no rectilinear distortion? it barrel distorts quite significantly in raw. your camera is correcting it.
That's an intriguing response, please elucidate.
I realize that 'no rectilinear distortion' is probably a simplistic, subjective overstatement on my part. However, after shooting with the lens for four or five months now - and with an eye for architecture (even though I don't spend my time taking square-on pictures of brick walls) I don't think it's an exaggeration.
I didn't make my judgment from the EVF or the little screen on the back, so much as the results I see on my computer screens. And while I'll grant that at the 55 mm end of the zoom range, there's a suggestion on pincushioning, nowhere in the zoom range - particularly at the 16 mm end, where I find myself using it most often - have I been able to identify any barrel distortion.
And (perhaps because I'm an old fart who doesn't grasp modern technology) I fail to understand how the image that the lens transmits - be it in-camera or in-jpeg (new terminology, OK?) can be evidentially 'different' in terms of what's being passed through the glass to the 'film' plane. Either it's bent, or it ain't, surely?
You must be out of your mind; a waist of money. Since when DOF is a must. When you look with your own eyes you will see everything in focus.
Painting are sharp painted.
Except some, the ones they were made bij lazy starters, who copied unsharp photographs.
If you need real DOF, buy a 5 x 7 inch view camera with a 360 mm and shoot 25 ISO film
Jaco, what on earth do you think you're talking about, here? Why are you participating in this thread, you silly person?
You are off topic completely (we're discussing a particular lens, here) you can't spell 'waste' and the general attitude you convey is one of arrogance and condescension, despite your obvious ignorance.
Please get over yourself, before next 'contributing' to this discussion. Sheesh!