Carsten -- I'm glad you and your daughter had some quality time with one of my shots.
Michael -- I too want to apologize for not leaving more positive comments for all your photo contributions on the various threads. You really add a lot of quality to the threads. Thanks.
Gunzorro wrote:
Michael -- I too want to apologize for not leaving more positive comments for all your photo contributions on the various threads. You really add a lot of quality to the threads. Thanks.
No need to apologize; I'm not very good myself at posting commendations for other people's amazing photos here. Anyway, I'm glad you enjoy looking at the photos I post here; I'm quite appreciative of the great shots that you (and Carsten, and Samuli, and Morfeus, and Philip, and too many others to name here) contribute, even if I rarely take the time to single out specific examples for praise.
carstenw wrote:
Btw, my computer just crashed out to my login prompt, and when I logged back in, suddenly all my photos seems kinda dark. Do these shots look dark to those of you with profiled monitors?
FlyPenFly wrote:
So my M42 Zeiss Jena 135mm F3.5 came in, really great condition but focusing is STIFF, anything I can do at home to improve that?
I have a CZJ Pancolar 50/1.8 which has the same problem. Focusing was stiff and dry. After ~2 years of using it is less stiff but still feels dry. I read that CZJ didn't use two different metals for the two parts of the focusing helicoid (to cut production costs), which makes them slowly fuse together (being the same metal), but I think the bigger part of the problem is dried out lube. It's relatively easy to dismantle the focusing helicoid on these lenses to clean out the old lube and replace it, but you have to know how to clean it and have a suitable replacement lube of course. I'd get an experienced repairman to do it for you (shouldn't be too expensive), unless you like to get your hands dirty and do it yourself.
Sorry, not that one. In fact, although I did some at f/5.6, I have chosen my favorites already and deleted them. Well, they are in the trash of Aperture, so I could pull them out again. But of these four, I have only done one shot each. I checked them on location and didn't reshoot. I will post more tomorrow, and will look for one with more DoF.
I was thinking about aperture values generally some time ago and it occurred to me that F5.6 might have 'the same look' as our eyes see things. Obviously wider apertures are more attractive most of the time but there is something about f4 or f5.6 that makes it realistic in some sort of way. Then again, when we speak of perception by itself, there are times that the rest of the world really kinda disappears when you focus on something, be it physical or something in our mind. I guess I could say that middle apertures have something of awareness factor included, but then again some things become truly present only when they are not present (as in OOF blur).
Well, to conclude, as this is a Zeiss lens discussion thread, most of my Zeiss Jenas do have that 'presence' any way you shoot them.
P.S. Perhaps I should have written this as a separate topic
Interesting thought. I think I don't see that way, mostly because I should be wearing glasses, but I don't I just see everything a little soft most of the time, except when I look through my camera. How weird, actually, now that I think about it.
robin bush wrote:
Set-up is critical when using alternative lenses to get the very best performance.
Almost all my alternative lenses are shimmed.
Shimmed how, and for what purpose? For lenses that don't have floating elements it shouldn't make a difference in IQ (as long as they can reach infinity).
Hi AhamB,
Infinity is often not where it is supposed to be when using an adapter, whether it's cheap or expensive, there is a very good chance that the infinity setting with the adapter is not accurate therefore, by placing tape between the adapter and lens and testing will eventually result in an accurate setting. This can only be tested with the lens wide open.
For a far better explanation on how to set up alternative lenses please refer to my friend David Clapp.co.uk web site, look under articles. He goes into great detail on how to set alternative lenses up. David and I spent many hours checking and rechecking my gear as well as his own before settling for our set-ups.
Hope this helps.
Thanks to FlyPenFly, somehow I found myself shooting the Flat Iron building (NYC), 'twice' in a week ! One with ZF.2 21, the other with CY 28/f2.8. There is about a week in between the shots, hence the different sky condition.
robin bush wrote:
Hi AhamB,
Infinity is often not where it is supposed to be when using an adapter, whether it's cheap or expensive, there is a very good chance that the infinity setting with the adapter is not accurate therefore, by placing tape between the adapter and lens and testing will eventually result in an accurate setting. This can only be tested with the lens wide open.
For a far better explanation on how to set up alternative lenses please refer to my friend David Clapp.co.uk web site, look under articles. He goes into great detail on how to set alternative lenses up. David and I spent many hours checking and rechecking my gear as well as his own before settling for our set-ups.
Hope this helps.
