wfrank wrote:
Zhangye, if your profile is correct you are using a D700. Have you tried to equip it with a precision matte such as the Canon EG-S. With such at portrait distance the Zeiss 35/1.4 is easy to focus, easier than on something 5m+ away.



Wilhelm, I use a altered Canon focus screen (EG-s or EE-S) on D700. This 35mm 1.4 is slightly different than 50mm case as I feel it has no haze with admirable WO performance general speaking. but the DOF transition is sharp to my untrained eye.(I don't have many 35mm 1.4 lens on hand, only VC1351.2, which is a lot insensitive to focus error) You know, most case I'd rather have a unsharp photo than a photo with sharp focus at the ears

I want to emphasize that at portrait distance shooting portrait. you can't find a worst case for manual focus to have eyes in focus within 0.5M with 35mm lens. It could because at that distance is more sensitive body movement by me or my subject result that impression. But since I never do a scientific test on this, please take a grain of salt on what I say.

Edit: all my comments about easy or not manual focus is the impression I get from real world usage based on keeper rate I have. So far, I would say Zeiss 35f2, MP50f2 are two easiest one. and then Nikkor 501.2, 35cron R and 50lux R are next. MP100 and P85 is harder for different reason. (p85 is due to SA and MP100 is due to quick focus fade off). D351.4 and P50 are two most difficult one. with P50 you just have soft photo with occasional acceptable ones but D35.14 have sharp image at the place not intended

zhangyue wrote:
carstenw wrote:
Don't understand me wrong, the 50 Lux E60 is a wonderful lens, related to the 50 Lux-M ASPH lens, and I would love to own one, but it sure is hard to focus. Beautiful rendering, maybe the best 50/1.4 SLR lens that exists, but hard to focus.

I hope I didn't misunderstand you, but your comments seems suggest both 35lux and 50lux E60 is harder manual focus than other 1.4sh lens.

My feel is usually lens with better WO performance suggest better SA correction usually easier to focus manually. Do you feel Leica 50lux E60 is harder to focus compare to other 50 1.4sh lens? (which is the interesting thing I want to hear more) or just general comment about: it is difficult to manual focus 50mm at 1.4, that could be my mis-understanding.

You understand me right: I mean these two specific lenses. Neither has much "glow", i.e. spherical aberration, to speak of (which it is true is one reason for lenses to be hard to focus). I think in this case it simply has something to do with the way that many modern Leica lenses transition from in-focus to out-of-focus which does it. It is definitely very real though.

carstenw wrote:
zhangyue wrote:
carstenw wrote:
Don't understand me wrong, the 50 Lux E60 is a wonderful lens, related to the 50 Lux-M ASPH lens, and I would love to own one, but it sure is hard to focus. Beautiful rendering, maybe the best 50/1.4 SLR lens that exists, but hard to focus.

I hope I didn't misunderstand you, but your comments seems suggest both 35lux and 50lux E60 is harder manual focus than other 1.4sh lens.

My feel is usually lens with better WO performance suggest better SA correction usually easier to focus manually. Do you feel Leica 50lux E60 is harder to focus compare to other 50 1.4sh lens? (which is the interesting thing I want to hear more) or just general comment about: it is difficult to manual focus 50mm at 1.4, that could be my mis-understanding.

You understand me right: I mean these two specific lenses. Neither has much "glow", i.e. spherical aberration, to speak of (which it is true is one reason for lenses to be hard to focus). I think in this case it simply has something to do with the way that many modern Leica lenses transition from in-focus to out-of-focus which does it. It is definitely very real though.

You confuse me more I feel 50lux E48 is pretty easy to focus and E60 will be more so for its given reputation. I have no idea how 35lux does.

Don't want pollute this thread.

I want finally add: easy or not focus is very subjective topic, it depend on what you shoot, focal length, shooting distance, lens design which include optical and focus ring moving range as well. (another reason MP100 is harder as focus ring range is very small from 2M to infinity)

So, I am not surprised to see different people have different feel about it.

carstenw wrote:
Strange, that just doesn't look like a 100mm perspective to me

Might be cause lens can change effective focal length with closer focus. Quite a lot of telephoto lens do that. Video guys call it focus breathing. I think this might be sample of it.

Mescalamba wrote:
Might be cause lens can change effective focal length with closer focus. Quite a lot of telephoto lens do that. Video guys call it focus breathing. I think this might be sample of it.

Highly unlikely. For one, "breathing" is a fairly small effect (not the difference between 100mm and 35mm, but enough to be annoying in a precisely framed film shoot). For another, in a unit-focusing lens like the CY 100/2, breathing always goes in the other direction: closer focus means the lens is farther from the camera, so the sensor captures a narrower field of view (as though from a >100mm lens). Quantitative example: a 100mm lens needs to be moved about +5.2mm further from the camera relative to infinity focus in order to focus 2m away, giving the field of view of an ~105mm lens.

zhangyue wrote:
You confuse me more I feel 50lux E48 is pretty easy to focus and E60 will be more so for its given reputation. I have no idea how 35lux does.

Don't be sure until you have tried I don't know the E48, so I cannot comment on how easy it is to focus. I can say with certainty that with the 35 Lux, I have to check my focus and reshoot two or three times on average, whereas with the ZF.2 35/1.4 I often get it the first time. Both are of course equally easy with live view or an EVF.

zhangyue wrote:

Edit: all my comments about easy or not manual focus is the impression I get from real world usage based on keeper rate I have. So far, I would say Zeiss 35f2, MP50f2 are two easiest one. and then Nikkor 501.2, 35cron R and 50lux R are next. MP100 and P85 is harder for different reason. (p85 is due to SA and MP100 is due to quick focus fade off). D351.4 and P50 are two most difficult one. with P50 you just have soft photo with occasional acceptable ones but D35.14 have sharp image at the place not intended

If you consistently get e.g. backfocus then you probably need to shim the matte. It is NOT hard to focus such a lens wideopen at 0.5m, you should get a very high ratio of keepers. You dont need to be scientific to find out, just place an object on the kitchen table 0.5m away an take 5 or 10 shots. Constent back- or frontfocus? Then you need shiming. Matte is just misplaced a bit.

The odd thing as that you imply the rest of lenses dont have that problem. A misplaced matte would show the same misfocus in the same direction regardless of lens (just to more or lesser degree depending on F-stop and DOF-character). Maybe you should do the kitchen table trick just to find that the matte is not misplaced

I am sure my screen is spot on. That is very easy to verify as this Zeiss has 30mm MFD. (I even use my MP50 to make sure my screen installation) I am not the only one complain the difficulty of focus this particular 35mm.

The problem for me might because of 35mm focal length, if distance is longer, DOF is kind of deeper, so eye will hard to tell critical focus. If distance is shorter, it is very sensitive to movement and shooting angle. On the other hand, once viewed at 100%, it is surprisingly sharp to be able to show focus error.

Again, give me enough time, I am sure I can nail the focus with very high keeper rate on any lens mentioned. Just turn back and forth focus ring to fine tune focus by eyes. I am talking about tracking kids with less than secs to be able to focus. (not necessary moving kids, but once see some interesting moment, I am able to capture it quickly.)

The difficulty of focus is combined result from focal length and lens optical character. On the other hand, Carsten seems OK with this 35mm. what can I say?

Well, I am not shooting action with it, maybe that is the difference.

carstenw wrote:
akul wrote:
Carsten - nice composition. Not so great interior, but I like the photo showcasing 35 1.4. How do you like it?

I love it! It is a chunky lens for sure, but it is easier to focus than my Leica, as I was hoping it would be. Leica lenses have incredibly beautiful (if somewhat abstract) rendering, but they can be sons of female dogs to focus. Both the 35 Lux-R and 50 Lux-R E60 are like that, and probably many others. The Zeiss is a cinch, even with the D800. I still miss focus sometimes, but I now often get it right on the first try. I will keep the Leica for now, as it is a very different lens than the Zeiss, much more moody and with a striking way to render, but in the end I might sell it, simply because that is a lot of money to have sitting on the shelf if I don't use it much.

The Zeiss has really nice rendering, very real and give you a sense of presence, quite different than the Leica. When I get a bit more free time and light, I will try to get some 3D going with it

I agree. The feeling of almost 'being there' - ness is very strong. I see that in that shot. I have not figured out when that happens. It tends to be more distance shot with 5.6 or 6.3 aperture range with me, but not always.

joakim, R. Young, Wilhelm, Carsten, Michael - Thank you so much.

Regarding focusing. I also find 35 1.4 probably the hardest one to get critical focus among my collection of zeiss. In my case mostly due to its thiin DOF. Carsten, your comment on your Leica being harder sounds pretty challenging as I don't think I can handle anything harder than 35 1.4 !!

Luka, nice B&w Brooklyn bridge shot.
Would clone out the tree branches in the top right as they are a little distracting.
How did you do your B&W conversion?

Thanks for your input Wayne. I actually like something up there on the corner as a counterpoint. That. Of course, is my feeling toward it.

I used PS BW filter and photo filter for BW and tinting.

Contax 100 f2 AEJ:

Petra by Rob.Young, on Flickr

And one from today:

Richmond Park by Rob.Young, on Flickr

What the! It looks stuffed, it's so calm! Fantastic luck, great shot!

It was chewing away on the undergrowth, so I just cleared my throat to get its attention

R Young, that's a fantastic shot. Congrats.

Thank you! I actually took an hour train to get just this kind of shot, but never thought I'd actually get it. Really happy with it. Hoping to head back in the morning to shoot with my 400 2.8 L IS