After few years shooting mainly with Zeiss "modern" ZE-lenses, I have been trying good old C/Y lenses. And while not technically as good (thou Planar 1.4/50 C/Y is definitely better f/1.4-2 than the new version) I enjoy the rendering style more on the older lenses. So sad that they didn't invest more to round apertures back then...
Distagon 28mm has been really enjoyable with A7r, I really like how it makes subjects stand out without the aid of DOF-separation. However field curvature is ridiculous at corners - does A7r cause more field curvature than for example 5DmkII? ? ? ? ? ? ?
I have no memory of field curvature with 5DmkII, not to talk about gigantic field curvature I'm now witnessing with this same lens (same copy) what I used to shoot from 2004 to 2009 when I shoot it with Canon 5DmkII. Unfortunately I don't have RAW-files now available from those times, so can't check from my own photos.
Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/28 C/Y @ f/4, 1/6s, Sony A7r @ ISO 100, B+W Circular Polarizer 55mm
Bottom right corner is really awful due to field curvature. While top right corner clearly shows that there would be sharpness, but focus plane is curved radically forward about to 10+ meters (30+ feet).
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Distagon 28mm has been really enjoyable with A7r, I really like how it makes subjects stand out without the aid of DOF-separation. However field curvature is ridiculous at corners - does A7r cause more field curvature than for example 5DmkII? ? ? ? ? ? ?
I have no memory of field curvature with 5DmkII, not to talk about gigantic field curvature I'm now witnessing with this same lens (same copy) what I used to shoot from 2004 to 2009 when I shoot it with Canon 5DmkII. Unfortunately I don't have RAW-files now available from those times, so can't check from my own photos.
i saw something similar with my rokkor 24/2.8, huge field curvature that i showed in an aperture series comparing the lens focused on the corner versus focused in the center. i went back and double checked my images with it on film though, and the same field curvature was present there as well. similarly, my rokkor 28/2 has a pretty flat field on both film and my a7.
on the other hand, my contax g 28mm definitely has much more field curvature (and astigmatism) on the a7 than it does on film...
yesterdays B selection:
that 1.7/55 has a realls interesting rendering
I thought I had lost this picture because I had forgotten to engage the stopdown lever of my FD adapter but the 2.8/20 is quite usable at f/2.8. Vignetting is severe but sharpness is actually quite okay.
sebboh wrote:
i saw something similar with my rokkor 24/2.8, huge field curvature that i showed in an aperture series comparing the lens focused on the corner versus focused in the center. i went back and double checked my images with it on film though, and the same field curvature was present there as well. similarly, my rokkor 28/2 has a pretty flat field on both film and my a7.
on the other hand, my contax g 28mm definitely has much more field curvature (and astigmatism) on the a7 than it does on film...
.
