The latest Lumix puts a Four Thirds sensor in a full-frame body with boosted AF and a wealth of stills and video capabilities to create a Swiss Army Knife of a Micro Four Thirds camera.
60/2 Apo-Lanthar E testing started
I received my Apo-Lanthar today and tested it off-axis to make sure it was a good copy.
http://blog.kasson.com/lens-screening-testing/examples/good-60-mm-ff-lens/
It is.
Tomorrow I'll start with LoCA, on-axis sharpness, and focus shift tests, probably at 1:10. From the screening test, I expect this to be a very sharp lens on-axis.
Notes: lens is metal and solid. Focus throw is about 300 degrees, which is about as good as you can do without a really expensive helicoid like Leica uses sometimes. That makes distance focus wide open a little twitchy.
If there are tests anyone would like me to run, please let me know.
Jim
At a reproduction ratio of 1:10, the LoCA of the 65/2 Apo Lanthar is excellent. It is also very sharp; I don't think I've ever measured a sharper lens on the a7RII.
Wide open:
And at f/2.8:
Compare that to the excellent Sony 90/2.8 FE macro:
For an explanation of what these curves mean, and more detail, look at this:
http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/voigtlander-602-apo-lanthar-loca-focus-shift/
Jim
The 65/2 Apo Lanthar has very low focus shift as you stop down. You can focus it wide open.
In this regard, it is a tiny bit better than the excellent Sony 90 macro, where you don't want to focus at 2.8 and stop down to 5.6:
The Sony has almost zero focus shift from wide open and jumping to f/11, though.
Jim , is this a different lens from the 65mm F/2 macro ?
Jim Stirling
samtheman2014 wrote:
Jim , is this a different lens from the 65mm F/2 macro ?
My bad. It's a 65 mm lens. Thanks for the correction. Too late to change the title, and I'm sorry for that.
Jim
JimKasson wrote:
samtheman2014 wrote:
Jim , is this a different lens from the 65mm F/2 macro ?
My bad. It's a 65 mm lens. Thanks for the correction. Too late to change the title, and I'm sorry for that.
Jim
It looks to a very interesting lens Jim and MF has very few disadvantages in macro shooting where I use MF anyway . I have found that though a great lens the FE 90mm is a wee bit twitchy when manual focusing
Jim Stirling
If they'd just copy the 125mm f/2.5 APO macro, exactly as it exist now, for e-mount...
Yippy!
JimKasson wrote:
samtheman2014 wrote:
Jim , is this a different lens from the 65mm F/2 macro ?
My bad. It's a 65 mm lens. Thanks for the correction. Too late to change the title, and I'm sorry for that.
Jim
Jim, this mistake reminds me of the superlative horse tale, you went for the essentials not the easy stuff.
http://bigthink.com/Think-See-Feel/salinger-buddhist
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
No photographer's gear list is complete without the printer mentioned !
JimKasson wrote:
If there are tests anyone would like me to run, please let me know.
Jim
I'm interested in field curvature wide open, perhaps at three distances: closest focus, infinity, and somewhere in the middle. Saying something about field curvature particularly at infinity does not sound easy, but I would love to know if it is possible to investigate, even if it must remain a theoretical question.
Weird idea alert: Since it is difficult to draw a diagram of the plane of focus at infinity, I'm thinking the units could match locations on a lens ring. I think it might be called a harmonic scale, but "harmonic scale" is taken by another discipline. I've never seen this idea tried, but it would seem cool and useful to know that when focusing the center of the image at infinity, the objects off axis are sharpest at particular other distances (as a function of distance off axis).
For example, if at 20mm off axis on the sensor the sharpest distance is 100 feet, then drawing a line in harmonic units (if I'm being clear), we might guess that at 10mm off axis the sharpest distance is 200 feet---the harmonic mean of 100 feet and infinity, if you'll recall from our discussion here:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57800235
We managed to end up agreeing on quite a few issues in the end.
Anyway, some way of knowing something about the point of sharpest focus anywhere off axis, even if only an approximation, could be quite useful in the field. It might even help you choose your lens, your composition, or where to focus. That kind of information has to be useful, but it seems difficult to come by.
Jerry Fusselman
E Dinkla wrote:
Jim, this mistake reminds me of the superlative horse tale, you went for the essentials not the easy stuff.
Wow! Thanks.
I'm a bit ashamed to admit that I never looked at the lens to see what focal length it was. And when I ordered it, I just asked my dealer to "send me the new E-mount Apo-Lanthar", thinking for some dumb reason, that it was a 60.
Jim
Jerry Fusselman wrote:
JimKasson wrote:
If there are tests anyone would like me to run, please let me know.
I'm interested in field curvature wide open, perhaps at three distances: closest focus, infinity, and somewhere in the middle. Saying something about field curvature particularly at infinity does not sound easy, but I would love to know if it is possible to investigate, even if it must remain a theoretical question.
If you look here , you'll see that field curvature at 47 meters is low.
Measuring field curvature at short distances requires alignment that I may not want to take the time to perform. Perhaps at 1:3 or so it would be easier. I don't know if I can get a suitable target, though.
Jim
I'll summarize the results for you...
The only photographers that will not like this lens are those that refuse to try manual focus.
I don't have any AF lenses, so if I want a picture, I have to do more than squeeze a button.
I just bough my first camera, Best camera EVER!!!1
Interested in Adapting lenses? head here: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/1065
My shots:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/
My lenses:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/viewprofile.php?Action=viewprofile&username=LightShow
You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus.
-Mark Twain
Reputation is the shadow. Character is the tree
-Abraham Lincoln
####Where's my FF NEX-7 ?????
Lightshow wrote:
I'll summarize the results for you...
The only photographers that will not like this lens are those that refuse to try manual focus.
Or those who have no budget to buy it. Poor me!
Lightshow wrote:
I'll summarize the results for you...
The only photographers that will not like this lens are those that refuse to try manual focus.
I'm happy with a $150 Minolta 100mm/2.8 macro. No thanks.
samtheman2014 wrote:
JimKasson wrote:
samtheman2014 wrote:
Jim , is this a different lens from the 65mm F/2 macro ?
My bad. It's a 65 mm lens. Thanks for the correction. Too late to change the title, and I'm sorry for that.
Jim
It looks to a very interesting lens Jim and MF has very few disadvantages in macro shooting where I use MF anyway . I have found that though a great lens the FE 90mm is a wee bit twitchy when manual focusing
You're right about the 90mm manual focusing, but all I do is set the camera to MF and leave the lens in AF. Manual focusing is then much easier, and super precise.
It makes me wonder why they even put a manual focus mode on the lens. It's much too sensitive.
I'm assuming you've tried this already?
rjp85 wrote:
samtheman2014 wrote:
JimKasson wrote:
samtheman2014 wrote:
Jim , is this a different lens from the 65mm F/2 macro ?
My bad. It's a 65 mm lens. Thanks for the correction. Too late to change the title, and I'm sorry for that.
Jim
It looks to a very interesting lens Jim and MF has very few disadvantages in macro shooting where I use MF anyway . I have found that though a great lens the FE 90mm is a wee bit twitchy when manual focusing
You're right about the 90mm manual focusing, but all I do is set the camera to MF and leave the lens in AF. Manual focusing is then much easier, and super precise.
It makes me wonder why they even put a manual focus mode on the lens. It's much too sensitive.
I'm assuming you've tried this already?
Not , yet though I read it about it in another thread and will certainly try it outÂ
cheers
Jim
Jim Stirling
jarvasm wrote:
Lightshow wrote:
I'll summarize the results for you...
The only photographers that will not like this lens are those that refuse to try manual focus.
Or those who have no budget to buy it. Poor me!
Poor you ! your loxia 21mm F/2.8 comes in at £1169 here in the UK the 65mm F/2 APO is a mere £749 , the FE 90mm is £889
Jim Stirling
samtheman2014 wrote:
jarvasm wrote:
Lightshow wrote:
I'll summarize the results for you...
The only photographers that will not like this lens are those that refuse to try manual focus.
Or those who have no budget to buy it. Poor me!
Poor you ! your loxia 21mm F/2.8 comes in at £1169 here in the UK the 65mm F/2 APO is a mere £749 , the FE 90mm is £889
Decades of hard work to earn the money for that and lots of silence at home when having it.
jarvasm wrote:
samtheman2014 wrote:
jarvasm wrote:
Lightshow wrote:
I'll summarize the results for you...
The only photographers that will not like this lens are those that refuse to try manual focus.
Or those who have no budget to buy it. Poor me!
Poor you ! your comes in at £1169 here in the UK the 65mm F/2 APO is a mere £749 , the FE 90mm is £889
Decades of hard work to earn the money for that and lots of silence at home when having it.
I was not intending to offend, those of us not in the unlimited cash gang { sadly a group i am in } must prioritise what is important to ourself. As a mainly landscape/Â macro shooter I would consider the pricing of the APO good, whereas the extortionate price for long fast lenses is something I would gag at . The sport and nature guys may see things differently
Jim Stirling
For the smaller wallets a test comparing the App Lanthar 65mm 2.0 with the Sigma 70mm 2.8 Macro and some other brands 60mm 2.8 Macros would be welcome. I am looking for a 60 to 70mm lens but not necessarily a macro one and then 2.0 or faster. FE or EF mount adaptable. There is not much choice, vintage or new.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
No photographer's gear list is complete without the printer mentioned !
Latest sample galleries
Latest in-depth reviews
The fourth camera in Leica's SL series of full-frame mirrorless cameras sees the 60MP BSI sensor from the Q3 and M11 models arrive with a significant interface redesign.
The Fujifilm X100VI is the sixth iteration of Fujifilm's classically-styled large sensor compact. A 40MP X-Trans sensor, in-body stabilization and 6.2K video are among the updates.
The Nikon Zf is a 24MP full-frame mirrorless camera with classic looks that brings significant improvements to Nikon's mid-price cameras. We just shot a sample reel to get a better feel for its video features and have added our impressions to the review.
This $250 electronic lens adapter is perfect for Nikon Z-mount curious Sony shooters — shhh, we won’t tell anyone.
Latest buying guides
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
'What's the best mirrorless camera?' We're glad you asked.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.