的调焦方便，毕竟微距头大部分时候都是靠手动对焦的。虽然宾得的好，但是新产品没有150mm Macro\180mm Macro\200mm Macro。。。早期有离别钩，但是价格太恐怖了，而且橙色如何也不清楚

其实好多副厂头是不错的，例如腾龙90mm Macro F004版本就很不错，可惜还是没有宾得口

小白兔分辨率最低？。。。

今年九月要出 180 ART 啊 ， 那真是太好了！  本来特别纠结这两个头来着的

EX版的适马180/2.8紫边过于严重
对不起APO的称号

/forum-viewthread-tid-1056590-ordertype-1-highlight-180-page-1.html

而且不支持USB DOCK升级固件，尼康如果今后机身做了限制，镜头就不能自动对焦了

等ART版出来吧
也快出了,今年9月更新ART版本的180 MACRO

从S35开始的FLD和SLD镜片都是适马最新的技术，这个180APO还是老版本的

色差控制和镀膜的抗眩光性能都不如S35 , S50 ART和S120-300 SPORTS这代最新适马镜头

多的那些分辨率你也看不出来，适马180有多锐图片最能说话

Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 2.0/135

分辨率1274
对比度1207
色彩973
焦外1359
星芒1127
畸变控制1093
暗角控制1048
抗眩光1158
倍率色散抑制1179
轴向色散抑制1389
综合得分1207

Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM

分辨率1235
对比度1177
色彩1040
焦外1652
星芒1102
畸变控制1284
暗角控制1481
抗眩光1143
倍率色散抑制1388
轴向色散抑制1691
综合得分1338

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM
分辨率1134
对比度1053
色彩951
焦外1195
星芒928
畸变控制1174
暗角控制1188
抗眩光1003
倍率色散控制1084
轴向色散控制1374
综合得分1132

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
分辨率933
对比度839
色彩941
焦外872
星芒841
畸变控制989
暗角控制844
抗眩光598
倍率色散控制822
轴向色散控制875
综合得分859

http://www.lenscore.org/

综上，镜头分辨率排名：

蔡司ZE135/2 >> 佳能328二代 >> 适马S1230 >>> 佳能小白兔

本帖最后由 mitsuhide 于 2013-11-14 14:05 编辑

Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 2.0/135

分辨率1274

Sigma 180mm f/2.8 APO Macro EX DG OS HSM

分辨率1078

http://www.lenscore.org/