I'm not sure I'd go as far as saying that they're working on it… I did write to them to ask whether it would be possible and they replied with the same answer. I guess it's the standard reply they give… I wouldn't hold my breath (although it'd be really great if it happened)
I realize the heading is "very best wides" but am puzzled why not merely here but in other Nex threads the Color Snapshot Skopar 25 f4 or the M mount later version is never mentioned one way or another.
The lack of rangefinder coupling of the original is not a problem on the Nex.
Is it that few have this lens in either mount or is there something inferior about the image quality and/or color cast on the Nex? Its pricing has been and continues to be more than reasonable in comparison to other rf alternatives.
artur5 wrote:
I don't think that the performance of the $1200 Zeiss 24/1.8 will be that much better than my $220 Canon FD 24/2. Not for the pictures I've seen so far and the ZM 25/2.8 on a NEX-5 /5N/7/ seems to be corner challenged,.. No free lunch.
I'm warming to the Zeiss ZA 24 E mount as I see more, but I know what you mean. It doesn't seem to grab attention like some of their lenses do. Maybe we need to look at the lens in the hands of other photographers though. On the other hand you get decent AF with it, if that matters at all for someone. And it shouldn't suffer the vignetting, colour cast, and edge performance problems the ZM25 has to contend with.
Being NEXless now I just wanted to pop in and say that the ZM 25/2.8 did not thrill me on the NEX. It was great, like any Zeiss or any lens can be, closer in but for distant landscapes or where corner and edge clarity really mattered, it was definitely less good than you'd want for $1,000+ lens. It isn't the fault of the lens of course.
My plan was to sell it in favour of the ZA E24 but in the end moved to the GXR and the ZM25 shines there so I'm glad I hung on to it. Still, even there I've got to get past how I felt about it on the NEX and spend a bunch of time with it to make sure it'll be a keeper in my bag.
jmiro wrote:
I realize the heading is "very best wides" but am puzzled why not merely here but in other Nex threads the Color Snapshot Skopar 25 f2.5 or the M mount later version is never mentioned one way or another.
The lack of rangefinder coupling of the original is not a problem on the Nex.
Is it that few have this lens in either mount or is there something inferior about the image quality and/or color cast on the Nex? Its pricing has been and continues to be more than reasonable in comparison to other rf alternatives.
The Skopar 25/4 has been mentioned only a few times in the NEX images thread. I'm not sure if Uhoh had/has this lens, other than him one other member commented that it was the only Skopar he had tried that didn't perform well.
I've got the CV 21/4 and it's a nice lens. I wouldn't call it excellent on the 5N. Could be sharper in the corners and has a little color shift. It's better than the Sony 18-55.
The ZM 18 and 25 both look better, but they're different animals as far as I'm concerned (bigger, heavier, much more expensive). I'd be interested in seeing the CV 21/4 go head to head with either of those to get an idea how much better they are.
I had a Skopar 25/4 on my NEX 5N for a little while and it's a decent little lens...it just didn't really wow me. It was actually not bad in terms of being sharp, but I replaced it in favor of a Contax G 28 which of course a more impressive lens. The cool thing about the Skopar was its size...it is absolutely tiny and weighs almost nothing which makes it very appealing if you're after a small package. But I did not really like the focusing tab, especially with the short throw, I found critical focusing with it on a NEX a bit awkward.
I've not used the Skopar 25/4, so take this with a grain of salt, but, by looking at the lens diagram for it, I'd guess that corner issues are going to be there on NEX. Looks like it would have a pretty high angle of incidence at the sensor edges.
I've not used the Skopar 25/4, so take this with a grain of salt, but, by looking at the lens diagram for it, I'd guess that corner issues are going to be there on NEX. Looks like it would have a pretty high angle of incidence at the sensor edges.
it's much easier to find and cheaper than the 28/3.5. A cv 15 + 25 + ? would be a great backpacking or daylight lens, and I suspect the 25 would be a good street lens. I always wanted one.
it's much easier to find and cheaper than the 28/3.5. A cv 15 + 25 + ? would be a great backpacking or daylight lens, and I suspect the 25 would be a good street lens. I always wanted one.
Can really get a sense of how it performs at the edges in that link, other than the obvious purple shift on the old NEX-5. I know the user says it is good at the edges at f8, but I'm still curious.
From those DPR shots it looks like there could be some issues, others look 'ok'. Strangely I thought the verticals all looked sharper along the top border, where the horizontals look worse. Especially the shots 3552 and 3557... the details in those leaves and top edge of the building look smeared.
Well, here I am visiting this thread again, hoping to glean something that I might have missed earlier.
I'm a bit frustrated that the kit lens is as good as it is from 21-28mm, and that there isn't a better lens in that focal length available that's a) smaller, b) lighter, or c) sub $1000.
The Contax G is the only lens that I can think of that seems to fit all of the criteria, but I just didn't like the adapter-focusing experience. Here's to hoping somebody figures out a better way to adapt these to the NEX.
The CV 21/4 is what I have now to fill this gap, and I think at best it's equal to the 18-55 kit when it comes to sharpness, better CA control, better distortion control (to my eyes, I don't have any numbers), better size, better user experience. At the end of the day just not a great landscape lens, but 'ok' I suppose.
I'm trying to build a kit that shares the same mount and same filters so I can minimize what I take when I go backpacking (i.e. one adapter, one CP, and one ND). What I've got so far is: CV 21/4, CV 35/2.5, and CV 90/3.5, the latter two are the better lenses on the NEX. All share 39mm filter.
I located a CV 15 and will have it in my hands after the holidays, I'm hoping it's better than the 21 but I don't know if it can replace that FL for me.
I'm feeling tempted by the ZM 21/4.5 and 25/2.8 although they don't really fit most of my criteria. The 21 seems a little sharper in the corners on the NEX from what I've seen so far. If anyone has any further thoughts or samples from the ZM 21 and 25 please share!
FWIW, what I do for filters is get step up rings for all of my rangefinder glass, so that all of my lenses take a 49mm filter. I leave the step up rings attached to my lenses all of the time, because they act as a mini-hood that protects the front element a little more, and I can use 51mm push on caps, so the overall length with the cap on isn't any more than using a standard cap without the step up rings attached. Of course, my CV 15 doesn't have any filter threads, but I'm going to look into making some kind of solution for that.
p.s. The step up rings also block the silly chrome front ring on CV and ZM lenses, which can cause flare issues. Also, when I set the camera down, the step up ring is leaned on, rather than the front of the lens, so it protects it from scratches. It's a nice $5 solution.
douglasf13 wrote:
FWIW, what I do for filters is get step up rings for all of my rangefinder glass...Of course, my CV 15 doesn't have any filter threads, but I'm going to look into making some kind of solution for that.
I do the same thing, except I put a UV filter on and then a step down ring. So far, I've used rangefinder lenses on crop sensors.
I will probably try installing a 39mm filter frame on my CV15 somehow.
douglasf13 wrote:
FWIW, what I do for filters is get step up rings for all of my rangefinder glass, so that all of my lenses take a 49mm filter. I leave the step up rings attached to my lenses all of the time, because they act as a mini-hood that protects the front element a little more, and I can use 51mm push on caps, so the overall length with the cap on isn't any more than using a standard cap without the step up rings attached. Of course, my CV 15 doesn't have any filter threads, but I'm going to look into making some kind of solution for that.
p.s. The step up rings also block the silly chrome front ring on CV and ZM lenses, which can cause flare issues. Also, when I set the camera down, the step up ring is leaned on, rather than the front of the lens, so it protects it from scratches. It's a nice $5 solution....Show more →
this is what i do to, though i don't keep them on all the time for my smallest lenses since i don't use filters often.
sebboh wrote:
this is what i do to, though i don't keep them on all the time for my smallest lenses since i don't use filters often.
Yeah, I rarely use filters, but I keep the step up rings always on, because, with push on caps, they don't add any extra length compared to the regular pinch caps sans step down ring. In fact, most regular pinch caps are actually a little deeper than a step up ring with a push on cap. The chrome filter ring on ZM lenses is just asking to be a flare issue!
inglis wrote:
From Edgars Kalnins from post 20,
I have heard that conurus is working on an AF adapter for contax G for use on NEX. If it is reliable it might tip the balance towards G. An interesting option for me seems the old Contarex 21mm f4.5. To my surprise I discovered that it is a biogon and, I presume, goes deep inside the lens body. That would explain the special viewfinder. Please, correct me if I am wrong here. Could make a well made and compact 21mm!
Here is Conurus's reply from this morning:
Hi John,
Thank you for your new product suggestion. We value your input but we are not able to confirm, deny or comment on anything about our future product plans....Show more →
If you allow me to clarify on our reply a bit, we started to give a standard reply to all new product suggestions/requests.
To give you some background information, our original Contax N to Canon EF mount modification took almost 2 years to develop, from conception to first customer shipment. By the time we ship our Canon EF to Sony NEX adapter, it will have taken 1.5 years to develop, again from conception to first customer shipment.
We remained silent until the very last minute for Contax N. Our work on Sony NEX is made known to the world about halfway through. Based on these past 2 experiences we conclude that it is best to remain silent throughout most of the development cycle. The downside is we won't benefit from end-user input early on, but the upside is that customer frustration with waiting is minimized. Customer disappointment is the greatest if a product is annouced and subsequently delayed or cancelled. We can minimize that by not letting anyone know until we are ready or almost ready to ship. With hard work, we have earned a solid reputation among customers over the last 5 years on innovation and workmanship, but the #1 complaint our valued patrons have, which unfortunately we are struggling with, is just one word: 'waiting'.
Your product request emails are very useful input for us to make a decision on what to work on next. There are some recurring questions a lot of potential customers ask. If enough people are asking for the same product, we would know about it, and take action, even though we are unable to communicate whether we will be working on it or not.
Our practical advice to the customers is to base all your purchase decisions solely on what is available on the market today, but never on a future promise, roadmap, annoucement, or plan of any company (including ourselves).
Thank you for your understanding. Hope this makes things clear.
Start a bit lower than the top of the page. He talks about the performance of these on film and compares most to current and older Leica versions that are often compared in this thread.
My experience is limited to the 15/4.5, 50/3.5 and 75/2.5 both on film and on Nex 5 and 5N. My copies lead me to agree with his experiences of the 50 and 75 but I think my 15 may be a better sample than his.
Start a bit lower than the top of the page. He talks about the performance of these on film and compares most to current and older Leica versions that are often compared in this thread.
My experience is limited to the 15/4.5, 50/3.5 and 75/2.5 both on film and on Nex 5 and 5N. My copies lead me to agree with his experiences of the 50 and 75 but I think my 15 may be a better sample than his.
I've read some of Puts' reviews, however the group here has a lot of combined experience which I think gives a better perspective than any one person's, especially when it comes to the NEX 5 and 5N which have shown to be different animals in terms of which lenses work well and which don't quite.
The CV 15/4.5 seems to have a good overall approval by 5N users. Everyone seems to agree it's sharp, gets color shift on the edges, and works better on the 5N than on the FF Leica's.
The user samples of the ZM 21/4.5 looks pretty good to my eye, but none of the few full size images posted here have discernible details to scrutinize in the corners.
douglasf13 wrote:
Yeah, I rarely use filters, but I keep the step up rings always on, because, with push on caps, they don't add any extra length compared to the regular pinch caps sans step down ring. In fact, most regular pinch caps are actually a little deeper than a step up ring with a push on cap. The chrome filter ring on ZM lenses is just asking to be a flare issue!
yeah, i don't use pinch caps for that reason, and the fear that they'll come off in a pocket or my wife's purse. all my lenses have metal screw on caps, so a step ring is a noticeable increase in size.
