michael49 wrote:
MF is so easy on the 5N that I use it mostly for MF, except for when I use the kit lens or if I purchase the 55-210 in the future.
I agree. Besides the kit lens, all my glass is alt glass. MF is not a problem but sometimes for shooting street, the AF would be nice. I was hoping the 24/1.8 would be worthy. I shot some quick shots in the camera store the other day and I wasn't impressed with the accuracy of the AF on my 5N. My MF of that same lens was better than AF everytime. Maybe it was that copy but I am curious what others think of it.
rji2goleez wrote:
There seems to be few, if any, using the Sony Zeiss 24/1.8. I'm curious if anyone has opinions on that lens. Afterall, it autofocuses!
Yup! I tried it, with great expectations, for the 24mm FL, for low light, and for AF. A real trifecta. Well, it was the first time I met a Zeiss lens that I didn't like enough to buy it. Not that it is exactly bad. But, compared with my Contax G and Leica R, and to Leica M loaners from the shop, it was just not good enough. Andrew (snowboarder) said, of the shots I posted, that the kit zoom was better. I wouldn't go quite that far, but there is something to what he dared write...
Now you will see that most of the posted shots with it are at close range. That is where it seems to work best, but not were I would have used it most...
in order of good pictures i shot with them in 2012
G 45/2
Minolta Macro Rokkor MD 100/4
Minolta MD Rokkor 50/1.4
Minolta MC Rokkor 50/1.4
Minolta MD Rokkor 35/1.8
Minolta MC Rokkor 58/1.2
Minolta MD Rokkor-PF 135/2.8
Sigma Super Wide II 24/2.8
Minolta MD 85/2
Sony E 18-55
Sony E 16/2.8
Minolta MC 200/4
lenticular11 wrote:
Brian - Do you mind telling me what you think of the Mutar TCs and if there's much difference between Ver 1 and II?
many thanks
David
I wish I could, but I haven't really used them yet. My intention is to do some serious testing with both Mutars and the 100-300. I understand that the Mutar I is optimized for shorter focal lengths, while the Mutar II is for longer. I'll report my findings soon.
I am using a Nex 3 still but soon will upgrade to a 7 :-)
My lenses:
12mm F5.6 CV (v.1)
24mm F1.4 FD L (arrives soon)
42mm F1.2 Pen Zuiko
45mm F2 Contax G
90mm F2.8 Contax G
180mm F4 CV Apo-Lanthar (adapter arrives soon)
Since my last self-made project is almost finished, I hereby proudly present my "Dr.Oly&Mr.Zeiss" hybrid below. I wanted a proper helical for the Contax G 45mm and then I found a damaged but cheap Zuiko 50mm F3.5 Macro. Quite some time later, I have a helix and built-in extension rings, too :-)
m-a-x wrote:
I am using a Nex 3 still but soon will upgrade to a 7 :-)
My lenses:
12mm F5.6 CV (v.1)
24mm F1.4 FD L (arrives soon)
42mm F1.2 Pen Zuiko
45mm F2 Contax G
90mm F2.8 Contax G
180mm F4 CV Apo-Lanthar (adapter arrives soon)
Since my last self-made project is almost finished, I hereby proudly present my "Dr.Oly&Mr.Zeiss" hybrid below. I wanted a proper helical for the Contax G 45mm and then I found a damaged but cheap Zuiko 50mm F3.5 Macro. Quite some time later, I have a helix and built-in extension rings, too :-)
m-a-x wrote:
Since my last self-made project is almost finished, I hereby proudly present my "Dr.Oly&Mr.Zeiss" hybrid below. I wanted a proper helical for the Contax G 45mm and then I found a damaged but cheap Zuiko 50mm F3.5 Macro. Quite some time later, I have a helix and built-in extension rings, too :-)
Wow, so much response so fast.
Thanks to all of you!
Jabberwockt:
Unfortunately, there are no pics. I did that over five months because I moved house, and my little daughter was born.
I did not have the patience in that long period of time to take photos of the process.
My pictures would not help much because it was no clean process at all.
I started to do it with a M39-M adapter plus a M-NEX adapter, and took away the rear base of the lens to achieve infinity. Not succeeding, I used a different mount (cut from a M42-Nex adapter). This means, the entire process was not perfect. At some time I thought I could not succeed. I would have done it different if I had the knowledge before.
Phillip:
It focuses to infinity. Built in means I always have close focus capability, too, thanks to the Macro double helix.
Douglas, thanx!
Sebboh:
Hmmm, I did not think about that during the conversion process. The easy part with this lens is that there are two "lens blocks" which screw into a metal tube. The aperture sits in the middle.
That makes the elements easy to disassemble, easy to clean, and solid. I'm not saying it is impossible, but the solid tube may hinder exchanging the entire mechanism with that of a donor lens.
I will write down what essentially has to be done, but not today any more.
And you are right: not to hijack this thread, I'll open a new one.
I'll do it tomorrow or within the next week.
Have just finished buying my NEX 7 kit. Still waiting on it to all arrive. Have only bought two lenses; a Zeiss ZM 50 f2 and a ZM 85 f2. I may get a wide of some sort down the track but I've never been much of one for wide angles. So we'll see.
C/Y Zeiss Distagon 35/2.8
C/Y Zeiss Planar 50/1.7
and have the C/Y 135mm Sonnar 2.8 on the way since yesterday
Konica Hexanon AR 40/1.8
Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.7
Minolta MD Rokkor 50/1.4
Minolta MC Tele Rokkor-X 135/2.8
Holga HL(W)-SN
My idea with the CY and CG lines is that I have one set for reliable and comfortable MF for when I need it, and ultimate portability (and ravishingly good looks; damn those CG's are pretty) when that's my priority. (The Holga is there because sometimes, working with serious limitations is the best boost there is for creativity. The trick is to bring no other lenses at the time, which is never an easy choice).
I suppose I should look into upgrading that E16 sooner or later. Other than that I'm just waiting for something with the 5N sensor qualities in a body with integrated EVF. And preferably some more/better physical controls.
Hello all, I'm a part-time pro with large and medium-format experience, and an extensive system of Canon primes. I'm new to the NEX threads as I'm just now deciding on both lenses and either an NEX-5N or 7 as a compact camera system. At the moment, I'm contemplating a limited, but high-quality kit that might include:
wide: 15mm/4.5 Voigtlander Super-Wide Heliar
std: 24mm/1.8 Zeiss Sonnar T* ZA e-mount
macro: 30mm/3.5 Sony macro e-mount
short tele: 50mm/1.5 Zeiss C Sonnar T* ZM
med tele: 85mm f/4 Zeiss Tele-Tessar T* ZM
I've read a good deal here about lens choices for the NEX bodies and find that I have a few observations and questions.
1. 24mm/1.8 Zeiss ZA. Opinions of this lens seem to vary widely, with some careful users quite happy with it, and others quite dismissive. I'm familiar with Zeiss glass on a Hasselblad, but have never used anything in the ZM series. If one were willing to forego the f/1.8 aperture, autofocus, and short minimum focus distance, is there any consensus about how a comparable ZM lens such as the 25mm f/2.8 Biogon compares? I realize that retrofocus designs seem to be more problematic on the NEX-7's corners.
2. SLR vs. rangefinder lenses. Although they are obviously much larger, I've read that SLR lens designs seem to have fewer problems at the image periphery. Has anyone tested Zeiss ZE/ZF lenses against identical focal lengths in the ZM mount for NEX bodies, such that if one were willing to accommodate the extra volume and weight it would make sense to use, for example, a 35mm f/2 Distagon in a ZE mount instead of a 35mm f/2 Biogon in a ZM mount? Then it would also be possible to use the Distagon on my Canon 5DII as well.
3. Canon EOS lens. Reviewing the list of possible lenses above, I can't help but notice that I have nearly all these focal lengths as Canon primes: 24mm f/1.4, 35/2, 50/1.4, 50/2.5 macro, 85/1.8. I realize that the much-anticipated Metabones/Conorus EOS to Sony NEX adapter isn't shipping quite yet, but I would be very interested in what might be expected if I purchased such an adapter and used some of my Canon lenses. It's not inexpensive at $400, but then neither are the ZM lenses!
