So two of the best ever fast 35s are from last century lens lineups...I really like the 'world in this lens', worldinlens, thank you.
It's a classic centre performance Leica, with huge contrast there at f2.8, and soft outers, should have very little CA wide open, very little coma, strong vignetting. IOW, perfect for these kinds of images...
The Leitax Leica-Sony mount looks very straightforward. Sony will soon have focus-friendly full frame cameras, and I have little trouble focusing the Summ-R 50/2 on the A900.
Anyone have a good one? And any ideas on a fair price for a good one? Jim's db prices are quite high, then again the CY is a big ask these days also.
question for the Bokeh experts out there:
how would you describe the bokeh in the above set of images compared to say the Zeiss 35/1.4 lens?
"busier" or more "active" versus the softer/creamier Zeiss @ 1.4
Worldinlens: were the colors/saturation pumped up at all in those images?
carstenw wrote:
Welcome! Ladies and Gentleman, from this gentleman I will buy my next lens, the 35 Lux-R, adapted for Nikon, slightly modified, with no mirror problems.
Congrats, Carsten. It's not perfect, but it's not at all a difficult lens to love.
carstenw wrote:
Welcome! Ladies and Gentleman, from this gentleman I will buy my next lens, the 35 Lux-R, adapted for Nikon, slightly modified, with no mirror problems.
Carsten, thanks! I believe that with this lens you will find a additional secret button once on your D3(X)... A "masterpiece-button" ))
bluetsunami wrote:
The blur from this lens looks real interesting. A nice mix of pleasant blurring but colors look defined in a nice impressionistic way. agent-Jon wrote:
...Worldinlens: were the colors/saturation pumped up at all in those images?
Most photos are made on the A900. And little post-processing in ACR with HSL for eyes-liked condition
The #3,6,9 and 10 from D700 and was saved "as is" in ACDSee
Color reproduction of R35/1.4 is very similar to R35/2E55 or R50/1.4E55
Aleksandr, I do not have the budget for the D3x today, but maybe in a month or two I very much look forward to using Leica lenses again. I have a series of Zeiss lenses, as you know, and they are great, but different from Leica. No replacement.
It's pretty much a sister lens to the R 80 as they behave about the same. SA softness wide open (the Leica 'glow'), sharp at F2, extremely sharp ('landscape lens' sharpness) stopped down.
I bought mine about 15 years ago and mainly used it on film. I still have the R 35/1.4 in the bizarre hope/wish/dream that one day there will be a full frame mirror less camera. "Tell him he's dreamin..." (for the Aussie "The Castle" lovers).
It's a very nice lens, soft Bokeh, not harsh. I almost bought a FF Sony just because of this lens but the Sony's don't have Live View so that's a deal breaker.
My purchase of a bunch of R lenses was based on the "bizarre hope/wish/dream" that Panasonic would release an R-mount compatible mirrorless body at Photokina in 2010. When that didn't happen, the Elmarit-R 19/2.8 and Summilux-R 35/1.4 went "straight to the pool room", where they now await the release of the fullframe mirrorless A99. (I did get some lovely images with the 35/1.4 on an R8 but dealing with film was too much trouble once I had a Contax C/Y 35/1.4.)
genji wrote:
My purchase of a bunch of R lenses was based on the "bizarre hope/wish/dream" that Panasonic would release an R-mount compatible mirrorless body at Photokina in 2010. When that didn't happen, the Elmarit-R 19/2.8 and Summilux-R 35/1.4 went "straight to the pool room", where they now await the release of the fullframe mirrorless A99. (I did get some lovely images with the 35/1.4 on an R8 but dealing with film was too much trouble once I had a Contax C/Y 35/1.4.)
You know, it's possible to flip the mirror up in a 5D2 (Live View) and fit a lens which would otherwise foul. Of course you have to remember not to switch off Live View if you do this, so it's a fair pain in the ass to do, but it's certainly doable. I've not been that desperate to use the R 35/1.4. But I'm getting there. I also have an R 24/2.8 which I quite like but can't use for the same reason.
Yeah, I'm over film too. Don't know why I keep my film bodies, about 3 Leica R's. Oh, that's right, 'cos they're worth sweet FA.
As an aside. I drove to the house used in 'The Castle' not long ago. It's only about a suburb away from where I live, probably less, a couple of Km. Damn developers where building a unit in the back. Anyway...
carstenw wrote:
Welcome! Ladies and Gentleman, from this gentleman I will buy my next lens, the 35 Lux-R, adapted for Nikon, slightly modified, with no mirror problems.
Carsten, are you sure? I don't want to spoil a mutually good deal, or the hopes for a great lens but I have a question about the performance: An MTF chart shows weak borders and corners also when stopped down. For me the borders doesn't matter wide open but judging from some of your images I think you sometimes want to have sharp center and borders, no? This may make the lens less versatile than wished. (Well, not the borders really looking again, but there is this significant dip around 15mm out from the center.)
Yes, I expect that. I am not intending to use it for sharp everywhere stuff. I have other lenses for this (28/2, 50/1.4, 50MP). I want a special look. As long as most of the frame is sharp by f/4-f/5.6 that is fine.
))