i'm sorry you haven't been able to use it
i really have enjoyed this lens
i still lust after the Leica Apo-Summicron-M 1:2/90 Aspherical... so i found this nice Schact to "satisfy" me for now
The A7 series has brought me so much joy in being able to use legacy glass
i truly hope you will find a way to adapt your EXAKTA mount, if possible
the very best to you, always
one more
not that interesting
wish i had been able to shoot from above a bit more
cigar creation
Peire wrote:
Sorry Susan.B.I didn't think your question was directed to me.
I use mostly cheap chinese/HK manual adapters,branded ones, (for example Pixco),and noname,regarding them very often as good as more expensive makes like Kipon.I have the Metabones Mk3 for my Z series Zeisses with Canon EF mounts too,but it's horrendous price with duty is deterring.
Thanks Peire,
Yes, your lens mounts are working well!
Keep posting 'em and thanks for the info re the lens mounts.
philber wrote:
Mike, you indicate your shot (very nice, BTW) has been shot with Zeiss 18/4. Is that the ZM? How can you get it to work for you at infinity on a A7?
+1! I was wondering the exact same thing. I tried that lens and hated it on the A7R...
The Contax 70-200 3.5-4.5! Can you tell me a little about your setup (adapter/af/mf etc) and the performance of the lens? I have used the Canon 70-200 f4, Nikon 70-200 f4, Minolta 80-200 2.8 if that helps. I was attracted because of the Zeiss-factor, and size. But I am pretty picky about IQ, and I haven't been able to find as much info as I'd like. Is it better than the 80-200 Contax Zeiss?
aeonsim wrote:
A7 + Minolta Rokkor 58mm F1.4, Was experimenting with DxO for this shot.
Gorgeous scene. I think I would like a combination of the two post processes since the big mansion building seems better with the normal processing and the buildings in the foreground and trees in the middle of the image look really cool with the dxo processing. Sometimes boosting the dark end helps define things really nicely and sometimes it is a bit heavy. Awesome capture to work with.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
The Contax 70-200 3.5-4.5! Can you tell me a little about your setup (adapter/af/mf etc) and the performance of the lens? I have used the Canon 70-200 f4, Nikon 70-200 f4, Minolta 80-200 2.8 if that helps. I was attracted because of the Zeiss-factor, and size. But I am pretty picky about IQ, and I haven't been able to find as much info as I'd like. Is it better than the 80-200 Contax Zeiss?
If you go back a few pages you would see I have been saying a few times that I use the Kipon adapter. It has electrical contacts for camera info and in camera diafragm handling if you put the diafragm on wide 3.5 open on the lens.
I have the c/y zeiss 70-200 as well. I prefer the Contax N. A bit more pop and nice sharp. A bit shorter as well.
If you want Autofocus look for the Fringer adapter. A lot more expensive.
Susan.B wrote:
Gorgeous scene. I think I would like a combination of the two post processes since the big mansion building seems better with the normal processing and the buildings in the foreground and trees in the middle of the image look really cool with the dxo processing. Sometimes boosting the dark end helps define things really nicely and sometimes it is a bit heavy. Awesome capture to work with.
Susan
A good idea I'll have to have a go at that, the two images are from different shots over a couple of minutes with fairly fast moving cloud so the lighting was changing from frame to frame. But it'd certainly be interesting too take the second shot and add some processing in DxO to see if the trees can be resolved better.
