Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  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
       end
  

28 vs 35
  
 
airfrogusmc
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · 28 vs 35


Steve if you can get your hands on the M 10 you will not regret it. It is at least two stops better in low light than my M 262 is. Leica glass, especially the fast wide, just sing on it.

I was on several lists and Murphy's camera came through first. It was only about 3 months with them. I as told it would probably be a year from the other places I was on lists at. Kevin Murphy said a few months but I was really thinking probably not until late this year or early next soonest. I also bought through him when I bought my MM.



Aug 09, 2017 at 07:19 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · 28 vs 35


zhangyue wrote:
Steve, I have a feeling that part of busy Bokeh of 28OTUS is from A7RII sensor stack. That looks very familiar. My 50lux ASPH M behave slightly different than stock Leica camera here as well.

Have you ever compare 28lux on A7RII and Leica body(how is your M10 status?, still want it?)

My 21 SEM at corner is similar. The same effect of smear will kill bokeh as well.


Hi Michael,

I don't think the Otus 28 is very affected by the sensor stack. First, it has a very long exit pupil which means it is less affected by the sensor stack. Second, and probably more important, it seems the Otus lenses were designed for a thicker sensor stack. Roger and Brian Carnahan on the lens rentals blog have shown that at least the Otus 55 does best with 2mm of glass in the image path. It actually does worse without glass in the image path than with glass in the image path and 2mm is pretty close to the sensor stack in the A7rII. It is likely that the Otus 28, would do worse with a Kolari thin filter mod (or the M10) than with an unmodified A7rII.

The 50lux ASPH and the 21 SEM both have much shorter exit pupils and they are not designed for a thicker sensor stack like the Otus lenses, and yes the effect of the sensor stack also affects the bokeh. In particular, I think it is sad that the nice bokeh on the 50lux ASPH is pretty much ruined on the A7rII. I just don't think it is having too much of an effect in these shots. It is just a tough scene and a difficult background distance for both these lenses. If you look above it also looks way worse in the 100% crops than in the shots of the full scene. One of the dangers of looking at 100% crops, perhaps especially with bokeh, is that you can over analyze results and make a big deal about a small difference that isn't really very important in real world print sizes and uses. A 100% crop of a 42mp FF image would of course represent a giant print if the whole image was printed at that size.

I hope to be able to do the tests with an M10 before too long. I have had one on order at B & H since the end of February, but it still isn't in yet. Hopefully it will be soon. So far, I have been able to be patient, but it has taken a long time.



Aug 09, 2017 at 07:28 PM
Samuli Vahonen
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · 28 vs 35


Steve Spencer wrote:
It is likely that the Otus 28, would do worse with a Kolari thin filter mod (or the M10) than with an unmodified A7rII.

I was going to comment the same as Michael that the boke looks pretty bad also on Otus (not just the fence but the leaves on ground etc. look much worse than I expected). I don't have Otus but all 100% samples, which I have seen boke has been better on Canon and Nikon than these - the leaf on ground also look like too thick sensor boke issue. My digLloyd has expired so I can't check now, and haven't saved bookmarks/images from other samples as I decided to skip Otus-series (thou from time to time I feel urge to buy 1.4/28...).

Kolari v2 is supposed to be close to similar as Canon sensor stack in thickness, standard Sony is thicker - I would assume Zeiss has optimized for Canon and Nikon cameras, not for the thicker sensors, but naturally this is just an assumption. The new UT (Ultra Thin) would definitely have too thin filter stack for Otus, assuming it's optimized for Canon/Nikon. I have not measured any thicknesses, just read from forum and lensrentals blog, but I have also been able to verify this with my lenses e.g. Contax Distagon 2.8/28 C/Y was OK with Canon 5DmkII and it's OK with A7 Kolari v2, but sucks with standard A7/A7r/A7mkII due to astigmatism and field curvature ruining boke (and focus plane but major issue is boke, not the focus plane, on my usage). I was really disappointed after switching from 2x5DmkII & 1x1DmkIII to 2xA7+A7r and finding out that C/Y 2.8/28 doesn't work well with Sony - it's a special lens to me as it was my 2nd "Alternative" lens and my first Zeiss lens. And then I jumped for joy for a month when I got two cameras back from Kolari and C/Y 2.8/28 worked again

Samuli



Aug 09, 2017 at 09:00 PM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · 28 vs 35


Samuli Vahonen wrote:
I was going to comment the same as Michael that the boke looks pretty bad also on Otus (not just the fence but the leaves on ground etc. look much worse than I expected). I don't have Otus but all 100% samples, which I have seen boke has been better on Canon and Nikon than these - the leaf on ground also look like too thick sensor boke issue. My digLloyd has expired so I can't check now, and haven't saved bookmarks/images from other samples as I decided to skip Otus-series (thou from time to time I feel urge
...Show more

+1 what Samuli said. I always feel OTUS 55 behave slightly worse on A7RII than what I see from D810. It just missing a little bite away from center. As far as I know Canikon sensor stack seems have less thickness than Sony. I general agree with you, Steve, that most of SLR lens should perform decent at least compare to M glass. My experience using 14-24 on A7R/A7 also behave very differently than on native body (mainly FC behavior) but we all know WA or SWA are more sensitive to flange distance variation, so I don't want draw any conclusion from there but here I feel we are reaching to final bit of difference either sharpness or Bokeh at edge or extreme corner.

I have meant to test it to back up my feeling but never find a time to do so. I sold my D810 a while ago to expect D850.(should be awsome )

The last time I did test OTUS and 135ZPO with A7R, the weak mount totally ruined my results. I haven't be able to find a time to fully test OTUS on my A7RII yet. Adding adapter between always is another variation to worry about. Last trip with A7RII confirm my preference to OVF and larger body, given D850 will have flip LCD, the last incentive for me to stay Sony went away.

Now, back to topic about 28 vs 35. I prefer 35 as it almost like a normal lens with background information best for story telling. If I can only have one lens, it will be 35. 28 happen to be wide but not wide enough to cover my wide end need. For 28mm lens to tell story, you almost need to be close to uncomfortable range to your subject, more dramatic but hard to master it well. Unless I shoot professionally means I can really close to my human subject, 35 will be my choice.

For Leica M user, 21 28 50 seems a wonderful setting spaced by number but for me, I feel 35 and 50 are different enough for each to earn a spot in my bag. So, 21 35 50 is better fit for me that 35 and 50 will cover most cases with 21 to cover occasional wide need. I also have 15VC if I visit some grand landscape area.


Edited on Aug 10, 2017 at 03:13 AM · View previous versions



Aug 09, 2017 at 10:19 PM
dbehrens
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · 28 vs 35


rw11 wrote:
ok, here is how to figure this out - get a 24-70 zoom and leave it on - after a few years, run a search on all your images by focal length and see which is most common


Actually some very good and revealing advice. I have a 24-70 and did a quick comparison of FL from about 5,000 shots. The biggest numbers (no surprise) were at 24/25 and 70mm and just enough between 43-51 to justify a 50mm. Very little between 52-69mm.

The big winners were 33/38mm followed by 35mm, 39mm, 30mm, 31mm and 40mm. I think that justifies my 28 and 40 primes!

Dave



Aug 10, 2017 at 12:30 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · 28 vs 35


Samuli Vahonen wrote:
I was going to comment the same as Michael that the boke looks pretty bad also on Otus (not just the fence but the leaves on ground etc. look much worse than I expected). I don't have Otus but all 100% samples, which I have seen boke has been better on Canon and Nikon than these - the leaf on ground also look like too thick sensor boke issue. My digLloyd has expired so I can't check now, and haven't saved bookmarks/images from other samples as I decided to skip Otus-series (thou from time to time I feel urge
...Show more

Samuli,

Thanks for your comment and your keen eye. Nobody knows for sure, but I think Canon and especially Nikon (and this lens is a Nikon mount Otus 28) have much thicker sensor cover glass than the V2 Kolari. We do know from the lens rental blog that the Otus 55 seems optimized for about 2mm thick cover glass. Roger and Brian tested this lens with 2mm and it was significantly better with 2mm than 0mm or 4mm and 0mm and 4mm were fairly close to equally bad suggesting at least that the Otus 55 was optimized for something close to 2mm. The Kolari V2 is supposedly less than 1mm.

For what it is worth the Otus 28 was shot using a Novoflex adapter and the Lux 28 was shot using a Hawk's adapter that I adjusted to get as close to spot on as I could. I think you are on to something about the bokeh looking like some other lenses that were affected by the sensor stack, but I suspect that in this part of the frame we have a similar phenomenon that is simply a part of how these lenses behave. If you look at the MTFs of both of these lenses and you can find the Otus 28 here:

https://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/camera-lenses/files/service/download-center/datasheets/otus-lenses/datasheet-zeiss-otus-1428.pdf

And you can find the Lux 28 here:

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/images/2/23/Technical_Data_Leica_Summilux-M_1%2C4_28mm_EN.pdf

You will see that both have a pretty big divergence of sagittal and tangential contrast at just this part of the frame 16-18mm, which may well suggest some notable astigmatism in this part of the frame for both lenses. If I had to guess I would say it is the astigmatism of the lenses combined with the background here that is creating the busy bokeh, and although sensor stack issues can and do cause exactly this sort of astigmatism in lenses for which it is not a property of the lens, I think in this case the MTFs suggest that both these lenses have pretty much the same problem in pretty much the same area. Of course the way to test this is to compare the performance on Sony to performance on a native camera, and I will do that when I can, but for now that isn't an option. What I would just caution is that although both these lenses can have fairly neutral bokeh much of the time, I suspect that even on a camera for which they were designed it can venture into somewhat busy bokeh in some parts of the frame. I might be wrong about that, but I don't think it is all that surprising either. Great bokeh and highly corrected lenses is quite a difficult combination.



Aug 10, 2017 at 01:09 AM
Lee Saxon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · 28 vs 35


I wonder if we're going to migrate back to thinner sensor stacks over time as photosite tech improves


Aug 10, 2017 at 01:43 AM
Samuli Vahonen
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · 28 vs 35


Steve Spencer wrote:
We do know from the lens rental blog that the Otus 55 seems optimized for about 2mm thick cover glass. Roger and Brian tested this lens with 2mm and it was significantly better with 2mm than 0mm or 4mm and 0mm and 4mm were fairly close to equally bad suggesting at least that the Otus 55 was optimized for something close to 2mm. The Kolari V2 is supposedly less than 1mm.

Steve, Kolari v2 replaces one part of the sensor stack with 0.8mm glass. On Kolari UT the same glass is replaced by 0.2mm glass and total thickness comes ~1mm. So from there one can figure out that the other part of the sensor is ~0.8mm => Kolari v2 is 0.8mm+~0.8mm=~1.6mm. This was also confirmed by simulations and experiments confirming the simulations when HirohikoT and myself worked to get exact solution for front filter solution to overcome the field curvature with G21&Kolari v2 (his calculation with 0.8mm did not not work at all with Kolari v2, but when he used more realistic value the simulation and experiment started to confirm each another). So Kolari v2 is similar than 5D-series (~1.5mm mechanical / ~2mm optical), or thicker than 1D-series (~1mm mechanical). Source for thicknesses: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/sensor-stack-thickness-when-does-it-matter/

Too thick sensor stack = outward field curvature. Too thin sensor stack = inward field curvature. Both will cause astigmatism. If I can select I would choose any day inward field curvature over outward field curvature. In practical shooting inward field curvature almost never causes issues to boke, unless something from front boke "jumps" into focus. But items in front boke generally are more blurred due to being very close (in scenes I shoot - will ofcourse vary depending on scenes).

I have seen MTF from Otus, but never samples showing that kind of astigmatism and other weirdness in boke - corners are not perfect, but boke has been close to perfect, if used on correct sensor, on all Otus lens images I have had change to view.


If one day Canon or Nikon comes out with full frame EVF camera (still having similar sensors and sensor toppings than their current models) then Otus 28 might be impossible to avoid. I could just glue Otus to that camera body and make a permanent place for it in my camera bag.

Samuli



Aug 10, 2017 at 02:16 PM
philip_pj
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · 28 vs 35


28mm used to be the standard wide angle for all formats (with equivalence) but lost favour as tech put wider lenses into vogue with high IQ, fuelled to some extent by the desire for unusual effects - wide for wide sake, if you will. Now Zeiss signal a return to 28mm: this elegant pragmatic photographic tool, excellent for so much general work. Soon we will surely see more from them, for Sony. 28s are easier to design and users are content with f2-f2.8, making lenses capable of very high IQ with moderate element counts and no asph. It is a fine blend of still quasi normal vision photography with often engaging 3D effects.

35s, long the wide standard lens of choice in fixed lens cameras, tend to be 'jack of all trades, master of none', and the FL is divided into heavy f1.4-f1.7 boutique options for non-Leica, or rather plain f2-f2.8 low cost general optics. The former are very often prone to serious mid aperture field curvature, making them one trick ponies to some extent. Personally, 28-50/55 works better for travel. 35mm is wide for portraits of strangers, and tight for much else.

Funny that we still await more options top tier lenses for less than megabucks in each of them.



Aug 10, 2017 at 02:54 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · 28 vs 35


Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Steve, Kolari v2 replaces one part of the sensor stack with 0.8mm glass. On Kolari UT the same glass is replaced by 0.2mm glass and total thickness comes ~1mm. So from there one can figure out that the other part of the sensor is ~0.8mm => Kolari v2 is 0.8mm+~0.8mm=~1.6mm. This was also confirmed by simulations and experiments confirming the simulations when HirohikoT and myself worked to get exact solution for front filter solution to overcome the field curvature with G21&Kolari v2 (his calculation with 0.8mm did not not work at all with Kolari v2, but when he used
...Show more

Thanks Samuli for this very informative post. It is good to know that the Kolari v2 mod is about 1.6mm thick and I suppose that means that contrary to the link you provided for the sensor stack thickness database at Lens rentals blog the Sony A7 cameras probably have a sensor thickness of about 2.65 to 2.8 (mechanical) because we probably need to add that .8mm to these measurements as well. I wonder if that is true for some of the Canon, Nikon, and Fuji measurements as well. Fuji seems pretty consistent in the thickness but Canon and Nikon seem to vary quite a bit, perhaps it is they have the second piece of glass like Sony and it varies in thickness allowing them to have a more consistent thickness across the two piece of glass. It would be interesting to know if Canon and Nikon have the two pieces of glass system like Sony or a one piece of glass system like Leica. I am pretty sure that Leica has just one piece of glass and the measurements in the database are at least close to correct. In any event, I think the best guess is that the Canon and Nikon is close to 2mm and the Sony is about .6 to .8 mm thicker. The Kolari v2 is about .4mm thinner.

It would be interesting to see the Otus 28 on a Nikon or Canon camera, but I think you may be expecting too much. First, on the Sony A7rII the Otus 28 has inward field curvature (at least at infinity focus and at wide apertures where I have looked for field curvature), this suggests as you point out that whatever the effect of the sensor stack is on the Otus it is not thick enough to induce the usual outward field curvature you see with a sensor stack that is too thick. I think based on the reasoning above it is safe to conclude the sensor stack is too thick, but its influence is probably not that great because of what is likely a long exit pupil in the Otus 28 and that is why we aren't seeing outward field curvature. Second, although there are many great samples with the Otus 28, I haven't seen very many at 100% crop on a high resolution sensor 16-18mm from the centre where astigmatism is likely at its worse on the Otus 28. Note I am not saying the Otus has bad bokeh. I think it has pretty neutral bokeh, but the area in the shots I posted above are what I suspect is a weak spot in its bokeh induced by astigmatism. The Otus is a fantastic lens and easily the highest IQ 28 out there. It colour correction is fabulous. It has very low distortion. It is quite sharp wide open and exceedingly sharp with great microcontrast stopped down and at f/4 and f/5.6 almost flawless. A lens is never completely flawless, however, and we can see even from the MTFs that there might be some annoying astigmatism once we get near the edge of the frame. I think we have to be careful not to exaggerate how good the bokeh is. It is exceptionally hard to have excellent bokeh in a lens as well corrected as the Otus 28. As Dr. Nasse (who played a big role in designing the Otus 28) notes in this article:

https://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/cln_archiv/cln35_en_web_special_bokeh.pdf

"even spherical aberration which remains completely within the range of the mild under- correction, yet shows clear signs of the measures that are intended to limit the growth of the spherical aberration. It can already cause a slight increase in the outward brightness. That is why lenses with larger apertures are usually not completely free of it."

If you allow me to paraphrase, he is basically saying that even if a lens is slightly under corrected for spherical aberrations when spherical aberrations are controlled the strategies to control them typically ends up creating some unpleasantness in the bokeh that looks like over correction. If you read this article, I think he does a good job of noting how lens design requires lots of balancing. To me it is not surprising that if you focus on correcting aberrations as well at the Otus 28 does, that it is awful hard to not induce any problems at all in the bokeh. I think Zeiss did a great job of mostly not inducing problems, but I think you may be hoping for too much if you think that there won't be any issues at all with the bokeh of the Otus 28 if you just shoot it on a Canon or Nikon.



Aug 10, 2017 at 04:39 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Samuli Vahonen
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · 28 vs 35


Steve Spencer wrote:
Thanks Samuli for this very informative post. It is good to know that the Kolari v2 mod is about 1.6mm thick and I suppose that means that contrary to the link you provided for the sensor stack thickness database at Lens rentals blog the Sony A7 cameras probably have a sensor thickness of about 2.65 to 2.8 (mechanical) because we probably need to add that .8mm to these measurements as well. I wonder if that is true for some of the Canon, Nikon, and Fuji measurements as well.

Steve, the measurement database on Lensrentals is correct. I'm not specialist of digital sensors, but sensor stack has components like:
1. cover glass (don't know do all cameras have this, some do)
2. AA-filter (if camera doesn't have this e.g. A7r, then there must be similar thickness cover glass to compensate)
3. CFA-filter
4. microlenses
5. possible something else Samuli doesn't know of...
And all these are counted to mechanical thickness of the sensor stack. The difference between optical thickness and mechanical thickness is due to refractive index of glass and whatever is on sensor stack.

What Kolarivision is doing they remove 1 & 2, and install thinner glass in place. This replacement glass on Kolari v2 is 0.8mm and Kolari UT is 0.2mm. So please don't add anything to thickness database numbers, they should be correct as they have measured whole stack.

Steve Spencer wrote:
Fuji seems pretty consistent in the thickness but Canon and Nikon seem to vary quite a bit, perhaps it is they have the second piece of glass like Sony and it varies in thickness allowing them to have a more consistent thickness across the two piece of glass. It would be interesting to know if Canon and Nikon have the two pieces of glass system like Sony or a one piece of glass system like Leica. I am pretty sure that Leica has just one piece of glass and the measurements in the database are at least close to
...Show more
Canon was "famous" of their abilities to design and manufacture quality AA-filters. The AA-filters in 1D-series (don't know anything about current models I stopped following at times of 1DmkIII and 1DSmkIII) were better and more expensive, based on thickness database and other sources they did use thicker AA-filter (cheaper to manufacture) on cheaper cameras. Now when there is more and more megapixels, it would be beneficial for manufacturer to standartize the sensor stack thickness, so that lenses could be designed to one specific sensor stack thickness (also option to have the thicker and cheaper filters in cheap cameras as incentive for serious amateurs to upgrade camera body...).

At the time when I had Canon's I did not have any idea of this stuff we are now discussing, but I did notice that my 1DsmkII did work slightly better with C/Y 28 and C/Y 50 (but as it did not have live view, and I had to get rid off it in 2008 when I decided to go 100% "EVF") - I would assume that was because of the sensor stack was thinner than my other cameras at the time (5DmkII).

Steve Spencer wrote:
It would be interesting to see the Otus 28 on a Nikon or Canon camera, but I think you may be expecting too much.

I hope I'm not expecting too much - if I'm there simply is no good 28mm lens in the world at the moment, all my hope is Otus @ native sensor For me great performance @f/4-5.6 make no point in lens sized and priced of Otus - G28 (with front filter correcting sensor stack thickness) and Leica-R v2 28mm will both beat all current cameras @ f/5.6, and two stops down have excellent boke quality (Leica not excellent, but let's say better than average) - they are only fraction of size of Otus (and G28 is also just few % if the Otus price). 28mm @ f/5.6 is rather boring as FOV/DOF/boke combo, one really can't make subject standout from fore- and background (depending on subject size of course, on close-ups/makro for sure f/5.6 has thin DOF).

I haven't studied how is the new Nikon 28mm f/1.4, but I have never got any kicks from Nikon rendering this far, so I don't expect to like this one either (exception: various EL-NIKKORs have drawn my attention many times, so much that I had to buy few of them and build helicoid for focusing etc.).

For samples only places which I remember (there were others, but I didn't save photos locally or bookmark as I try to convinve myself that I'm not that interested ) you can see >5000px images is digLloyd. But I have only memories from there as my subscription has expired. I did pixel peep all boke areas in his samples of Otus 28 at the time.




philip_pj wrote:
Now Zeiss signal a return to 28mm: this elegant pragmatic photographic tool, excellent for so much general work.

Philip, I have missed this - I checked their Lenspire, Twitter and website but could not find anything. Any link available for their hint for new 28mm?


Samuli



Aug 10, 2017 at 06:54 PM
waterden
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · 28 vs 35


There is a fine 28, the final R28/2.8. Apparently the Leica Q 28/1.7 is not bad either!

This thread has developed beyond my expectations.



Aug 10, 2017 at 07:21 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · 28 vs 35


waterden wrote:
There is a fine 28, the final R28/2.8. Apparently the Leica Q 28/1.7 is not bad either!

This thread has developed beyond my expectations.


I think the Leica Q is a very nice camera, but in my view the 28 lux has much much nicer bokeh.



Aug 10, 2017 at 07:28 PM
wayne seltzer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · 28 vs 35


Here is a quick handheld shot at 2.8 with my Otus 28 at f2.8 on my Canon 5dSR
1) whole scene with sharpening
2) righr side crop
3) right side crop smaller crop for 100%

I do not see the same bokeh rendering at edge of frame like Steve showed on the Sony.


















Aug 11, 2017 at 08:10 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · 28 vs 35


wayne seltzer wrote:
Here is a quick handheld shot at 2.8 with my Otus 28 at f2.8 on my Canon 5dSR
1) whole scene with sharpening
2) righr side crop
3) right side crop smaller crop for 100%

I do not see the same bokeh rendering at edge of frame like Steve showed on the Sony.


Well I agree that it isn't as bad as the examples I posted, but it is a quite different distance as well. I also see some pretty strong double lining on the the pool equipment and some increased busyness in the bricks in exactly the area (16-18mm) that you might expect some astigmatism from the MTFs. I think we may be making too much of a big deal about these issues with the bokeh. In my view it is just too much to expect a lens to be super highly corrected and to have no issues in the bokeh. These issues are there at high magnification and only way out towards the edges and corners. Your sample shows how nice the bokeh can be more centrally. I would still rate the Otus 28's bokeh and basically neutral and quite good, but under heavy scrutiny you can see issues. That is almost always the case with bokeh, even lenses with excellent bokeh. For example if you look at the the Leica R 80 f/1.4, which I would rate as having excellent bokeh, it does have some bright rings in the outer edges of some highlights and it definitely has some cat's eye effect.



Aug 11, 2017 at 02:27 PM
wayne seltzer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · 28 vs 35


Steve, I agree this is pixel peeping at the outer edges of the frame and most 28's that are highly corrected will be less than perfect here. I do think like others have said that sensor glass differences can aggravate the astigmatism at the edges.
Lenstip review showed a lot of mechanical vignetting in the corners which may also be effecting the busyness of the bokeh near the edges.
I would like to point out the great secondary color correction(LoCA) that the Otus 28 has due to all the low dispersion glass elements zeiss used, 8 of the 16 elements. This separates it from the Nikon 28e and probably the Leica M28. I am really noticing and enjoying the clean bokeh colors of the Otus 28.
BTW, I forgot to mention my focus point in my shot was the sunflower which was 6ft/2m away.



Aug 12, 2017 at 12:32 PM
nehemiahphoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · 28 vs 35


Steve Spencer wrote:
Well I agree that it isn't as bad as the examples I posted, but it is a quite different distance as well. I also see some pretty strong double lining on the the pool equipment and some increased busyness in the bricks in exactly the area (16-18mm) that you might expect some astigmatism from the MTFs. I think we may be making too much of a big deal about these issues with the bokeh. In my view it is just too much to expect a lens to be super highly corrected and to have no issues in the bokeh.
...Show more

I am not as sophisticated as you, but thought the bokeh on my the r80's could get a little busy. You haven't found this at mid-distance? For the record, I loved that lens.



Aug 12, 2017 at 09:12 PM
huddy
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · 28 vs 35


I went through a gear exploration phase for about 3 years, shooting with 20mm -300mm (35mm equivalents). As time became more scarce, I sold a lot of my lightly used lenses (20mm and everything longer than 105mm). My preferred combo is 28/50 as I shoot lots of pictures of children and get really close. If I'm travelling really light, I'll pack a 28 if I expect to be indoors a lot, 35 if I expect to be outdoors.


Gunzorro wrote:
I like 35mm as a general walk-around lens, and when needed, making wide panoramas from multiple shots.

Perhaps Pentax has it right with their 31mm lens, splitting the difference between 28/35?


I think you hit the nail on the head. Perhaps that's why the Sony RX1 lens is really closer to 32mm instead of 35mm. It'd be amazing if a fully mechanical version of the Sonnar for any ILC camera could ever exist.

carlitos wrote:
I have a Nikon Coolpix A w/ an APS-C "28mm" lens and a Nikon 28Ti with a 28mm lens that I like to travel with. But sometimes I need a 35mm lens and sometimes I need a 50mm lens.

Be nice if they'd produce these hi-end P&S's in several versions. Then again a FF 25-50mm zoom P&S might be nice.


It's a bummer that Nikon killed the DL series. I was really looking forward to the 18-50 version which would have been very similar to that 25-50.



Aug 13, 2017 at 03:17 AM
LightShow
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · 28 vs 35


I like them all, I do think I have more 28's that I prefer to use than 35's, when I want wide I usually want W-I-D-E, so 24mm is great too, I also love my 15mm, so I'm going with Jim's answer, it depends....


Aug 14, 2017 at 10:17 PM
1       2      
3
       end






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

1       2      
3
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password