I'll bump with a couple of shots taken while putzing around with the 500/4.5L @ f/5.6. The first shot is significantly cropped. If I had thought to bring the NEX-7, I would've used it instead. The second shot is the whole frame.
Phillip Reeve wrote:
That cherry tree is right in front of my window, the lens sits on a tripod, so it is a rather easy setting.
For focusing it is easiest to use my a7 in crop mode with the standard image style set to maximal sharpness, this will cause glimmering or flickering in the EVF in sharp areas and it is more precise and less obnocious than FP which I never got comfortable with.
On the 5n I have no EVF and have to use the display with focus magnification, this takes longer but those greedy birds feel comfortable enough in our cherry tree to stay for a full meal....Show more →
I played around a bit with my Fujifilm X-T1 a bit today to see if i could somehow get it to work the way you mentioned with Sony, but i couldn't. I do get a shimmer in LCD when i try to focus at something which would cause moire (like window net or backlit fabric) but couldn't replicate the effect with normal subjects. The sheer size of EVF helps though.
I'm trying my 'collection' of FD lenses on my A7r but my initial enthusiasm has waned a little
20mm - good but curved field of focus at infinity prevents it reaching full potential.
24mm 2.8 -very good
28mm 2.8 very good
35mm 2.8 very good
35mm 2 - potentially very good but again a curved focus field at infinity holds it back. Not as good stopped down for landscape as a good copy of the 2.8
50mm 1.4 SSD and FDn - very good stopped down. Awful bokeh wide open.
85mm 1.8 - same as the 50mm 1.4
100mm - awaiting further testing
135mm 2.8 - very good for a cheap light 135.
70-210 f4 - not tested yet but likley not brilliant. Very light focus and zoom control make handholding problematic
35-105 - 2 copies and both have terrific central sharpness but terrible away from it. Maybe bad samples
300mm 4 - not tested it yet but significant CA visible in the EVF when zoomed in.
General comments that apply to all lenses. Handling is excellent and they feel and look just right on the A7 series. Mostly they have fairly flat fields at infinity which makes them good landscape lens choices. Considerable CA which Camera Raw can't fix. Needs processing in Capture One which does eliminate it. Horrible bokeh with green / purple separation of highlight areas. Purple bloom wide open around highlights. Extreme corners go soft rapidly so need to frame a bit wider in camera and crop in post. Some lenses are definite keepers like the 24mm, and 35mm 2.8's others are bettered by my other alt glass - OL 28mm 3.5 and CY 28mm 2.8 are both ( slightly)better, 35mm elmarit R v2 pips the FD but not by much and price comparison is not at all fair, in 50mm my OL (mc) 1.4, contax 1.4 and Summicron 2 are simply better with regards to bokeh and lack of that purple / magenta wide open. Stopped down no real difference but with a 50 it's nicer to have it all in one lens. 85mm has no rivals in my collection yet so that will stay. 100mm will battle it out with my OL version. 135mm looses out to my Elmarit V1 2.8. Above 135 I need more testing but for landscape 135 is as far as I usually go. I want to use lenses in the near future for video on my A7s and so the problematic CA is a real issue esp as it doesn't respond to CA reduction in Adobe RAW like my OL lenses do and this is part of the video workflow. I really, really wanted to have a full set of matched FDn glass for my A7r and A7s for stills and video but I think it will be a pick and mix set in the end. Maybe some of the exotic L versions would solve some of the issues but then the prices put them up with contemporary offerings so they are not such a bargain. I'm tempted by the 80-200L but I can just use my ef 70-200 2.8 + metabones adapter if need a good long zoom. The 35-105 was looking like a good ' video' all rounder esp as the focus action was long and smooth but I suspect contemporary zooms are superior optically. Will likely sit on my collection for a while before I feed it back to the market as I see prices of FD glass going up and up now they have a new lease of life on mirrorless. Infact I may even make further ' investments'.........
This is with a Canon fd 300 f/2.8L and an astronomy-specific CCD camera (QHY9M). The nice thing about this lens is that standard astronomy filters thread perfectly into the drop-in filter holder for the lens. It turns this lens into a very compact, very fast astrograph! :-)
astrodave wrote:
This is with a Canon fd 300 f/2.8L and an astronomy-specific CCD camera (QHY9M). The nice thing about this lens is that standard astronomy filters thread perfectly into the drop-in filter holder for the lens. It turns this lens into a very compact, very fast astrograph! :-)
telyt wrote:
Very nice! I especially like the jet/moon photo. I recently purchased this lens, it arrived on Thursday now I'm waiting for the adapter to show up.
Thanks, Doug. I'll be interested to hear what you think of it. I recently sold mine and went back to the Leica 280/2.8 and extenders to cover the focal length, which is easier to pack without resorting to a backpack, but I can't say I was disappointed with the results from the Canon. I found it to be a surprisingly good lens for its age.
