Today some pictures taken with Rollei QBM mount lenses and the A7.Both Zeiss licensed and Mamiya ARs.
Rollei HFT Planar 50/1.8.A very good lens.Difficult to tell apart from C/Y Planar 50/1.7.A little bit cooler colour rendition,tiny bit less microcontrast,and a tad more CA in contrasty lighting.All these differences are not significant in real life picture taking though.
HFT Planar 50/1.8 wo
HFT Planar 50/1.8 af f5.6
HFT Distagon 35/2.8 - visibly softer in corners/sides compared to the 35/2.8 C/Y ,up untill f8,slightly lower microcontrast and slightly higher CA,but still comparable IQ.
HFT Distagon 35/2.8 wo
HFT Distagon 35/2.8 at f8
Rollei HFT Tele Tessar 135/4 - sharp,very good little lens.On par with 135/2.8 C/Y Sonnar.
HFT Tele Tessar 135/4 wo
HFT Tele Tessar 135/4 at f8
Rolleinar 21/4 - a very good wide angle.Low corner smearing,even wo,sharp across the frame atf8.Minimal and easy correctable CA/distortions.Small and solid.Nice colours and contrast.Here at f5.6
Last,but not least - Rolleinar AR 85/2.8.Very similar to Sonnar 85/2.8,though with less microcontrast and more muted colours.Very sharp,very little CA.Compact with built-in hood.At f5.6:
James nice shot (Foggy Bottom), I wouldn't been able to resist temptation to photoshop and would have removed the ugly trashcan from right edge.
Greggf wrote:
Absolutely killer shot, Samuli!! I knew you had to have a C/Y 35-70!! They were made for the A7(r)!
Gregg
Thanks - I rarely shoot landscapes as I prefer my photos without humans, human created stuff or nature ruined by humans (e.g. I prefer nature, which is as it should and not modified for humans needs. Due to paper&wood industry we have less than 3% of forest growing natural way and rest is modified for wood & paper industry needs). It's rare to find beautiful places, which still fit my criteria mentioned above... C/Y 35-70 is nice for lanscapes, but I can't stand it for anything else as I always shoot with polarizer (rotating front). For landscapes it usually doesn't matter much as focus distances are quite far away (front turns relative short amount). In addition my copy turn so easily that even Zeiss polarizer tends to rotate lens (=ruin focus) when I adjust polarizer (B+W is 10x worse than Zeiss, there is no change to keep focus when adjusting polarizer unless focus is at infinity stop). I tried today shoot normal (2-5m distance) forest shots with C/Y 35-70, but it didn't work and gave up after few photos before frustration really ruined my good mood; too much work focusing/adjusting polarizer and also it's way too slow, as I prefer stopping little and then I'm already at f/5.6 (most my photos are shoot ~f/2.8).
Same applies for C/Y 80-200, but mine is more stiff than 35-70 and very rarely focus moves when I turn polarizer. With Leica polarizer it never moves, but with B+W it's better to check focus after polarizer adjustment. But it's optically not as good as 35-70, due to which I prefer C/Y 35-70 & Leica R 80-200 combo for landscapes.
Horses for courses... in normal shooting perspective anyways is more important, and it's easy to change framing by adjusting tripod location, which in landscape photography isn't usually an option.
Ronny _Olsson wrote:
Wow Samuli !
Love that shot.. just a gentle HDR effect.. perfect
Thanks! Sony files are really hard to process in PhotoMatix Pro. It might be due to larger dynamic range of files, which maybe made 5DmkII files easier to process in PhotoMatix Pro. Also they removed the lightness slider in newest versions and only good way to adjust lightness is to adjust all 3 images + or - some EV, try in PhotoMatix, export new 3 images, try in PhotoMatix... until one finds correct lightness to final photo.
Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 4/80-200 @ f/8, HDR (1/20s, 1/80s, 1/320s), Sony A7 @ ISO 100, Leitz E55 P-cir 13357
Love it Samuli. I like how this pic is quite dark and I'm guessing quite reflective of what you actually saw at that moment.... Sometimes I have a bad habit of trying to boost the shadows too much in scenes such as this.
