p.4 #1 · Viltrox 14mm f/4 and 9mm f/2.8 - unbelievable performance for the price?
davidjl wrote:
Ouch. And thanks.
There's even a Phillipreeve review. Hmm. The corners are mush below f/11, so it's a non-starter here. Sigh.
I've been busy this week, there's a typhoon coming through, and 3 rolls of 120 to be scanned, but I do have good intentions of attacking the downtown skyscrapers here with the 14/4.0. Intentions.
(Went to an event near Tokyo station in the evening last week: night in the city was pretty.)
Yeah, I would like to say PR's results were a matter of copy variation, but a couple of my coworkers, who fell for the 50 Air, got the 20 and found the same corner issues.
Everything's eventual, right? I got my Laowa 180/3.5 in late last week and haven't had the time or the weather to do anything but a couple of tabletop shots with it. I'm anxious to get it out in the world and see how it does as an all-arounder. Hopefully, this weekend I can go on a 14/180 shooting spree.
p.4 #5 · Viltrox 14mm f/4 and 9mm f/2.8 - unbelievable performance for the price?
Craig Gillette wrote:
Just ordered the 14/4 on Amazon, $159. Showed 2 available when I ordered, then went to 1 and now out of stock. Should arrive in a couple of days.
I hope you had better luck with the Vitrox. My TTA was notably decentered.
p.4 #6 · Viltrox 14mm f/4 and 9mm f/2.8 - unbelievable performance for the price?
freaklikeme wrote:
I hope you had better luck with the Vitrox. My TTA was notably decentered.
We'll see. Arrived today, in an Amazon heavy paper bag, with a tight layer layer of small bubble bubble wrap over the retail box. No outer indication of damage/problems.
p.4 #7 · Viltrox 14mm f/4 and 9mm f/2.8 - unbelievable performance for the price?
Does someone have the Viltrox 9mm (the APS-C lens) and an A7RIV or A7RV?
The 9mm is a bit wider than the Viltrox 14mm (which in fact is more a 14.5mm) anyway, and with a full-frame camera one could perhaps crop the black borders away so that perhaps the remaining not too dark parts leave you with an even wider lens... Could anyone try that out? That would be great!
p.4 #8 · Viltrox 14mm f/4 and 9mm f/2.8 - unbelievable performance for the price?
Craig Gillette wrote:
We'll see. Arrived today, in an Amazon heavy paper bag, with a tight layer layer of small bubble bubble wrap over the retail box. No outer indication of damage/problems.
Mine arrived too, nicely packaged, but nowhere does it says "Air", not on the box, lens, or anywhere. Just curious.
p.4 #11 · Viltrox 14mm f/4 and 9mm f/2.8 - unbelievable performance for the price?
My 14/4 appears to be softer on the left side. I'll need to some more critical testing. But it may be going back. Unfortunately the Amazon shipped but "sold by" is OOS now and off sale pricing, too.
p.4 #12 · Viltrox 14mm f/4 and 9mm f/2.8 - unbelievable performance for the price?
Craig Gillette wrote:
My 14/4 appears to be softer on the left side. I'll need to some more critical testing. But it may be going back. Unfortunately the Amazon shipped but "sold by" is OOS now and off sale pricing, too.
Can you share the full-size image?
Some random shots from my copy, I find it acceptable for 14mm, but looking forward to the opinion
p.4 #13 · Viltrox 14mm f/4 and 9mm f/2.8 - unbelievable performance for the price?
I'm going to take some more "test" type shots, the ones I have were just quick shots, so one area had hazy weather, the other, they aren't all that symmetrical so similar and/or "sharp" subjects, things aren't found on either side or same distances, uneven light, etc. Almost a feeling that while one side is worse, not sure any of it as acceptably sharp.
p.4 #15 · Viltrox 14mm f/4 and 9mm f/2.8 - unbelievable performance for the price?
Craig Gillette wrote:
I'm going to take some more "test" type shots, the ones I have were just quick shots, so one area had hazy weather, the other, they aren't all that symmetrical so similar and/or "sharp" subjects, things aren't found on either side or same distances, uneven light, etc. Almost a feeling that while one side is worse, not sure any of it as acceptably sharp.
A great big brick wall and a tripod can give you a definitive answer. Turn off IBIS, get the camera level, and use the rotation of your tripod head to see if you can get even performance in the corners. That's easiest to do if you've got access to a geared head. It's tedious, I know, but it'll help you make sure you're completely square with the wall.
p.4 #16 · Viltrox 14mm f/4 and 9mm f/2.8 - unbelievable performance for the price?
I ran some buildings (not perfect brick walls), across a parking lot at a couple of distances, then some park play gear, plantings and stucco walls. All under better lighting and somewhat reflective of actual shooting conditions. some were "deeper," so if not perfectly square there should be a section in clear focus, also hard surfaces and crisp edges at comparable distances. The earliest shots were farther out and maybe slightly hazy weather and not a lot of crisp surfaces, sharp edges and the like.
I'm not sure if there might be some impact from not having a profile but that should impact all sides similarly.
(davidjl, we can best place this here for readers new to the lens, and there are many in that category.)
The Sony presents as a true 14.1mm, the Viltrox as a true 14.6mm, but the Sony lens shows here as having a noticeably longer focal length (narrower angle of view). It might be focus breathing or it could be profile correction, or both.
'Focus breathing negatively impacts photographers intending to use focus stacking techniques, videographers pulling focus, and anyone critically framing while adjusting focus. *This lens shows a relatively large change in subject size as full extent focus adjustments are made.*'
UWAs always need foreground interest, and close focus will exacerbate the breathing issue. This is another example of why we need to work from a lens's images backwards to lens specs and design issues - in that order. No one does it, of course.
Distortion is well-controlled in both lenses, and (in Chinese fashion) the Viltrox is good enough here to use without profiles, thanks to its stellar CA correction and reasonable distortion pattern and level. The slight complexity is drowned out in the wide field of view.
Color goes to the Viltrox, hands down. Colors are brittle and washed out in the Sony lens, not just in these samples:
One reason is the chalky, flat and washed out highlights.
By contrast, the Viltrox is rich, clean and assured.
In the f4 images from each lens, we see bokeh in the Sony image (why?). It's not much better at f8, and this is Sony's smoothing technique at work. The Viltrox is characterised by high clarity, great tonality (flooring) and a harmonious spatial separation in the image field. Sony's flooring seems to disappear under the camera, the Viltrox is far better integrated pictorially. It's also a good example showing how color tonal range can enhance 3D.
The specs Sony (Viltrox): weight 460g (170g); W/L 83mm x 100mm (65mm x 56mm); aperture blades 9 (7); MFD 25cm (13cm); filters rear! (58mm); cost $1748 ($199) - cost ratio: 8.8.
Design: Sony went all out here, with very high end glass and a huge bulging front element in a 14/11 design. Viltrox walked a very different path in their 12/9 design (both are shown below). The Viltrox design probably features a PMO asph element (second from last).
See also how they use high refractive index (HRI) elements, one opens proceedings and the other is sandwiched between ED elements; asph elements are second in order and second last in order; the ED elements get progressively meatier and larger through the lens, front to back. This refraction/dispersion control is how it used to be done, because HRI produces dispersion, in the absence of other properties. What this all bought them was the smooth gradient in their MTF, moving from center to corners. (see below).
Sony 14/1.8 block diagram
Viltrox 14/4 block diagram
Viltrox element array legend
Viltrox 14/4 MTF - smooth and steady, center to corners
