philber wrote:
so this sharply limits the importance of what am I about to write: I find this set with the Zony uncomfortable, with the foreground subject almost etched and pasted onto the picture. Could it be oversharpening, because that is the closest I can come to explaining what I mean?
i think this is a combination of backlighting and Samuli composing and processing an f/1.4 shot the same way he would an f/2.8 shot. i get a bit of the same effect.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
I think I understand what you mean. What I have seen this far of FE1.4/35 I would say that it looks less "organic" (best word I can come up with) than older Zeiss lenses, which maybe correlates to your observation. I have never had older Zeiss (or any brand) lens, which is able to produce usable photos @ f/1.4, so I'm not sure how f/1.4 photos are supposed to look like, DOF is really small @ f/1.4 - I'm much more familiar how high performance Zeiss/Leica photos look like @f/2.8-4. In perfect world I would like to combine ZM 2/35 focus plane and DOF/boke transtion to FE 1.4/35 boke, that would be pretty close to my optimal 35mm lens rendering style. I doubt such lens exists, haven't tried yet the ZM 1.4/35 or new optic formula Milvus 1.4/35 - and I don't feel huge urge to try either of them. More or less everything else I have tried. One day I try Voigtländer 35mm f/1.7, Helena's photos above just reminded me about it - again, but Voigtländer doesn't have "Zeiss like" rendering, very nice rendering but very different. ...Show more →
the FE 35/1.4 really is amazing for what it can do bokeh wise wide open. if it were smaller i would get one, instead i use the rx1, which is smaller (camera included), and actually has even nicer wide open bokeh imo (but only f/2 ), and a bit more pop in the focus plane.
unrelated, a picture with the rokkor QF 40/1.7 wide open (which definitely doesn't have smooth bokeh wide open):
Love your shot, Kierzkow! Everything is just so... right. Or would be if you hadn't taken it with a lens I love to hate. All the more reason to congratulate you!
MedicineMan, you should have seen the look of admiration on my face! And with the 24-70 too. The mind boggles!
And all the usual suspects, of course. You'll know who you are....
After sunrise in Paris, sunset in Paris. Still Otus 28...
PEKA62 wrote:
Phillip, how do you like your FE 70-200 ?
I have the same lens sitting here since almost a year (got it in an eBay auction for cheap) and have not yet found motivation for using and testing it much. Your images above show your typical post processing style (which I like usually) but do not shine like others often do, shot with classic manual lenses.
So, no motivation for FE 70-200 here, I stick with my Loxias. Comments?
I got it for a price where I couldn't decline but I am not a big fan of it. Optics are solid enough but I don't like the handling and have relatively little use for a 70-200. Usually I take it with me just because I am meaning to finish the review and sell it afterwards but I feel I could need some more pictures.
Contrast and colors are fine with the lens in my eyes but I am not picky with both aspects because lenses are usually just a minor factor and postprocessing much more important in my experience.
Couple of random shots--first one lens testing (confirming I like the look of the ZM 35/1.4 better than the Zony 35/2.8) and then a couple of walking around flowers:
Playing around with a new lens and decided to make my wife pose for some quick portraits and to try out a couple of other lenses that I have used for portraits. Her patience only lasts so long so this was an unscientific comparison of three lenses in the same setting and handheld.....
Anyone have any favorites? I think I like the GM best on this go round, but it is hardly determinative....
Samuli...I love the FE 35 1.4 rendering. I've so far been able to not jump on one because I have the FE 50 1.4(which I would love to hear your thoughts on!!)...but I've rented one for this week and I'm excited.
Gregg, I have been drooling after FE1.4/50 due to your photos and other photographer, who's name doesn't come out just now (this photographer shoots American custom cars with FE1.4/50 and GM85, sorry about crappy name memory!!!). On some photos I have seen hint of issue due to having larger DOF in corners due to mechanical vignetting, not 100% sure is that real issue, or is it just the scenes. I would really need to shoot it myself to be sure - all f/1.4 lenses suffer from this, but on some photos it has been really distracting. "FE1.4/50 is so big => I don't want it" has been my main excuse, and maybe little also Zony quality control (no idea is 50mm as bad as 35mm) and no real manual focusing, but instead focusing via AF and non-connected ring. Now finding that I actually like to shoot with FE1.4/35 and GM85 even they are very large and heavy lenses (manual focusing I don't like so much...but size/weight is fine), I need to find new excuse(s)... or real reason like "empty wallet", will do as well for now. Samuli EDIT: Edited 3rd paragraph (the one with starts with quotation mark)...Show more →
I love the FE 50 1.4 ZA. IMO the best 50 I've used, but/just not for everything. Portraits, and mid distance WO or stopped down it is incredible! And it has AF....big plus. I haven't shot the Otus, but this is so sharp at WO(as I'm sure the FE 35 1.4 is!) that it really boggles the mind. And I actually don't mind manual focusing either. I find it not too bad!
Here are a couple of grabs. The last with the trees is from last year I believe.
Thank you Joshua!
Gregg
A7rll and FE 50 1.4 ZA
Recent post as well. Hand held ISO 4-5000, @f1.4 mf
Agreed! It is a do everything great sort of lens--so sharp with great bokeh and apochromatic and fast and small (tho not very light). I doubt we will see Sony make a 180 that is as good or, if as good, certainly not as small!
), and a bit more pop in the focus plane.
