Oops... I looked at that one, then somehow forgot about it. I need to revisit the others again I guess. It is hard to quantify how much better one if vs. the other.
What will be a good alternative lens to the NEX 16mm + NEX 0.75X wide adapter to get 12mm (18mm equivalent) or wider FOV for the 5N that is not an fisheye?
A.Y. wrote:
What will be a good alternative lens to the NEX 16mm + NEX 0.75X wide adapter to get 12mm (18mm equivalent) or wider FOV for the 5N that is not an fisheye?
CV 12mm and sigma 8-16 aps-c in alpha mount come to mind.
Jacob D wrote:
The Contax G glass has an almost instantly recognizable rendering. Most of the time when I see the excellent photos posted by members here I can tell if they are either the Contax G 28 or 45 before I read their comments. I guess this is due to their high microcontrast, but others would know better than me.
For me, focusing the Contax lenses on the adapter left me cold. The Fotodiox adapter I have is an 'ok' size but the release lever is in the wrong place for my focusing grip. Focus is a little rough and occasionally hangs up a bit. The Metabones adapter focus smoother but takes up too much space on the camera body....Show more →
I agree with everything you say......I am lucky to have a Fotodiox adapter that doesn't "hang". Also, I have perfected that slight in and out body rocking motion that allows for a few more keepers.
Jacob D wrote:
The Contax G glass has an almost instantly recognizable rendering. Most of the time when I see the excellent photos posted by members here I can tell if they are either the Contax G 28 or 45 before I read their comments. I guess this is due to their high microcontrast, but others would know better than me. The CV lenses that I own don't draw the same but they have their own look which I also like. More punch to the colors than Leica and less contrast than Zeiss is how I would describe it. What I really like about the CV lenses though is how they handle, and their tiny size.
For me, focusing the Contax lenses on the adapter left me cold. The Fotodiox adapter I have is an 'ok' size but the release lever is in the wrong place for my focusing grip. Focus is a little rough and occasionally hangs up a bit. The Metabones adapter focus smoother but takes up too much space on the camera body. If someone comes up with an adapter that is easy to use and ergonomically a good fit I would be more inclined to give the Contax lenses a more serious try. I'm sure the CZ G 28/2.8 must qualify as "one of the very best wides for the 5N"....Show more →
I have never had CV lenses, but I like what I have seen of their fast rangefinders. I use kipon adapter with Contax G and focusing is good for a "deliberate" style of shooting. I am not in rush and I am ready to have inconveniences for the sake of using these inexpensive lenses. The adapter is fairly smooth, it does not hang up noticeably.
Edgars Kalnins wrote:
Great pics Rich! Is there an "agreed" way of processing the files coming out of G and NEX combination? Anyone can recommend a cheap raw processor?
Edgars, I've found the default rendering in Capture One Six to be excellent. Of course, there's a 30 day free trial and you'll be fine with the basic version.
Edgars Kalnins wrote:
Great pics Rich! Is there an "agreed" way of processing the files coming out of G and NEX combination? Anyone can recommend a cheap raw processor?
Edgars......I only use LR3. Curious what others would recommend.
philber wrote:
Uhoh, this is just for you. I had so much fun shooting from the Paris Wheel that I waited for a clear day, went back up, and shot both sides. Here is a picture of the other side, with the Champs Elysées and the Arc de Triomphe. Not as interesting IMHO, but the clear sky makes it even more of a challenge for colour shift. AFAIAC there is simply none. And the amount of small detail is mind-boggling. Enjoy your new lens!
Mild vignetting compared to the wide bunch in general and I can't see the shift--most important the edges seem very good. It can take the place of both the 16 and the 21 for daylight work
I had to pay 1110 for one that is supposedly like new--I'd imagine a patient person could find one for 900. That price was only 15USD short of my max at gixen--so I barely took it.
At some point we are going to see more results from the leica glass. One that would be really intertesting--I'm sure someone has already mentioned it-- is the WATE 16-18-21 which is only 30 grams heavier than the ZM 18.
a mere 6k, the same price as a 21 summilux. I'm sure there is a lurker out there who has one or the other---
I'm not sure what your price range is but LR is a bargain for everything it does. It should be pretty easy to find at $150 or less; there seem to be sales a few times a year. The lowest I've ever seen it was $89 (about a month ago). So add me as a +1 to everyone who mentioned LR.
philber wrote:
Uhoh, how is it that "all these 21s" could have this problem and not the ZM 18 ?
Not my area of expertise, but the ZM 18 is a distagon (retrofocus) lens, so by design I believe the exit pupil is farther from the film/sensor plane, thus alleviating the smearing/color shift problems.
As for the ZM 21/4.5 possibly being another exception, I don't think so. Maybe there is evidence to the contrary that I haven't seen, but that lens is probably one of the worst suited ZM's for use on a NEX. I am pretty sure Zeiss even states somewhere that the lens should not be used on the M9.
I know I should buy a decent RAW software but so far I have not spend a penny on photography soft and almost all of it on lenses (plus old cameras). I hoped there was a free software that was nearly as good as LR and others.
Edgars Kalnins wrote:
I know I should buy a decent RAW software but so far I have not spend a penny on photography soft and almost all of it on lenses (plus old cameras). I hoped there was a free software that was nearly as good as LR and others.
If you're looking for free, you can try Raw Therapee:
I have an older 28 elmarit from the 80's, which also never really shifted on the n5---made pretty good edges too, but the little CV 28/3.5 blasted it in the centers. It was not quite fast enough for easy use indoors on the n5, but is prolly OK with n5n
The Elmarit 28 v 3 was the gateway drug that let me to the Elmarit 24 ASPH, and I agree, it was very well behaved on the original 5.
Edgar, Just buy LR3, you see deals quite frequently. Adobe finally got on top of the Sony raw files and developed NR and capture sharpening algorithms that are competitive with the excellent small developers, and are much better than earlier LR/ACR versions.
RT is not up to snuff, being unstable and quirky, though in experienced hands, can do very well; for a newcomer to raw software it could usher in a world of pain. Software of a high quality is a necessity component of image production these days, if you want to get the best from your lenses it's worth the short term pain when you see the results. This situation will not go away, but will intensify. If you go Adobe, buy a user guide from one of the Adobe insiders, who know the intent of each tool intimately and just read the sections on raw processing - Martin Evening is my recommended guy, despite a clinical writing style...then gradually learn your own tweaks in time.
With Adobe, you then gain access to the large body of assembled wisdom in using the s/ware, rapid profile updates...and your images will appear 'regular' to eveybody else, because LR/ACR is what 90+% of them use, and therefore what most customers see as 'idealised' commercial images.
Thank you again for the advice. I have to check if I m still eligible for the student version - my graduation ceremony is later this months. I tried a free software when Nex was young and, to my big disappointment, discovered that shooting JPEG got better results than my conversions! I quite like the free canon dpp I still use for 30D, may be mediocre, but costs nothing and is simple.
I will check the Raw therapee! There was a tip on the board that one one get DXO for e 2.50 - is it worth it?
