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)....Show more →
I compared a version II to my version I on NEX-7 in an update of this article: Adorable 35s (update)
Compared with that particular version II sample, the version I performed significantly better in terms of sharpness/contrast as well as in the bokeh but at least the new version does not seem to show the onion rings in the out-of-focus highlights anymore. But I am not sure if this comparison is representative as that version II sample may have been a bad copy. When I get another one, I will repeat the test...
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.
PS: The optional grip is attached to the camera in this shot.
Looks great. FWIW, I noticed the C/Y 28/2.8 length + the Contax register distance is exactly the length of the FE 28-70: 95mm. I guess in practice that means the C/Y will be a little shorter, since the sensor is embedded a bit into the body. I know these are two completely different lenses, but it just helped me visualize how this lens would handle.
Another Chinese test (w/ lcd check in a shop) also posted that ZM25 and G28 have light to heavy red shift w/ A7R and not much w/ A7. Tester said G35 has no problems, maybe minor color shift on A7R. Also new FE35 showed slight color shift on A7R which was seen in dpr photos.
Another Chinese test (w/ lcd check in a shop) also posted that ZM25 and G28 have light to heavy red shift w/ A7R and not much w/ A7. Tester said G35 has no problems, maybe minor color shift on A7R. Also new FE35 showed slight color shift on A7R which was seen in dpr photos.
Thanks for that! The robo-translation is pretty rough, but it may say the G35 has sharper corners than the FE35, which seems very hard to believe. Any native Chinese speakers around who can give us a more accurate translation??
well, well, well. That is what people are saying...
Notice how everything looked pretty well proportioned..that CY 85/1.4 is 64mm in length. The AI-S 135/2 is 103mm long. Even the Distagon 21mm will go on nicely - it's 90mm long. My very favourite SLR lenses will fit great, IQ was never in doubt.
As CZ says, improve the sensor for any given lens, you improve overall quality. You *have to be* looking forward to the next few weeks ending.
Looking again, the camera almost looks made for alt lenses..and how about the aperture blades in the 55/1.8 FE..
philip_pj wrote:
well, well, well. That is what people are saying...
Notice how everything looked pretty well proportioned..that CY 85/1.4 is 64mm in length. The AI-S 135/2 is 103mm long. Even the Distagon 21mm will go on nicely - it's 90mm long. My very favourite SLR lenses will fit great, IQ was never in doubt.
As CZ says, improve the sensor for any given lens, you improve overall quality. You *have to be* looking forward to the next few weeks ending.
Looking again, the camera almost looks made for alt lenses..and how about the aperture blades in the 55/1.8 FE..
thanks
+1
The CY 85/1.4 shot is stunning. Here's hoping that the CY 35/1.4, CY 28/2.8, CY 35/2.8, CY 85/2.8, and CY 100/3.5 look as good. As much as I've been hoping that certain RF lenses will perform well on the A7R, I'd be more than happy to go with the 35+55 FE combo plus the CY lenses until the Zeiss FE MF lenses arrive late next year.
"... I've reason to believe
We all will be received
In Zeissland."
I wrote: 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)....Show more →
3D-Kraft.com replied: I compared a version II to my version I on NEX-7 in an update of this article: Adorable 35s (update)
Compared with that particular version II sample, the version I performed significantly better in terms of sharpness/contrast as well as in the bokeh but at least the new version does not seem to show the onion rings in the out-of-focus highlights anymore. But I am not sure if this comparison is representative as that version II sample may have been a bad copy. When I get another one, I will repeat the test...
Thank you for the update.
It's interesting to see the SLR Magic lenses doing that much better. Looking at the images I guess it doesn't cover a FF sensor though...
I think, as you suspect, there is something strange with your CV35/1.2 v2 lens. My "First look at..." confirms there is very little of Bull's eye-effect in background OOF highlights. The usual ugly Cosina Voigtländer magenta cast and aberrations are also there but the difference between your v1 and v2 images are odd.
I went back to the "First look..." thing from October 2011 (I can't believe I went through all that work just to make my usual findings about an interesting lens available for the public, lol.) If I was to buy an A7 or A7r today I would have a long hard look at the CV35/1.2 again. What that worries me is the limited area of the image which is reasonably "sharp" at wide openings. That, and the magenta/purple cast. But the lens behaves in a predicable way, there are no MTF dips, there is no focus shift, even the bokeh is predictable and not bad at all.
I look forward to your further findings!
@cputeq. Thank you for the link. Interesting. Unfortunately the samples from the WA lenses aren't really telling us much but it was good to see the images of the lenses next to the camera and the other results. Some were great!
OTOH: Yesterday I shot some images of a building using the RX1 at 35mm and f/2. I really used f/5.6 but for the fun of it I took an image at f/2 and f/2.8 as well. Back home I found nice sharp images free from bad surprises at the borders or corners. I used AF, the shutter was silent and it was all in all a very quick and painless operation. I'm not sure at all the A7 will offer this and for the moment I voted "I'll wait for the next generation..." in the poll "To buy or not to buy" dennishh started.
Interesting. Kind of makes sense too given that the NEX 5N apparently has it. It ought to mean that the technology itself is not that expensive but put in where it makes sense from an IQ perspective. Hope it's true.
michaelwatkins wrote:
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.
Thanks. I see a few different el-cheapo adapters on the bay, as well as a more expensive Novoflex adapter. The cheapos are so cheap that I wonder whether they can be any good.
This is getting a bit frustrating. The cameras will be available within ten days, and we still don't know which one of them that gives least potential smearing. If I pass on both my preorders, I'll perhaps have to wait for a looooong while.
wfrank wrote:
Interesting. Kind of makes sense too given that the NEX 5N apparently has it. It ought to mean that the technology itself is not that expensive but put in where it makes sense from an IQ perspective. Hope it's true.
The new 36Mp has offset micro lenses due the registry distance
Hej hej
wfrank wrote:
Interesting. Kind of makes sense too given that the NEX 5N apparently has it. It ought to mean that the technology itself is not that expensive but put in where it makes sense from an IQ perspective. Hope it's true.
There's no indication that the 5N has offset microlenses. It is likely just a happy accident from the sensor topping design. It still doesn't perform great like the GXR or anything.
FWIW, I noticed the C/Y 28/2.8 length + the Contax register distance is exactly the length of the FE 28-70: 95mm. I guess in practice that means the C/Y will be a little shorter, since the sensor is embedded a bit into the body. I know these are two completely different lenses, but it just helped me visualize how this lens would handle.
If I pass on both my preorders, I'll perhaps have to wait for a looooong while.