Let's get some more images going. I haven't shot much with it yet, but here's one from the 35N on the 5D. Taken with a 25mm tube, the distance too close to be practical (almost touching the front element) and extremely limits the range.
AhamB wrote:
About the internal reflections: in some shots with my 200 APO I got the same impression, that there was some veiling flare that should not be there. Perhaps it could be improved by adding some baffle in the rear of the lens, or perhaps not. I'm reading this thread now: http://forum.fourthirdsphoto.com/showthread.php?t=57126
The 120/4 looks very nice there, Dmitri. The 200/2.8 was never abundantly available in the past couple of years but even more difficult to find these days, apparently. There are two for sale in German ebay shops at 1100-1200 euros. That's almost 3 times what I paid for mine last year.
Yes, it's marked A, like the 150/2.8, 120/4, 300/2.8 and 500/4.5 (last 2 are APO). I believe the A designates the lenses that use special glass for superior corrections of aberrations, but these lenses are all MF. The AF series are marked "AFD", and they have no aperture ring so they can't be adapted. It looks like the longest AFD lens is the 150/2.8.
$700 sounds like a good price for the 200 APO. If you can put up with the weight and bulk of the lens, the results are very rewarding, especially for landscape photography (incredible sharpness from wide open, even though you get far too little DOF at f/2.8 for landscapes). I use it for macro too on tubes, but that gets rather challenging. Better to use the 120/4 for that.
J, it's a beauty!
I let go the one I found since I was eyeing a 100/2.8 APO Leica..
But, I would definitely love to pick it up if I manage to find one!
AhamB wrote:
Looks great, Dmitri! A bit heavy on saturation though. I'll try post some of my shots with the 200 APO soon.
Aham, thank you.. Funnily you mention...in fact, only the first one got all colours boosted - I really wanted it to have deep blue..
2nd got greens boosted slightly, but 3rd one is untouched in terms of colour. Only contrast and brightness are corrected..
colour/vibrance/clarity untouched during processing.
Rusty, that's quite some resolution. I managed to get Mamiya original tubes in addition to my set of Kenko ones, but I haven't tried 120/4 on them yet...looks like it's time..
Krosavcheg wrote:
Rusty, that's quite some resolution. I managed to get Mamiya original tubes in addition to my set of Kenko ones, but I haven't tried 120/4 on them yet...looks like it's time..
The resolution seems fine enough ... my concern with it is the amount of CA that is present.
AhamB wrote:
The 110/2.8 isn't a Mamiya A lens, so it doesn't have ULD elements (which should improve CA correction). How does your 150/2.8 A do in terms of CA?
What I meant was ... how much CA do you see in the 110/2.8 N w/tubes test shots? Enough to be worthy of concern ... or is it of little consequence?
I see a little bokeh blue/yellow LoCA (or bokeh CA) fringing the white letters. It could look a bit cleaner but I think it's better than green/magenta CA.
