p.12 #1 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
Guys there are a two issues that I want to keep separate! One is the accuracy of using the AF confirm with the 35mm f/1.4 wide open (or other fast glass), and the issue of visualizing DOF in the VF.
I want to love the 5D3, but my experience was horrible when shooting the 35 f1.4 wide open - super low keeper rate!
Even with the micro-adjust it almost never nailed focus precisely. So I've decided to rent the it again and give it another go.
I would love to see shots with the 5D3 using the 35 f/1.4 wide open that are spot on so I can go out and buy a 5D3!
The other issue that I brought up because I started to think about my first Nikons, was that I personally find it surprising, that the major camera manufacturers have "sacrificed" the ability to see your DOF with lenses faster than 2.8. With all our technology and advancements, it's interesting to me that the "powers that be" made such a decision for us.
Maybe I'm totally out of touch with modern photographic trends and pro users of fast glass are in the minority. It's obvious where the masses - it's like a Toyota commercial: Zoom Zoom Zoom.
Phillipe, I'm looking forward to seeing your photos!
@rji2goleez Could you do some testing with your 35 wide open at f1.4?
p.12 #2 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
philber wrote:
Siddhu, I respectfully beg to differ. For 10 days now in Chile, I have shot both 5DII and 5DIII with ZE 25 f:2.0, 35 f:1.4 and 50 f:1.4. I have shot the 50 wide open in a rainforest where leaves are moving, at close to MFD. That is as tough as any type of shot to focus. My keeper rate for these very wide apertures with the III was at least double that of the II. Now it is difficult for me to say that I focused exclusively with the viewfinder, and thus ignored the AF confirm, because I used one but the other also helped. But what matters IMHO is the keeper rate, and, for me, it worked great....Show more →
Great to hear that the keeper rate is improving a lot with your new camera. I would love to do some photography in Chile I hope to see some photos from your trip later
p.12 #3 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
As a side discussion, could those of you shooting 5D3 please comment on how the liveview implementation is in the 5D3 compared to 5D2? I read a short blurb elsewhere that it has been improved but I have not found much real detail about it.
@Phillipe - looking forward to your samples from Chile!! (sorry if I murdered the spelling on your name, I see at least 3 different spellings on the thread and I'm confused!)
@Bob - well, you already know what I think about you. Great samples, color, and processing, BTW!
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #4 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
@ Bob and Phillipe,
Great to hear and see that the new camera actually works very good for MF with Zeiss lenses. And even improving your keeper rates. Especially good when coming from you two that already have posted so many good photos with your older 5D2s and Zeiss lenses before. Hope to see more pics later
p.12 #5 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
Siddhu wrote:
Guys there are a two issues that I want to keep separate! One is the accuracy of using the AF confirm with the 35mm f/1.4 wide open (or other fast glass), and the issue of visualizing DOF in the VF.
I want to love the 5D3, but my experience was horrible when shooting the 35 f1.4 wide open - super low keeper rate! Even with the micro-adjust it almost never nailed focus precisely. So I've decided to rent the it again and give it another go.
I would love to see shots with the 5D3 using the 35 f/1.4 wide open that are spot on so I can go out and buy a 5D3! ...Show more →
The D35/1.4 has spherical and longitudinal chromatic aberration at f/1.4, so the focus is ill-defined.
Two issues that I want to keep separate are:
- How well are the optical paths (lens-screen and lens-sensor) calibrated?
- How easy is to focus manually with a well-calibrated 5D3?
There is a good reason Canon sells washers for the 5D and 5D2.
p.12 #6 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
I think that the question for 5d2 users like me, who loves MF Zeiss lenses and fast AF lenses, is:
- move to 5D3
- stay with 5d2 + eg-s screen
- swith to Nikon D800
Till two weeks ago I thought to stay with 5d2 still for a few month; in the meantime to test 5d3 and d800 and then decide... but I was pretty sure that, after the test. I would have decided to pass to the D800
Now I am changing my mind for these reasons:
- 5d3 AF seems much better than d800 (finally Canon has done a good job with AF)... this seems to be confirmed by Lloyd Chambers tests and seems to be true also beyond the AF problem of the first batches of D800 (reagrding the different perfomance of left vs right focus points)... in fact also with the central point D800 AF doesn't look reliable (sometimes it is very accurate and sometitimes it is not... as Lloyd writes .... and I trust him, expecially when speaks bad about Nikon)
- 5d3 focus dot appears to be pretty good in helping MF, as Philippe, Bob and other fellows I trust are writing ...moreover Lloyd, which finds not reliable both Nikon and Canon focus dots, writes that Nikon has reduced the precision of the focus dot passing from d700 to d800 (he writes it as a positive point, but IMO it is a negative one)
If my personal tests will confirm these two points, I think I will go to 5d3: IMO to achieve more easily correct focus is more important than banding and DR... you can work on the noise, but a misfocused picture goes to the bin
Only one doubt remains: colors (not the gree cast, but overall colors) ... Many Nikon users say their colors are better, vivid, wonderful, and so on ... Canon users replies that also Canon colors are beatiful, but they never say that Canon colors are better ... I never tried a Nikon, but I start thinking that Nikonist could be right...
Cheers
Francesco
ps: I think it is useless to discuss about alternative non Canon/ Nikon screen (e.g. Brightscreens). Everybody here knows about them. But if we are discussing of MF with 5d3 is because many of us dont' like to use third party screens... E.g.: I have a Brightscreen, but I don't use it, because spot metering is not usable with it
p.12 #7 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
Toothwalker wrote:
The D35/1.4 has spherical and longitudinal chromatic aberration at f/1.4, so the focus is ill-defined.
Hi Toothwalker, what do you mean by the focus is "ill-defined" with the D35/1.4?
I'm able to get super sharp shots within my field of focus. My problem was when I was testing the 5D3, I had a much lower keeper rate than when I would focus manually with the 5D2 using the
EG-S screen.
p.12 #9 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
I'll be waiting for that thread. I've always wanted to know Chile, and I always enjoy your images, so it will be great to see some of it through your fine perspectives.
p.12 #10 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
Siddhu wrote:
Hi Toothwalker, what do you mean by the focus is "ill-defined" with the D35/1.4?
I'm able to get super sharp shots within my field of focus. My problem was when I was testing the 5D3, I had a much lower keeper rate than when I would focus manually with the 5D2 using the
EG-S screen.
With spherical aberration the position of the best focus may vary a bit with lens aperture. Earlier in this thread it was suggested that the stock screen of the 5D3 limits the effective (viewfinder) aperture to about f/2.8. If that is true, you are focusing at f/2.8 even if you take the picture at f/1.4.
With longitudinal chromatic aberration different colors have slightly different focus positions, hence the focus is ill-defined for polychromatic subject matter.
There is of course also the possibility that your 5D3 was poorly calibrated.
p.12 #11 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
^ Sounds like the EG-S was out of calibration for that 5DII. My 5DII is a little off. My first 5DII was even farther out of cal. That is probably why Canon decided not to have this screen as an option in the 5DIII. It would mean the mirror box and screen need to be manufactured with tighter tolerances. It could also be why users are having different experiences. It could depend on where an individual camera falls within the broad range.Canon making the 5D to the same sloppy tolerances it always has.
p.12 #12 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
pdmphoto wrote:
^ Sounds like the EG-S was out of calibration for that 5DII. My 5DII is a little off. My first 5DII was even farther out of cal. That is probably why Canon decided not to have this screen as an option in the 5DIII. It would mean the mirror box and screen need to be manufactured with tighter tolerances. It could also be why users are having different experiences. It could depend on where an individual camera falls within the broad range.Canon making the 5D to the same sloppy tolerances it always has.
You've misread my posts. I have a 90+ keeper rate shooting with my 5D2 and the EG-S screen and the 35mm f1.4 Distagon wide open at 1.4
There might have been a mis-calibration on the rental 5D3 that I was using. There is no "official"option to use anything other than the stock screen in the 5D3.
p.12 #14 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
carstenw wrote:
Wilhelm, yes, for sure the higher pixel count and pitch will result in some disappointments with some lenses. I have been planning for this for some time, and have only 24-70 and 70-200 VRII from Nikon at this point, in addition to the 60 Micro (which I wanted to sell, but which is super sweet performing on the D3, so I have been delaying). On top of this I have two Leicas (35 Lux, 180 Cron) and 5 Zeiss lenses (21, 28, 50P, 50MP, 100MP), of which I am only worried about the 50P, which I love. I do also own a 16/2.8 AF-D which I am a bit worried about, but in the worst case I will simply sell it. I barely use it, and only keep it for its uniqueness. I have to test this and see how it does before deciding....Show more →
Well some (high class) lenses performs just great on the NEX 5N with the same pixelpitch as the D800. And who knows, maybe the Nikkors will give a better experience compared to some of the EF's I had on the 7D with equivalent pixelpitch of 44MP FF.
I am just getting acquainted to the 50P/1.4 since a couple of days but on the 21MP 5D2 it performs just great (with EG-S for me) - but with the usual haze of a fast lens gives shot wideopen. I dont know how it looks on a sub-level 12MP FF so I cant tell. But unless you have a bad copy I would hesitate to let such a lens go - but again just given my short experience.
In this thread we see a lot of praise for AF-confirm shooting. That method is something that was just not possible with the 5D2 for (fast) lenses shot wideopen. With a 5D2 I find I can get acceptable result with AF-confirm with lenses below 20mm but still only stopped down. As an example, the ZE21/2.8 does not give accurate enough AF confirm for shots with the 5D2 - at least not for the copy I have. But it is supersharp if you have the time with LV.
Regardless, both the D800 and 5D3 lacks the big game changer for me, a tiltable screen. In the rest they look pretty equal to me. Apart from that Nikon flange distance blocks most alternative lenses which would demand extra ordinary other features to come close to a system switch.
The EG-S in the 5D2 is such an asset (for me) so I would need better evidence than so far to switch modus operandus to AF-confirm compared to using my eyes with the EG-S. But maybe Bob will prove that Siddhu (who seem to use cameras like me) had a bad copy. The story will continue..
p.12 #16 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
I have my 5D3 since Friday 13th April - omen? Between the CZ ZE 21, 35/1.4, 50/2, and 100/2 the 35 is the most difficult to MF for me. I tried my best after almost one and a half years of CZ use on 40D+MF screen and 5d2+Eg-S: I can understand Siddhu very well when he states he lacks the DoF visibility. It is really missing most with the 35/1.4. With the eg-s I felt quite confident to ignore the focus confirmation. With the stock screen of the 5D3 I seek the focus confirmation as I feel unsure at 1.4.
Now, I am not a pro and I am not philber, Lars, Bob Israel and the other gurus. What I noticed for myself is that seeking the focus confirmation is slow (I need to place the AF-point where I need it by hitting the multicontroller in that direction), distracting (looking when the black or red light on the AF point will turn up instead on whats behind it) and in the case of the 35/1.4 not entirely reliable. After MA the AF confirmation did not change significantly. I used the computer based LV method and the LCD method but can't say that it did really change much. the 35/1.4 is somewhat more delicate and I think that I need more practice. As previously stated, at low light the AF confirmation served me a better job than the Eg-S. Gosh, it would be marvelous to have both! The DOF viewing precision of a matte screen AND this marvelous AF system.
The other three lenses work fine. I don't have another f1.4 lens to compare but MF-ing f2 and 2.8 is easy. By sight AND by focus confirmation. Actually, I was surprised to discover how precise the AF is on the 100MP and the 50MP. At MFD, at infinity, midfield - no trouble.
With the CZ 35/1.4 only, the focus confirmation lights up twice when turning the focus ring. I.e. it seeks too! With the other there is only one position where I got FC. With the 35 there are two, close to each other but still enough to through me off. I tried to MA from near to infinity. Probably need to go the other way round and see.
Anyway, Siddhu, when you buy a 5D3 and change the Focusing screen against a brightscreen or Katzeye or similar, let me know how you go. I presume this would be a killing duo: MarkIII Af + a FS. BTW, the spot metering on my 5D3 is way off already - underexposing by 2/3 or more...
And, I am off now to order a 70-200 2.8 II - this camera deserves it at last. Joshua Ong convinced me. Or a 135/2, don't know yet.
p.12 #18 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
wfrank wrote:
Well some (high class) lenses performs just great on the NEX 5N with the same pixelpitch as the D800. And who knows, maybe the Nikkors will give a better experience compared to some of the EF's I had on the 7D with equivalent pixelpitch of 44MP FF.
I am just getting acquainted to the 50P/1.4 since a couple of days but on the 21MP 5D2 it performs just great (with EG-S for me) - but with the usual haze of a fast lens gives shot wideopen. I dont know how it looks on a sub-level 12MP FF so I cant tell. But unless you have a bad copy I would hesitate to let such a lens go - but again just given my short experience....Show more →
My copy is not bad, I have tried 3 now, I think, and mine is just like the other two. It works great on the D3, although it is a tad soft wide open as I think it is on all cameras. It is also more than sharp enough stopped down to f/4 or f/5.6, and I think it will be fine here on the D800 as well. I guess I am more worried how much the wide open and near-wide open performance will slip on a camera with 3x the resolution. However, I will try it and find out!
p.12 #19 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
Toothwalker wrote:
With spherical aberration the position of the best focus may vary a bit with lens aperture. Earlier in this thread it was suggested that the stock screen of the 5D3 limits the effective (viewfinder) aperture to about f/2.8. If that is true, you are focusing at f/2.8 even if you take the picture at f/1.4.
With longitudinal chromatic aberration different colors have slightly different focus positions, hence the focus is ill-defined for polychromatic subject matter.
There is of course also the possibility that your 5D3 was poorly calibrated.
I fail to understand how LoCA or spherical aberration can impact the focus !
LoCA means that colors have slightly different defocus behaviors, but at the focus point, all colors are on the same point! So no impact there.
Spherical aberration may impact the focus position when the aperture is closed, but the fact that the screen does not resolve more then f/2.8 does not means that the lens has been stopped down to 2.8; so no impact there either.
Siddhu, on the fact that even pro body screens do not resolve more then f/2.8, I think it is a trend that fits the usage of a majority of pros: who really cares about exactly visualising the DoF?
Pro users that have to work fast (news, wedding, sport, wildlife) just care about nailing down the focus, the aperture is often whatever happens to be to get the picture. And there are not a lot of lenses that actually go beyond 2.8. Lost of people use the L zooms, all are f/2.8. Long lenses are at best f/2.8, apart from the 135L and 200L which are f/2, only marginal difference.
The only pro lenses very open are the 24, 35, 50 and 85. When one uses these full open, it is essentially because one has not enough light, so it is essential to get the focus right and the DoF is just a by-product of obtaining the picture.
Studio and nature photgraphs have all the time to check the result on the back screen and adjust, so it is not a show stopper for them (contrary to the time of film).
I personnally like to see what I will get, so I changed my 5D2 screen to Eg-S. But what really made this necessary was the move from AF to MF lenses like the 1.4/85, where I just could not have a correct focus with the standard screen. Coming from manual focus film, it does not bother me that the screen darkens a bit more after 2.8.
p.12 #20 · 5D III for alt and MF lenses: a game changer!
feanolas wrote:
I fail to understand how LoCA or spherical aberration can impact the focus !
LoCA means that colors have slightly different defocus behaviors, but at the focus point, all colors are on the same point! So no impact there.
Using the term LoCA for defocus fringing is improper use of terminology. LoCA is the aberration where the optimum focus is at different depths for different wavelengths. Different wavelengths create different focal planes, basically. So your thinking is the wrong way round: there is no focal plane independent of wavelength. The lens is set to one focal distance, but only some wavelengths end up being in focus at the plane of the sensor and others slightly behind of in front of it.
I believe that your reasoning w.r.t. SA is incorrect as well. The focusing screen doesn't display all the peripheral rays contributing to the confusion of the best focus, so in effect it acts as an aperture.
One is the accuracy of using the AF confirm with the 35mm f/1.4 wide open (or other fast glass), and the issue of visualizing DOF in the VF.
, don't know yet.
The focusing screen doesn't display all the peripheral rays contributing to the confusion of the best focus, so in effect it acts as an aperture.