Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4       5       6       end
  

Archive 2011 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?
  
 
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


If one is willing to spend a lot of money on a lens for NEX, wouldn't the Leica 24/1.4 Summilux ASPH be a natural choice? I've never used it, but it seems like a good focal length for APS-C and it has a large max aperture.


Dec 08, 2011 at 05:00 PM
kosmoskatten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


Yes, but I just don't find the prospect of a three to four thousand dollar lens being the equivalent of 42/2 on APS_C interesting. It is not 3K great on APS-C.

And, if ever a good 28/1.8 or 25/2 or 26/2 is released for sub $1K to accommodate the equivalent of 35 to 40/2 - or faster - the whole idea would become even more ridiculous.

I am not dissing the lens, nor APS-C, it is just a combination that doesn't work for me.



Dec 08, 2011 at 05:10 PM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


denoir wrote:
If one is willing to spend a lot of money on a lens for NEX, wouldn't the Leica 24/1.4 Summilux ASPH be a natural choice? I've never used it, but it seems like a good focal length for APS-C and it has a large max aperture.


it's also comparatively huge (and even more crazily expensive) unless i'm confusing it with the also huge 21 lux? i'm just looking for a one lens kit to take for size considerations that doesn't have any real weakness and is fast enough to shoot indoors at night (f/2 or faster).


kosmoskatten wrote:
Yes, but I just don't find the prospect of a three to four thousand dollar lens being the equivalent of 42/2 on APS_C interesting. It is not 3K great on APS-C.

And, if ever a good 28/1.8 or 25/2 or 26/2 is released for sub $1K to accommodate the equivalent of 35 to 40/2 - or faster - the whole idea would become even more ridiculous.

I am not dissing the lens, nor APS-C, it is just a combination that doesn't work for me.


the prospects of ~40mm equiv f/2 or faster compact lens being released for aps-c that matches or even comes close to the cron in performance seems a bit unlikely to me (i can dream though). i think you two have a different persective because you've seen what the cron can do on FF and it's just not as magic on aps-c. compared to it's competition on crop, i suspect it may still be magical. but hey, i've not shot with it, i'm just contemplating my next move.



Dec 08, 2011 at 05:19 PM
kosmoskatten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


Yes, if you go for it, enjoy it. If you find one at a good price, why not. But for the most part the great Leica stuff is in short supply on the second hand market and will most often be priced accordingly.

Definitely not trying to bring you down, just giving you my take on it. Just because I wouldn't do it doesn't mean that I am trying to talk you out of it.

I have just recently started to get comfortable with the idea of sticking with APS-C and not pursuing full frame until there is a model on the market that suits me. More or less for the same reason as Denoir I find that APS-C designed lenses can look better than a full frame adaptee. My Ricoh GXR has proven that, and I appreciate the design effort of the A12 lens modules even more now that I have compared them to adapted lenses. With the M module I find that it keeps the integrity and lens character well on longer glass (40mm and up) but not so much on wide angle lenses. The odd one out being the ZM18 which I think looks just fine on APS-C. It looks a little different than on full frame (M9) but still a very fine lens on crop.

Personally, I will keep the GXR, A12 modules, keep two ZM's (possibly keep the 40/2) and then see what will surface on the market in the next few years to come. An APS-C or APS-H solution is something I will consider - IF it comes with a few small and fast lenses. The Fuji offering might be my ticket - who knows?

I think the NEX5N is one of the best compromises out there as for now. Still, I will let it go and stick with my odd one out GXR as I find that the two A12 (28 and 50 equiv) are the best options for me (as in me and not everyone else). With the M module and a couple of adapted lenses I can satisfy my need for toying with quality glass. I think I will actually keep the GXR until it falls apart. For most people I honestly think the NEX5N is a better choice than the GXR. But I am not most people, for better or worse.




Dec 08, 2011 at 06:47 PM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


denoir wrote:
That's the general curse of crop formats - you lose the interesting stuff going on at the edges. You get a more uniform rendering from a good lens but also more flat and boring. Once you get used to a set of lenses on FF it's very difficult to use them on a cropper. My first serious camera was a 7D and I liked it very much.. until I got a 5DII. I simply couldn't go back to the 7D after that - the output looked so flat and boring. The same thing with the M9 & NEX. It's terrible
...Show more

I think this leads to a good point. If you're picky (like most of us on this forum!) I think you have to build a lens lineup for each format, according to your needs, rather than attempting to share lenses with multiple systems. Set goals for what you want with each angle of view, and shop accordingly.

My wide, standard and tele options on my aps-c, 135 and 6x6 systems are, of course, not identical in rendering, but I give it my best shot to choose the most appropriate lens for each system, rather than trying to share any lenses across 3 systems. That's why I can't get rid of the darned Nokton 35/1.4. It has enough field curvature on the NEX that it kinda approximates the look that some of my fast 50s did on the A900 (I emphasize approximates.) It's probably why I keep coming back to the Contax G 35, too, despite it not being technically amazing like the ZM 35s. My ZM 50/1.5 is too new to comment on, but I'm liking its vibe, so far, on the 5N.

Interestingly, comparing the 7D to 135 is a little different than comparing NEX to 135, because the short registration distance of NEX gives us new aberrations to worry about. Maybe some of us may actually prefer the poorer corner performance of the NEX-7, compared to the 5N, because it'll have more vignetting and possible resolution issues, a la 135.



Dec 08, 2011 at 08:36 PM
ocean2059
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #6 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


denoir wrote:
...
At the same time I have a Leica X1 that is a cropper as well, but I've never had any issues there. The lens was designed for ASP-C and the rendering isn't nearly as flat as when you use a FF lens on a crop camera.
...


I have the similar experience about Leica X1. If one can live with 35mm focal length, I would highly recommend the X1. I have been using several ASP-C compacts, NEX 5N, and Ricoh GXR, and Leica X1, and personally, I much prefer the IQs from Leica X1. Perhaps it has something to do with its lens design.



Dec 08, 2011 at 08:54 PM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


kosmoskatten wrote:
I have just recently started to get comfortable with the idea of sticking with APS-C and not pursuing full frame until there is a model on the market that suits me. More or less for the same reason as Denoir I find that APS-C designed lenses can look better than a full frame adaptee. My Ricoh GXR has proven that, and I appreciate the design effort of the A12 lens modules even more now that I have compared them to adapted lenses. With the M module I find that it keeps the integrity and lens character well on longer glass
...Show more

makes sense, in general i disagree though for my own personal use. the only crop lenses i've ever really cared for are the olympus zd 50/2 and the pen f 42/1.2 (2 very different olympus lenses). i pretty much always prefer the look of my FF lenses on crop to lenses designed for crop. the gxr lenses and leica x1 actually look pretty good but only come attached to stuff i don't want.



Dec 08, 2011 at 09:13 PM
kosmoskatten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


sebboh; so now an outdated low ISO only sensor glued to the lens and a mid tier evf is not good enough for ya? Snob.

From my limited experience with crop sensors I think I have no problems at all with SLR lenses on APS-C, for the most part they look just fine. It's just that I am not entirely sold on the RF lenses on crop.



Dec 08, 2011 at 10:04 PM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #9 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


kosmoskatten wrote:
sebboh; so now an outdated low ISO only sensor glued to the lens and a mid tier evf is not good enough for ya? Snob.


it's alright enough for me to use right now, it won't hold it's value the way all my other lenses do though, and i can't take it with me when fuji or whoever comes out with the holy grail of mirrorless cameras. neither of the two lenses really excite me either. the leica x1 is definitely not good enough for me though no manual focus! plus the camera has other issues and the lens is too slow to be my only lens.



Dec 08, 2011 at 10:45 PM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #10 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


sebboh wrote:
the leica x1 is definitely not good enough for me though no manual focus! plus the camera has other issues and the lens is too slow to be my only lens.


Actually it does have manual focus, although the implementation is less than ideal. Overall the problem of the X1 is usability - they've really botched it with the painfully slow AF, the poor screen and the bad MF implementation. So it's a frustrating camera to use. It is however capable of producing very nice shots. I'd rate it a notch above the C3/5N in image quality although this is primarily because of the awesome 24/2.8 Elmarit lens which unlike the M lenses I've been using on NEX is designed for an APS-C sensor.

It's also really small. Much smaller than a NEX with a rangefinder lens attached to it as the Elmarit collapses into the camera.

On the rare occasions when I use mine I wish to chuck it in the nearest garbage bin while using it, but I tend to forgive it each time after I see the pictures. Had they implemented a fast AF and/or a decent MF function it would have really been a great camera.



Dec 08, 2011 at 10:57 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


denoir wrote:
Actually it does have manual focus, although the implementation is less than ideal. Overall the problem of the X1 is usability - they've really botched it with the painfully slow AF, the poor screen and the bad MF implementation. So it's a frustrating camera to use. It is however capable of producing very nice shots. I'd rate it a notch above the C3/5N in image quality although this is primarily because of the awesome 24/2.8 Elmarit lens which unlike the M lenses I've been using on NEX is designed for an APS-C sensor.

It's also really small. Much smaller than
...Show more

i'm aware it can "manual focus", just not in a usable way. the usability is what i was talking about with the "camera issues". if the lens were f/2 and had real manual focus i would have bought one long ago. i'd of been much more excited by the fuji x100 if were the body were the size of the x1.



Dec 08, 2011 at 11:11 PM
ocean2059
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #12 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


denoir wrote:
Actually it does have manual focus, although the implementation is less than ideal. Overall the problem of the X1 is usability - they've really botched it with the painfully slow AF, the poor screen and the bad MF implementation. So it's a frustrating camera to use. It is however capable of producing very nice shots. I'd rate it a notch above the C3/5N in image quality although this is primarily because of the awesome 24/2.8 Elmarit lens which unlike the M lenses I've been using on NEX is designed for an APS-C sensor.

It's also really small. Much smaller than
...Show more

I totally agree with your comments on the X1.



Dec 08, 2011 at 11:13 PM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


sebboh wrote:
i'm aware it can "manual focus", just not in a usable way. the usability is what i was talking about with the "camera issues". if the lens were f/2 and had real manual focus i would have bought one long ago. i'd of been much more excited by the fuji x100 if were the body were the size of the x1.



I was never particularly excited by the X100 for a couple of reasons. Fuji deserves a huge amount of credit for the hybrid viewfinder which was really an inventive thing. My admiration stops there however.

First I think it is a rather poorly done fake. It pretends to be a classic rangefinder but isn't very good at it. The build is semi-shoddy and the rear of the camera is really a textbook example of poor design. Overall it's a form over function while it tries and fails to imitate designs where form follows function. So it feels dishonest - something that is made to impress onlookers rather than providing the design the user would benefit from.

What made me completely uninterested in it however is the lens and sensor combo. I've been consistently disappointed by the output I've seen. The rendering is IMO just bland and flat.

If Leica gets their shit together with an X2 that fixes the issues of the X1 then I think they'll have a really sensationally good product.



Dec 08, 2011 at 11:22 PM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #14 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


denoir wrote:
I was never particularly excited by the X100 for a couple of reasons. Fuji deserves a huge amount of credit for the hybrid viewfinder which was really an inventive thing. My admiration stops there however.

First I think it is a rather poorly done fake. It pretends to be a classic rangefinder but isn't very good at it. The build is semi-shoddy and the rear of the camera is really a textbook example of poor design. Overall it's a form over function while it tries and fails to imitate designs where form follows function. So it feels dishonest - something
...Show more

i didn't notice that the x1 was more than a fake rangefinder either (though a sleeker one).

the x100 sees to have plenty of character to me, especially in corners, just low contrast (which could be construed as character).



Dec 09, 2011 at 12:17 AM
Andrew Gough
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #15 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


I can absolutely say that the majority of the field curvature problems associated with RF lenses, discussed on this thread are a result of poor adapter issues. Most adapters are simply too short, and that creates the very issues that we see here. To me it seems rather silly to put a $$$ lens on a $20 adapter...

IMHO



Dec 09, 2011 at 04:46 AM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


Andrew Gough wrote:
I can absolutely say that the majority of the field curvature problems associated with RF lenses, discussed on this thread are a result of poor adapter issues. Most adapters are simply too short, and that creates the very issues that we see here. To me it seems rather silly to put a $$$ lens on a $20 adapter...

IMHO


How would an adapter been slightly short cause this issue, especially at focal points between the mfd and infinity? Either way, I've got several adapters of many makes and high price points, and this phenomena doesn't change when I change adapters (one of my adapters does hit infinity dead on.)

The only way that I could imagine the adapters being the issue is maybe if the lens has floating elements.



Dec 09, 2011 at 06:43 AM
Andrew Gough
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #17 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1055288/1#10030156


Dec 09, 2011 at 10:42 AM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #18 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


That link doesn't explain anything. All that a lens helicoid does is move the entire group of elements back and forth, so, on a non-fle lens, being able to focus past infinity shouldn't matter.


Dec 09, 2011 at 03:07 PM
Andrew Gough
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #19 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


Yes, but most RF lenses are the rear focus type, hence the problem. It is a common assumption that lenses only come in two flavours, fixed helicoid and FLE, but this is not true. Most modern lenses are a fixed front group and a rear group that moves for focus. Because of this, the lens to sensor distance is as important as in a FLE lens.

Think about it this way, lenses do not just develop field curvature, it is a function of lens design. Placing a lens on a different sensor has absolutely not effect upon field curvature assuming the registry distance is correct. With a fixed lens group on a helicoid you are correct, there is nor "real" change. But change the distance on a FLE or rear focussing group lens and what happens - field curvature and focussing issues. you are attempting to focus the lens at a distance registry that does not correspond to the actual distance, this is why you distance scale does not match. Because the lens designer has optimized the filed curvature at given distances using the focussing group vs the sensor, moving the sensor(or lens placement via a poor adapter) throws the whole equation off.

Andrew




Dec 09, 2011 at 07:38 PM
uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #20 · Does the 5N 'exaggerate' field curvature?


denoir wrote:
The 28 Cron is the last lens I'd recommend for a 5N. It's a character lens, not an ultimate performance lens. For its character to come through you need FF as most of the interesting stuff happens at the edges. On a cropper it's just mediocre and IMO a complete waste of money. You don't get an interesting look, you don't get high performance, bokeh is often dodgy etc There are a lot of better choices to spend $4,000 on...

If one is willing to spend a lot of money on a lens for NEX, wouldn't the Leica 24/1.4 Summilux ASPH
...Show more
sebboh wrote:
it's also comparatively huge (and even more crazily expensive) unless i'm confusing it with the also huge 21 lux? i'm just looking for a one lens kit to take for size considerations that doesn't have any real weakness and is fast enough to shoot indoors at night (f/2 or faster).

.


re cron vs zeiss 2.8

One half the light.

There is no comparison at all. If you cannot see the huge dif between 2 & 2.8......You need another lens completely for indoor stuff

And 28 Cron is had for 2800, no need to spend 4 k--why does everybody scream 4k! 4k!?

You say it's a character lens and has no character on nex? A rash statement.

Frankly, u seemed to have utterly flipped out on the whole subject

I love the "28 cron is last lens I'd rec, get 24 summi, though i don't own or have never tried it"

But it's always good to see all sides and I like ur crops and nice comparisons w excellent zeiss

thank god rational sebboh is around to defend my "precious" . I could have said the same but i suspect you'd have scoffed.

The truth is that all things considered--putting price aside--but looking at footprint, sharpness, character together the 28 cron is probably the best normal lens available for the nex--bar none. It's EFL hits the definition of "normal" square on the head. It goes in your pocket. It's sharp----say what you want--it may or may not be ultimate. It is very sweet in character.

As to the money---it's not wasted, it's in the bank. And if the lens can replace a bunch of others its even more valuable---you don't have to think, what's my normal? You have it. That, my friend denior, is priceless.


Edited on Dec 09, 2011 at 08:47 PM · View previous versions



Dec 09, 2011 at 08:07 PM
1       2      
3
       4       5       6       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4       5       6       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password