Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi Anthony,
I understand your desire and reasons for third party and legacy lenses, you have a point there. I am using to buy mostly Nikon mount lenses, because they are broadly adaptable to the rest of the mounts. However, truth is that today we have larger participation of a “system dedicated lenses” than ever before. Starting from the sensor itself, pixel pitch, microlenses, sensor toppings, etc., many of those specifics are taken into consideration during lens design.
Examples of such approach, are recently Loxia 50/2 and 35/2, which are basically same design as their ZM counterparts, but adjusted (mainly the rear lens group) in order to correct astigmatism on Sony E mount cameras.
On top of that, you were considering “landscape lens” and believe me that at f/5.6 and smaller, you will hardly find differences between Sony FE 16-35/4 G OSS and Otus 28/1.4 (except for the traces of LoCA with Sony).
I am using filters extensively and I certainly don’t want to comment on Mr. Rockwell blog, but with screw-in filters you will face several problems…
LEE is making best neutral filters IMHO, in terms of their “neutral” color behavior. So called Big stopper, does shift colors to the blue tones, but that is way better than BW screw-in 10 stop, which is shifting them toward red.
Using system filters, such as LEE, will allow you to combine 2 or even 3 filters at once, unlike with screw-in. (especially on WA lenses, where stacking filters might cause vignetting).
Most importantly, I am always laughing when I see someone using screw in ND graduated filter on the sunset (sunrise)… Tonal gradient is going through the center of the filter, while one of the most famous composition rules is rule of thirds. Thus if you want to place gradient properly on the horizon, you will ruin your composition.
BTW, for proper exposure balance on the shots where exposure compensation is needed via ND filters – such as sunset or sunrise, you should anyway consider so called reverse grads or strips, and while they exist in screw-in variants, they are even more useless than regular screw in ND grads.
I am using LEE hard ND grads, most often in combination of 0,6 and 0,9, by rotating one of the filters (usually weaker one) in its slot by 180°. At the horizon line, I let both filters to overlap, giving me 1,5 in that zone. This way, I can adjust the width of the strip, needed for the scene and I can of course move it up or down, to please the composition. The only caveat of this approach is that I am loosing approx. 1,5 EV overall, so I have to compensate exposure.
Good luck with your choice anyway, and let me know what you’ll finally decide.
Cheers,
ViktorHi PetivutK,
I briefly tried two FE 35/1.4 but didn’t really spend much time with them. In my opinion, if there aren’t problems with QC (as refered by several users of this lens), it is a good choice IQ wise, but from what I have seen, I still liked ZM version more. If you are using Sony A7 camera, I would wait a bit longer. Something tells me that Loxia 35/1.4 (based on Distagon 35/1.4 ZM) won’t take too long to appear 😉Cheers,
ViktorHi Anthony,
I guess you have seen some of my tests here with UWA lenses on sony A7/r – http://www.verybiglobo.com/sony-alpha-a7-ilce-7-and-sony-alpha-a7r-ilce-7r-part-8-a7-ultra-wide-lenses/Since that article, I’ve been testing few more UWA lenses, but nothing bellow 16mm. I don’t have experience with Voigtlander 15, but I have their 21/1.8 which also have built in hood and I basically don’t use it mainly because of difficulties with a filters.
Samyang 14/2.8 is best value for money, very sharp across the frame, and distortion can be noticed mainly on architecture. There are some profiles that are supposed to flatten its rendering (PT lens e.g.), but I simply never used it on architecture.
In my humble opinion, your best bet is certainly Sony FE 16-35. The flexibility of the zoom at the wide angle is even more significant than on most tele-zooms and image quality is excellent. Recently there is lot of talk about QC issues with Sony lenses, but either I was lucky, or not enough picky to discover problems with any of my Sony lenses.
If you can live with tighter framing, expensive but from what I have seen, superb (technically) rendering has new Loxia 21/2.8 (very pricey though), and you might take a look at some other options – namely Tamron 15-30/2.8 or Canon 16-35/4. Both options will be slightly cheaper than Sony FE 16-35/4. (Tamron has bulbous element too).
If you just need UWA, I will take a risk and try one of Samyangs 14/2.8 (I think they are developing also 12/2.8, but not sure about that), because it is fairly cheap and if you don’t like it, you might lose some 50 GBP or so, by selling it later.
If you want lens that will use all native benefits of AF and built-in software correction, I would suggest FE 16-35/4, despite its size and weight…
Cheers,
ViktorHi Anthony,
interesting idea for sure. You might test it on a cheap lens, I would recommend something like Russian Helios 44, and to test it I would simply spray a shower on it than I would leave it for a month or so in a wet dark place. If the protection wasn’t good, you will most certainly find some rust on the barrel and focusing can get stiff or even blocked. Be sure however to screw any type of protective filter (I assume you don’t want to spray coating over glass?).
There is one problem to consider – probably most critical places for moisture to get into the lens or camera is the mount itself. Weather protected lenses have sealing ring , usually made of rubber, on the mount side. I am afraid that there is no proper way to apply nano coating in order to protect this weak spot, unless you spray it over with lens mounted on camera, but that’s a risk that I won’t suggest (and you won’t be able to change lenses).
In any case, if you dare to try it, please let us know how it went.Cheers,
ViktorHi Jim,
thank you for the comment. You nailed it with the snob vs size and fancy look relation. I am really curious to see if there would be some new space for snob-ism though 🙂 I was looking for the nice Leica M3 SS but never managed to find one that will suit my budget (in a perfect condition), so I ended with M6. Not a bad model either, but when you carry those super old ones such as Leica I or II from early batches, there is still some little bit of extra appreciation to enjoy about the brand.
Cheers,
ViktorI am just wondering how many Leica users with enough funds will be willing to take this system with or without red dot. As I said it reminds me Nokia Vertu project. While Vertu exists, and is probably doing well, its values are rather linked to the jewelery and business status symbol. How much of that Mojo can be transferred to photography, is hard to predict, but the problem is that SL doesn’t even look great IMHO and considering its style being quite far from traditional “Leica look”, I am curious to follow its success.
Don’t get me wrong, there are enough snobs that Leica will not be able to fulfill market demand at the beginning, same as with every model they released in the last 10 years, but question is, how many they really produce 🙂
We’ll see, maybe I am completely wrong and it will be new raise of the star…
Cheers,
ViktorHi Thea,
I still have few of those but the problem is that their usage is very limited. In order to make them interesting for production, we (people that were involved in the experiments) would need to invest in RD too much, and profit would be hard to make,But you can achieve nice results (similar to those) with some projection lenses. I will take a look what I have in studio and will let you know.
Cheers,
ViktorHi Thea,
it depend what you expect from this lens.You can adapt it for Sony, using same adapter as with Swirly Helios.
This Takumar is not highly valued lens for its optical performance, but as each Takumar, it is very well made.
I would suggest you to look for Topcon RE Topcor 58/1.8 instead, as that lens is much sharper and had quite interesting rendering. I can offer you few alternatives from Carl Zeiss Jena – Very good Pancolar 50/1.8 MC (around 100-120 USD), Old but charismatic Pancolar 50/2 zebra (50-80 USD), Meyer Optik Gorlitz Trioplan 50/2.9 (100-150 USD), Super cheap Pentacon 50/1.8 (if you just want to try that focal length/speed combination,(up to 25 USD) and few other (There are some great Russian alternatives as well). You might also consider Olympus 50/1.8 (be sure it has “Made in Japan” engraved on the lens collar, Or Nikon 50/1.8 Ai (or Ai-S, but not E)
Among Takumars, most popular are 50/1.4 versions, but except very first (8 elements) version, they all have Thoriated (radioactive) elements inside which are yellowing in time. To bring them to their original transparency, you will need UV (black light) lamp to keep shining on the lens for many, many days or months.Cheers, Viktor
Hi Thea, you have nice Contaflex I. Lens is not removable, (there are always ways around by they require certain level of experience and some special tools), I would suggest to keep it for your upcoming film adventures 🙂
Cheers, ViktorHi Thea,
could you post an image of your new camera. Early model of Contaflex cameras had built in lens, (Contaflex I and II) some with a compur shutter, later models had interchangeable lenses. This forum uses embedded images (and videos) only, so you will need to post it elsewhere (flickr e.g.) and post the link.
In any case, adapting Contaflex lens won’t be easy, because AFAIK there are not commercially available adapters.If you are planning to buy some other old lenses, don’t hesitate to write me. We have tons of old Zeiss lenses laying around, especially those not so rare and even if we don’t have what you are looking for, I can usually give you some advice.
BTW, if your Contaflex is working, why not putting a role of film inside and have some real legacy fun 🙂
Cheers,
ViktorHi Martin,
I have been using Takumars with both – NEX 5N and NEX 7. Any of those cameras will do well with Takumars, but for the most exciting results you might consider full frame.
Lenses originally designed for full frame, especially legacy ones, will benefit of similar projection size, rendering image similar to what they were designed for.
On APS-C sensor, part of the lens projection (yes, that is worst part of the image) will be cropped of course, but it depends on you if you like it that way.
From the technical point of view, there are not many differences between NEX 5 (N) and NEX 7 in terms of critical corner performance at wide open apertures with this lens.
Hope it helps,
ViktorAnthony, thank you so much for posting this brilliant short interview. It is simple said truth, easy for everyone to understand. I am trying to promote idea that there are not better or worse lenses in general terms, just different lenses, such as we all have different eyes and perception.
I will take a look at open talk to see what is going on there.
Thanks again for your great contribution.
Hi Jim,
thank you for your kind words. I am sure that Zeiss will introduce several new lenses in both Batis and Loxia lines. If you would be able to focus manually, there are already some quite small and good 135mm legacy lenses (MOG Orestor 135/2.8 e.g.) and very, very good Samyang 135/2 at affordable price.
For AF, either Zeiss or Sony will certainly announce something soon, but the problem with longer focal lengths is that you can’t get much of the size/weight benefit with E-mount in comparison to FL up to 50mm 🙁Cheers,
ViktorHi Anthony, I am not cleaning sensor at all, (except that I use Giottos rocket blower to blow the dust each time I change the lens.) If I’d have too and camera will be under warranty, I will send it to the service. If it is out of warranty, I would probably try wet cleaning with some proven swab system…
Cheers,
ViktorHi Jim,
not many news about Batis I am afraid. However, it was more than clear that Zeiss is paying lot of attention to Sony in general and I am sure that this line will grow-up. Considering their supply problems recently, it might take a bit longer till they come with new Batis lenses, but not too long. I would expect something in the 1st quarter of 2016, wild guessing 135/2.8 and maybe 50/1.4. Those are really wild guesses, not info from Zeiss.Regarding Milvus, Zeiss is convinced (and I share that opinion) that DSLR market is far from being dead. With Milvus, Zeiss is just replacing old – “Classic” line, which was available for Canon and Nikon (earlier for Pentax too) for over 10 years now. Reasons for that are several, officially they wanted to update 50 and 85 for new high resolution sensors (other “classics” were already resolving enough), move toward new – modern and differentiating design, add weather protection and new coatings. On the other side of the equitation, there is probably effort to reduce production costs (barrels are now really similar and less complicated forms and assembly is needed), and it builds a space for slight profit increase.
Regarding MF and DSLR vs MILC, there are situations where OVF can still beat EVF (in speed and low light), but most of all, OVF is still preferred by majority of professionals, for rather emotional but also some rational reasons. (When I shot model with EVF I always have a feeling that I am watching him/her on TV, while through OVF I feel as a part of the set. Also, most of portrait shooting doesn’t go at really wide apertures, especially in studio and with flash and modeling light it is easier for me to focus using OVF).
Anyway, looking at the recent Zeiss camera lens offer, we can see 7 lines recently (ZM is on hold unfortunately and Classic is slightly dying) from which 3 lines are only Sony E mount dedicated (Loxia, Batis and Touit). With Sony/Zeiss lenses it makes it actually 4 and I think that it is more than clear, which technology and brand, Zeiss consider as a most promising.
regards,
Viktor
