Jack: That last set with the night shots was very impressive again. You certainly have a great eye.
Greggf wrote:
Not sure, really? I've head many diff people say they don't like the over-saturated look of the CV 35 1.2ll...I only had one briefly, and then opted for the CV Ultron 35 1.7(fantastic lens BTW)...As far as the CV50 1.5...I couldn't tell you why it seems less like the 35 1.2? It is just a great lens. Sharp, with tons of POP, and very nice bokeh.
As far as the PP goes, I don't get too crazy. The sliders I use don't go very far either way, so my images are pretty close to the orig. In fact, here are a bunch with the Nokton 50 1.5 ASPH, below...
Gregg ...Show more →
Thanks, that's good to know. I wasn't sure whether this over saturation was an issue with all CV lenses, since I only have experience with the CV 35 1.2 II. I'm definitely going to look into the 50 1.5 APSH.
therealthings wrote:
A city that i visit frequently, and the moment i saw it immediately recognized, though from an uncommon view. Was this shot from Breskens?
A bit more around the corner direction S/W zuid-west
Yashica ML lenses in subdued light require more than average PP to get satisfactory results.I'm not quite clear whether it's caused by poor coating or poor sharpness.Some of the lenses are definitely sharp with little CA i.e. 50/1.4,50/1.7,35/2.8.Others are softer - 24/2.8,28/2.8,135/2.8,200/4 with more CA.Unlike their Zeiss C/Y cousins all of them are not good low contrast performers.They look much better in standard lighting conditions.
Hello Dale... I'm really impressed about the rendition of MD 35-70 Macro in your backlight picture... Could you please tell me more about that lens? Which exact model I have to search on the Bay? Thanks in advance.
Regards - Manuel
