The official Zeiss 35/1.4 thread
/forum/topic/839374/116

1       2       3              116      
117
       118              122       123       end

carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15778
Country: Germany

Hmm, I am considering adding my old gear to my profile as well. Nice way to keep track...



ceder
Registered: May 13, 2011
Total Posts: 280
Country: Sweden

HELP!

I have the C/Y 35/1.4, it was leitaxed for canon mount, and today I got the Metabones speed boost adapter, so I unscrewed the leitax adapter, put on the speed booster and put it on the camera. I immediately noticed it felt like a loose fit, so I put the camera down and realised I had forgotten to screw back the screws into the C/Y 35mm when taking off the Leitax adapter. Well, I un-mounted the speed booster, and noticed that the holes for the screws were still aligned at the back of my 35mm lens, so I screwed them in.

Everything fine and dandy?

NOPE! The aperture ring now slides without the distinct stops between the full apertures (I think it used to do that), and I can now only go to aperture 11, not aperture 16 (which is max). Well, I can go into 16 if I use force, but I do not want to do that.

What is the cure?

Thanks for any help guys!!



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 2960
Country: Sweden

Sorry to hear ceder!

If youre lucky there's a simple solution, the screws you screwed in came with the Leitax adapter and they are usually longer than the original ones. A guess is that they now press on aperture mechanics making it malfunction. Hopefully just unscrew them (a bit at least) so they not pushing anything for a prolonged time.

If you dont got the original screws together with the lens, it ought to be possible to get the correct ones from Zeiss if it is a MM version (green F/16 mark). Leitax may very well be able to help you too, I understand that he is a helpful guy quick to respond to emails.



ceder
Registered: May 13, 2011
Total Posts: 280
Country: Sweden

Yes, I will change to the shorter screws! Thanks Frank!



sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 10640
Country: United States

ceder wrote:
Yes, I will change to the shorter screws! Thanks Frank!


i bet the aperture ring came out of alignment at some point without tight screws holding the mount in place and the ball bearing that is responsible for click stops came out of position. those things are slippery devils, hopefully it's still under the aperture ring just out of position (and is what is blocking f/16). otherwise you'll have to get a new one if you want click stops.

note: i believe the ball bearings on all contax lenses are spring loaded? so it's possible the spring might be displaced as well.

my solution would be to put the lens in a shoe box (where the ball bearing won't get away) and remove the aperture ring (after the mount of course) to see if you can locate the bearing (and spring) and put them back in their proper location.



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 2960
Country: Sweden

For the ball bearing position and "mount", check this links image #8 and #9. It's an instruction for a different conversion (of the 85/1.4 and 35/1.4) and involves lifting the aperture ring also revealing some other mechanics.

http://leitax.com/conversion/contax/Planar_8514/index.html



Samuli Vahonen
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Total Posts: 1586
Country: Finland

Makten wrote:
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
I have quite little experience shooting 50 planar wide open close up - tried few frames years ago and that's it.


Try it! The Planar is really a "double nature" in that it gives very harsh bokeh close up, but is instead very smooth for distant shots (+2-3 meters or so). Personally, I don't understand why one would want smooth bokeh when the background is totally blurred out. I want chaos! Hence 95% of all "bokeh tests" are totally irrelevant for me since they usually are carried out near MFD.

Yes too smooth bokeh is boring, but I like just little rough or "characteristic" bokeh, not your chaos level I'll promise to try 1.4/50 wide open close-ups this summer. Damn now all the time goes shooting wide open (1.4/35 as well I'm planning to try to do that)

Makten wrote:
I think you should try some medium format, if you can afford it. I have only used 6x6 and 6x7 film because of cost, but many of the lenses have characteristics that I'm sure you would love, because they don't have to be faster than ~f/2.8 to give a really blurred background. Especially the humble Hasselblad Zeiss 80/2.8 Planar behaves very much the same as the Z* 50/1.4, but it is of course much sharper at the same DOF.


I have considered going to medium format as option as well, but I'm not very keen on any of the currently in production medium format lens characteristics. So I would be forced to adapt to old Hasselblad (when they were still made by Zeiss) or Contax 645 lenses. In addition to Planar 2.8/80 I'm sure I would love Planar 2/110 and 40mm & 50mm Distagons based on what I have seen them adapted to 36mm*24mm sensor cameras. Also I'm not happy to current implementations of live view in medium format backs. I have no interest to go back to film anymore, so it would be pretty pricey adventure at this point (full frame sensor is must).

Samuli



Samuli Vahonen
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Total Posts: 1586
Country: Finland

Samuli Vahonen wrote:
So my brand new guideline for myself for 2013:
- bokeh shots: shoot f/1.4, if bokeh issues, go closer and/or close aperture to f/3.2-4 depending shooting distance - if vignetting or magenta/green issues close f/2.0-2.8 depending shooting distance
- landscapes: keep shooting f/5.6


Tried yesterday the wide open shooting - all below: Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 1.4/35 ZE-version and Canon 5DmkII @ ISO 100


1# 1/5000s



2# 1/3200s - larger



3# 1/2000s - the DOF is hard to see from thumbnail, so here is larger version



4# 1/2000s



5# 1/1000s - larger



Samuli



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 2960
Country: Sweden

Looks good Samuli, but I'd go with you that for a typical tree shot it looks like you benefit from stopping down a bit for your typical crispness. Type of subject is obviously important as is of course background, distance to it etc. I realize these are just fresh examples and also taken in difficult lighting with snow and harsh light filtered through trees, but the same lens in an evenly lit summer evening on your Volvo (or was it Saab?) is capable of producing more 3D.

EDIT
Watched those first on the iPad. On a 2nd look on laptop the first one does it for me. Bokeh isnt exactly superb but front tree is really "present".



ceder
Registered: May 13, 2011
Total Posts: 280
Country: Sweden

sebboh wrote:
ceder wrote:
Yes, I will change to the shorter screws! Thanks Frank!


i bet the aperture ring came out of alignment at some point without tight screws holding the mount in place and the ball bearing that is responsible for click stops came out of position. those things are slippery devils, hopefully it's still under the aperture ring just out of position (and is what is blocking f/16). otherwise you'll have to get a new one if you want click stops.

note: i believe the ball bearings on all contax lenses are spring loaded? so it's possible the spring might be displaced as well.

my solution would be to put the lens in a shoe box (where the ball bearing won't get away) and remove the aperture ring (after the mount of course) to see if you can locate the bearing (and spring) and put them back in their proper location.


Thanks!



ceder
Registered: May 13, 2011
Total Posts: 280
Country: Sweden

wfrank wrote:
For the ball bearing position and "mount", check this links image #8 and #9. It's an instruction for a different conversion (of the 85/1.4 and 35/1.4) and involves lifting the aperture ring also revealing some other mechanics.

http://leitax.com/conversion/contax/Planar_8514/index.html



Perfect! Many thanks!!



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 2960
Country: Sweden

ceder wrote:
Perfect! Many thanks!!


Np ceder. Hope you get it together. I've seen your Flickr pages that you've bombarded with awesome shots so I want to see you use this lens :-)

- - -

Elderly gentleman (quite talkative) and a CY bokeh shot from today. Both wideopen. Harsh light.






_manny_
Registered: Apr 10, 2013
Total Posts: 6
Country: United Kingdom

Hi, I'm new here, long kept reading on here but never posted. The images in this thread pushed me over the edge though! Very impressive.

I'm a Nikon shooter - am I correct in thinking the C/Y model is impossible to use on Nikons? Even if a leitax adaptor was used?

Another thing I've found hard to understand is the issue of how the new Z* version performs at f/1.4. I've read about a veiling glare, yet the photos above taken with the ZE version at f/1.4 look great... Is it just in certain conditions, with a certain mix of colours and light?

I have the Nikon 35G f/1.4 and like it; it has quite gentle bokeh and a pleasing - to my eyes - steady progression from the in-focus to out-of-focus areas... yet it seems to lack the bite of the photos here, that almost medium format look. I hope it's not sacrilege to ask but I would like to know if anyone has compared the new Sigma 35 to either of the Zeiss 35 f1.4s? It looks to have the same sharpness wide-open and also the same abrupt change from in to out of focus as the C/Y Zeiss which I think lends that dramatic 3D look.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15778
Country: Germany

I believe that the Contax 35/1.4 will not fit on a Nikon, at least not without major modification, above and beyond Leitax. The ZF.2 version is perfect for Nikons, and has similar (although not identical) rendering.

Several of the ZFs can have glare under some circumstances, but in general they perform great and I wouldn't worry about it at all.

If you develop in Lightroom, you might experiment with Contrast and Clarity to get a little more bite into your Nikon 35/1.4 shots, and definitely make sure that you downsize and sharpen correctly. If you still need more bite, then off to Zeissland you go

The new Sigma appears to be a fantastic lens, but the boke is not nearly as nice as the Zeiss at least in some circumstances, and it doesn't have the same micro-contrast and 3D ability, that I have seen in shots so far.



_manny_
Registered: Apr 10, 2013
Total Posts: 6
Country: United Kingdom

Thank you for the response.

Regarding the Nikon lens, I probably should have been clearer about bite, I meant more the combination of sharpness wide-open and a fairly rapid shift to out-of-focus which seems to be the signature of the C/Y version and perhaps the new Sigma although I'm unsure about the latter as most photos I've seen with it are close-ups of pets etc. But you're quite right about downsizing and sharpening - that was actually how I discovered this forum, in the huge Zeiss images thread there are some great tutorials on sharpening that are linked to on many other sites.

It's a pity about the C/Y version not being suitable for Nikons; it seems to offer the kind of rendering I prefer. A while back I found a Noct at good price (well good for a Noct) and have been amazed by it even at f/1.2 and on a D800E which has encouraged me to have a more open mind about older lenses. Alas it sounds like this Zeiss won't be one of them. I'll keep an eye on this thread and see more posted with the Z* versions I hope. As I mentioned the ZE photos above on this page seem wonderful at f/1.4 with even nicer bokeh than what I've seen from the C/Y yet many people have claimed problems at wide apertures with the Z* version which I find quite confusing. Perhaps it's technique, light, subject etc all coming together.



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1377
Country: Netherlands

The Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam just reopened today after ten years of renovation.
The queen just opened it and here are the people standing in line for a free admission. It all looks splendid inside and outside!
Second photo, tourist hanging about.















R.Young
Registered: Jul 01, 2011
Total Posts: 960
Country: United Kingdom

Nice shots wfrank. I spot a little highlight artefact on his cheek though, maybe a little over cooked in post?

Here is one at f/2.8 for a change. Contax MMJ on 5D2:


Ashley by Rob.Young, on Flickr


mortyb
Registered: Feb 15, 2009
Total Posts: 1362
Country: Norway

^ Lovely.



Samuli Vahonen
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Total Posts: 1586
Country: Finland

wfrank wrote:
...also taken in difficult lighting with snow and harsh light filtered through trees,

Photographers have different preferences for light - after reading many photography books it starts to sound like photos should be taken always in "golden light". Personally I'm really bored to soft warm light photos, it's very worn out look - More or less I try to avoid doing those cliche shots (and exception breaks the rule as always...). While I shoot in forests one of the most important tools are shadows caused by other trees, sometimes one has to wait for long time to get light to your subject, and it may not happen at all.

wfrank wrote:
but the same lens in an evenly lit summer evening on your Volvo (or was it Saab?) is capable of producing more 3D.

Saab these days, used to be Volvo guy but when I had to leave to army had to switch car (had 240 diesel) since my car just turned it's 1st million and to continue it would have needed quite a lot of maintenance. Didn't have money for other Volvo so I bough Saab, and for some reason I'm now on my 3rd Saab even I could buy Volvo if I would like to waste money to car. Thou from the cars I have photographed it may have been Volvo as well if I have shown photo here.


On the following day (of previous photos) the spring ended and winter came bag, more snow and very different light - tried to catch the snowfall also to sensor.

Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 1.4/35 @ f/2.8, 1/320s, 5DmkII


Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 1.4/35 @ f/1.4, 1/1250s, 5DmkII (the contrast edge between snow and darker background got very ugly green fringe, removed that by desaturation of green channel, masked with few strokes to Wacom tablet in Apple Aperture)


Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 1.4/35 @ f/1.4, 1/320s, 5DmkII



And sure I use the soft light many times, but these are so cliche that I try to avoid shooting them - Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 1.4/35 @ f/11, 1/40s, 5DmkII (vignetting slider touched)


Samuli



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 2960
Country: Sweden

R.Young wrote:
Nice shots wfrank. I spot a little highlight artefact on his cheek though, maybe a little over cooked in post?



Thanks and probably, they often come out that way when I am not paying attention.

Very nice shot yourself. Reminds me of this UK wonder guy and his series "Soho people" which is here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/petezelewski/8385365045/in/set-72157626385293791/lightbox/

Not Zeiss but some tasty Canon L's there.



1       2       3              116      
117
       118              122       123       end