charles.K wrote:
I have just read on the LUF forums, that someone has noted that the Metabones works better than the Novaflex adapter!! I have both, and I find the tolerances better with the Metabones from Sony, and there maybe the issue of internal dimensions that may affect some of the corner smearing? Interesting!
Can you possibly post a link to that conversation?
I've been interested in the question of adapter width (as well as inner diameter) and potential impact on performance with some lenses.
Dec 15, 2013 at 09:23 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
I have a Minolta MD 35/1.8 in the mail. Now you are saying it doesn't work from 3m and up? Oops. But it worked very well at longer distances on film, didn't it?
The CV35/1.2 is OK. The FA31/1.8 Limited is OK. None of them perfect, they will both require more PP than the RX1 (not always but in many situations). The Summilux-M 35/1.4 ASPH (non-FLE) make very beautiful images but doesn't work for all situations. The focus shift may be annoying or not depending on your "shoot-flow".
I'll try the Minolta when it arrives. If it doesn't work I'll have to go back to the Voigtländer 35/1.2 or skip the A7 for for 35mm focal length and just stick to my RX1. ...Show more →
Hi Jonas,
The Minolta MD 35 f/1.8 didn't work for more than 3 meters on my Canon 5D and 5D MKII because it hit the mirror. It should be fine on the A7(r). It was great on my Canon 50D (with a crop sensor) and on that it was nice all the way out to infinity as I remember. I think you will like the bokeh and the character of the lens. It will probably have some CA that will be noticeable at times and will be slightly soft wide open, but I expect it to be a very nice lens on the A7(r). I am eager to see how yours works out, so please post some shots when you get it.
The 35 M-Summilux ASPH (non-FLE) does really intrigue me, even though I won't be able to afford it for quite awhile. I am not worried about the focus shift because I will stop down to the aperture I want to shoot at before focussing. I typically do this with alt lenses even with an optical finder and I figure this will work even better with an EVF. I also assume that the focus shift means a fair bit of uncorrected spherical aberrations which should really enhance the bokeh.
Sorry I was confusing about the Minolta MD 35 f/1.8.
Steve Spencer wrote:
am not worried about the focus shift because I will stop down to the aperture I want to shoot at before focussing.
There is no issue of focus shift with EVFs. You stop down to the desired aperture and the EVF raises the gain; what you see, is what you get. That's the marvelous thing about it.
freddy_hayek wrote:
There is no issue of focus shift with EVFs. You stop down to the desired aperture and the EVF raises the gain; what you see, is what you get. That's the marvelous thing about it.
Ah Freddy, I think both Steve (obviously) and I (I mentioned something about the "shooting-flow") understand that. I have done it that way since November 2008 (when the Panasonic G1 came) but five years later I still prefer lenses without focus shift.
Steve Spencer wrote:
The Minolta MD 35 f/1.8 didn't work for more than 3 meters on my Canon 5D and 5D MKII because it hit the mirror. (...) I am eager to see how yours works out, so please post some shots when you get it.
(...)
Sorry I was confusing about the Minolta MD 35 f/1.8.
OK Steve, I get it. Those pesky mirrors... I recall shaving of parts from the 50 Lux-R E60 before using it on the 5D. I'll get the Rokkor, and hopefully an adapter as well, Wednesday or Thursday and will be able to post something next weekend.Let me know if you have any wishes about targets or so for the initial try-out.
Jonas B wrote:
OK Steve, I get it. Those pesky mirrors... I recall shaving of parts from the 50 Lux-R E60 before using it on the 5D. I'll get the Rokkor, and hopefully an adapter as well, Wednesday or Thursday and will be able to post something next weekend.Let me know if you have any wishes about targets or so for the initial try-out.
let me know if you end up not liking it. i've been looking for one of the 49mm filter thread versions for a long time.
p.148 #10 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
Sorry if someone mentioned this already. I have not followed this thread since page 100.
According to Cosina, the VM-E (NEX version) has lens-camera “kerare” issue. I am not sure if the word “kerare” only means vingetting (dark corner), or the meaning for the word can also include corner smearing. They mention that kerare problems have been confirmed with longer lenses (75-85mm) with f1.8-f4 aperture. They did not mention they performed tests with wides. Supposedly, Nikon-E adapter has the same problems, too (including wides).
After following this thread, I learned from some people that the sensor toppings (cover glass, filter thickness) can cause smearing. Color shift can be caused by non-offset micro lenses. Thank you for that.
But I thought that some has also mentioned the quality of adapters can also contribute to corner smearing. Well, I thought I saw that, but I cannot go thru all the pages to find that. It could have been in other a7/a7r threads. Or maybe I am mistaken.
Cosina says the new VM-E (close focus version with extension feature) does not have the same problem with “kerare.” The new one either has not kerare issue or at least the kerare issue is alleviated.
Maybe newer adapter will work better with corner smearing issue? I am not sure. Just wanted to add this to this thread.
p.148 #11 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
shogo73 wrote:
Sorry if someone mentioned this already. I have not followed this thread since page 100.
According to Cosina, the VM-E (NEX version) has lens-camera “kerare” issue. I am not sure if the word “kerare” only means vingetting (dark corner), or the meaning for the word can also include corner smearing. They mention that kerare problems have been confirmed with longer lenses (75-85mm) with f1.8-f4 aperture. They did not mention they performed tests with wides. Supposedly, Nikon-E adapter has the same problems, too (including wides).
After following this thread, I learned from some people that the sensor toppings (cover glass, filter thickness) can cause smearing. Color shift can be caused by non-offset micro lenses. Thank you for that.
But I thought that some has also mentioned the quality of adapters can also contribute to corner smearing. Well, I thought I saw that, but I cannot go thru all the pages to find that. It could have been in other a7/a7r threads. Or maybe I am mistaken.
Cosina says the new VM-E (close focus version with extension feature) does not have the same problem with “kerare.” The new one either has not kerare issue or at least the kerare issue is alleviated.
Maybe newer adapter will work better with corner smearing issue? I am not sure. Just wanted to add this to this thread. ...Show more →
Thanks, this is interesting -- though I'm not 100% I'm following you.
You seemed to say the VM-E causes “kerare” -- and then that the VM-E does not cause “kerare” -- did you mean some other adapter with the first reference to VM-E?
Where did they say the two adapters behaved differently?
p.148 #12 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
I said one is the NEX version (crop). The other one is the newer one, supposedly, designed for the full frame E mount with the extension feature. Kinda like the Hawks Factory one.
Edit:
See the link in my earlier post. Not much info tho…
p.148 #13 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
Oh, I forgot to mention. I would not rely on the Google translation for the word “kerare.” I am originally from Japan and I do not recognize this word. Maybe it is a photography specific word? I noticed that a lot of people in the Alt Forum live in Japan. I was thinking they can tell us what the word exactly means.
Even if it isn’t photography specific, I still would not rely on the translation. Because just as Webster or Oxford dictionaries would not give us the definition we are looking for the word “smearing,” I doubt that Google translation can give us proper translation (for us).
BTW, just for fun…
The word boke generally refers to blurred mental state. The word is often used to refer to or describe people suffering from dementia or Alzheimer’s disease .
p.148 #14 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
shogo73 wrote:
BTW, just for fun…
The word boke generally refers to blurred mental state. The word is often used to refer to or describe people suffering from dementia or Alzheimer’s disease .
p.148 #15 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
shogo73 wrote:
(...)
BTW, just for fun…
The word boke generally refers to blurred mental state. The word is often used to refer to or describe people suffering from dementia or Alzheimer’s disease .
Do you have a source for that? I thought it was a Japanese word for used to describe background parts of a painting? I see it spelled bokeh more often than boke. When googling bokeh the whole first page shows links to photo related material, the top hit is Wikipedia. Boke may be something different and perhaps I don't understand the "fun" - is it that a similar spelled word doesn't mean what we are talking about?
p.148 #16 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
As far as I know, that is right, it means something like blur, and is normally used to describe a fuzzy mental state. The Japanese term for background blur in a photo is something a bit longer, but I forget what exactly (boke-aji?). One of the two (?) people who brought the word into daily use in the west is blogger Mike Johnston (the online photographer), and although the word would normally be transliterated boke or bo-ke, they chose to add an 'h' to the end to get the pronunciation closer for most people who read it the first time (people would read something that rhymes with bloke or broke, instead of bo-ke). Personally, I write boke, because I think people should just learn to read properly, and the language should be left correct.
p.148 #18 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
Guys…
That’s a tough one to show/prove. First… You have to use the Japanese word for boke and use Japanese Google. And I think you would have to be a person living in Japan or have to a person raised in Japan, i.e. me.
Boke (or bokeh) can be written in many forms in Japanese. Using different characters and such. So I would not even recommend trying looking up.
Bokeh is also a type of flower. I did not know that till a few min ago when I, myself, looked up the word using Japanese Google. I bet most Japanese people would not even know that either… unless they are into flowers.
Like I said “generally.” I meant: if you heard that word on TV in Japan; or heard that word from people in Japan “in a daily life situation…” it refers to blurred mental state. Majority of Japanese people will agree with me here, I think. Even people who are into photos. You kinda have to just trust me…
If someone told you that you are bokeh-ed or bokeh-ing, that means you are or being an idiot/forgetful.
But this is off topic.
By "fun," I just meant: hey, this is just for contributing to your trivial knowledge.
When I was informed correct pronunciation for Summicron, Summarit… (Z vs S sound). I thought that was fun.
p.148 #19 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
shogo73 wrote:
Guys…
That’s a tough one to show/prove. First… You have to use the Japanese word for boke and use Japanese Google. And I think you would have to be a person living in Japan or have to a person raised in Japan, i.e. me.
Boke (or bokeh) can be written in many forms in Japanese. Using different characters and such. So I would not even recommend trying looking up.
Bokeh is also a type of flower. I did not know that till a few min ago when I, myself, looked up the word using Japanese Google. I bet most Japanese people would not even know that either… unless they are into flowers.
Like I said “generally.” I meant: if you heard that word on TV in Japan; or heard that word from people in Japan “in a daily life situation…” it refers to blurred mental state. Majority of Japanese people will agree with me here, I think. Even people who are into photos. You kinda have to just trust me…
If someone told you that you are bokeh-ed or bokeh-ing, that means you are or being an idiot/forgetful.
But this is off topic.
By "fun," I just meant: hey, this is just for contributing to your trivial knowledge.
When I was informed correct pronunciation for Summicron, Summarit… (Z vs S sound). I thought that was fun.
Edited for typo. ...Show more →
+1
I really appreciate it.
Since the first time I learnt the word bokeh I find its origin funny.
I myself am Cantonese native and cannot bare how the Americans used Chinese culture/language/verbals incorrectly throughout different circumstances. Eg movies, or even food (eg. fortune cookie)
And by the way, I've been to Iran and heard how the natives pronounce Iran. But when I came to US people are "correcting" me how I should pronounce Iran.
And I will say all these are so funny. Both funny haha and funny peculiar.
p.148 #20 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
I'd bet they are just talking about the adapter diameter.
Funny enough the cheap ones are fine with huge diameters, but the Hawks 2.5 does vignette a number of lenses. Hence the new and otherwise improved v3 hawks.
Since cosina is making expensive adapters, I suspect it's a similar issue.
