alwang wrote:
Can't wait for the results: I just bought a C/Y 28/2.8, thinking it might be a good wide for a future A7r.
Done deal!
I hope they aren't stupid and forbid us to put cards in the camera at this late date, but I have seen some comments from various places around the world recently where exactly this restriction was placed. Maybe lay people are not to be trusted.
jcolwell wrote:
It's a good lens for any camera you can put it on.
Yeah, I'm not even committed yet to buying an A7 or A7r. For the time being, I'd like to do a direct comparison between the C/Y 28/2.8 and the Contax G28 on a NEX-5N, to satisfy my own curiosity.
What the article in PC Mag does do is back up Steve Huff's contention in his preliminary testing that the a7 is better than the a7r for avoiding colour shift with WA lenses. The writer compares the two cameras to the Nex 5-N and Nex 7 in this regard. Increasingly I'm coming round to the view that the a7 is the practical choice unless one is going to be making very large images. coffeeshakes wrote:
sadly - nothing new to see here, move along.
waterden wrote:
What the article in PC Mag does do is back up Steve Huff's contention in his preliminary testing that the a7 is better than the a7r for avoiding colour shift with WA lenses. The writer compares the two cameras to the Nex 5-N and Nex 7 in this regard. Increasingly I'm coming round to the view that the a7 is the practical choice unless one is going to be making very large images.
We still don't know which one of the a7 and a7R that gives the least smearing and problems with curved field. If the a7 is better even there, I see no reason personally to buy the a7R. For example, from my shooting with the 35/1.2 Nokon and a7R I never got as sharp corners as Ron Scheffler did with the same lens on the a7. Though I don't want to draw any conclusions yet, since I didn't realise that peaking gave me many misfocused images (still fairly sharp in the middle though).
Makten wrote:
We still don't know which one of the a7 and a7R that gives the least smearing and problems with curved field. If the a7 is better even there, I see no reason personally to buy the a7R. For example, from my shooting with the 35/1.2 Nokon and a7R I never got as sharp corners as Ron Scheffler did with the same lens on the a7. Though I don't want to draw any conclusions yet, since I didn't realise that peaking gave me many misfocused images (still fairly sharp in the middle though).
Didn't Ron use version II? There's a a huge difference between the 2 versions as far as I know.
Makten wrote:
I used version II, but I don't know if Ron did. However, from the A/B tests I've seen, there is little or no difference between them optically.
I just checked, Ron used version II as well. If I remember correctly, this version has much better WO performance, but I never tried any myself, so I will have to trust you on that
waterden wrote:
This is an excellent synopsis. As I said I have a copy of the M-Rokkor, the latest CLE version as stated on its box but nowhere does the lens itself say CLE. However, the serial number is on the barrel as you say.
Mine just arrived! Can't wait to take it for a spinb
Nov 07, 2013 at 02:48 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Jeff Kott wrote:
With K to E adapter, the Pentax 31/1.8 is almost exactly the same size as the CV 35/1.2 with M to E adapter, but significantly lighter (and slower).
And it is noticeably wider, 31 vs. 35 may not seem like much, but I notice the difference. I had them figured to be about the same size too. I am actually thinking seriously about getting both the Pentax 31 and the CV 35 f/1.2. The Pentax as an all around lens and the CV for shallow depth of field and low light portraits. I don't mind the size,
edwardkaraa wrote:
I just checked, Ron used version II as well. If I remember correctly, this version has much better WO performance, but I never tried any myself, so I will have to trust you on that
Ed, also, version II also focuses closer. I had version II and it was a sound performer.
edwardkaraa wrote:
I just checked, Ron used version II as well. If I remember correctly, this version has much better WO performance, but I never tried any myself, so I will have to trust you on that
I have owned both versions. I could see no real difference between them. I too have read reports talking about v2 having higher contrast wide open but, seriously, I think that is a kind of wishful thinking. I think the RF forum was split between those seeing a difference and those not noticing it.
The size is the same (maybe v1 is about one or two millimeters shorter.
The only really difference is the MFD. Considering the lens performs worse and worse the closer you get (when used on a Nex-5 that was) one can say it isn't much of an advantage (but can also not be a drawback).
Anyone interested in a comparison between the FA31/1.8 and the second version of the 35/1.2 used on mentioned Nex.5 may have a look at this small review called "First look at..." I made two years ago. Sure, the Nex-5 is an outdated and crop sensor camera but you may be interested anyway.
waterden wrote:
What the article in PC Mag does do is back up Steve Huff's contention in his preliminary testing that the a7 is better than the a7r for avoiding colour shift with WA lenses. The writer compares the two cameras to the Nex 5-N and Nex 7 in this regard. Increasingly I'm coming round to the view that the a7 is the practical choice unless one is going to be making very large images.
I posted the link before I realized he no samples up.
Colorshift is moot issue. Smearing is really all we care about.
Brian Smith swears the zm18 has very good edges. Obviously we are going to have to see the evidence.
As to the cv35/1.2 versions. If anything the second version would be the compromise, because it became impossible to continue the first version due to sourcing.
However I never could see any difference in actual images.
michaelwatkins wrote:
I've lost track. Do we have a WA RF lens winner for the A7r, yet, in the range of 20 to 25ish? Anything that doesn't cost > 1K$ ?
I'm taking my C/Y Distagon 28/2.8 off to see the A7r tonight. It's not RF glass but isn't huge either, and I'm hoping to at least be able to rely on it for the interim.
A couple other locals have contacted me so I know some other RF lenses will be there. Sure wish I still had my ZM25 and ZM35/2 to check out. Fingers crossed someone else of like mind will be there tonight or at Sunday's event. ...Show more →
Michael, I had originally bought your Distagon 18/4 and 35/2 Biogon but have since changed over to a ZM 2,8/28 Biogon and ZM C-Sonnar 50mm setup.
I will be at the Sony event on Sunday to test both lenses on the a7 and a7r as well. I am also bringing along my Hawk's adapter to see how that performs with both lenses.
Any other requests regarding these two lenses folks?
I was at today's event and will likely pass on Sunday's... I hear there's quite a crowd lined up to see the cameras and I got what I needed (mostly comfort in my choice) even though I didn't have nearly enough time with the camera. Short story: I like it, keeping my order in. Based on what I experienced, with a pre-production model no less, concerns being raised by some (noisy shutter, AF speed, size of lenses) are total non issues for me. The camera is delightfully small but not tiny. The FE35 is tiny and light. The FE55 barely fills my hand, feels great on the camera, in person... looks great on the camera if that matters. Love the looks coming out of it. Might have a couple of images to share later.
From the hands on I have had with the cameras, I thoroughly enjoyed both the FE35 and FE55. Might consider getting one of them for those times where having autofocus would be appreciated.
Not WA RF but here's my C/Y Distagon 28/2.8 in front of an A7r; It feels quite at home on the A7 cameras where I always felt C/Y glass plus adapters felt too big and clunky on my NEX-5N. The little bit of extra size and heft helps the A7 in this regard IMO.
michaelwatkins wrote:
Not WA RF but here's my C/Y Distagon 28/2.8 in front of an A7r; It feels quite at home on the A7 cameras where I always felt C/Y glass plus adapters felt too big and clunky on my NEX-5N. The little bit of extra size and heft helps the A7 in this regard IMO.
What kind of adapter is that, and can you recommend it?
It's an el-cheapo adapter... sorry, haven't a clue where I bought it except for recalling it was from an eBay vendor, nor have I done much with it. No wobble though, that's something.
