Gregg, you're definitely 50s-covered
Yes Jack...I thought so too! The ZM's Planar and Sonnar, and the Oly 50 1.2. I do miss the Nokton sometimes, but I really like the ZM's. Can't do anything wrong with the Planar, and Sonnar's bokeh and character are to die for! And, gotta have a 1.2. Joshua had the Oly, and while I do miss the Nikkor 50 1.2, the reverse focus always throws me for a loop! So I went with the Oly with no regrets.
If I ever get the mod done for my A7(I might jump on an R as the prices come down!), I think I'd like to try a Mandler 50 Summilux for its character too!
navmannz wrote:
Michiel, that planar 100 delivers beautifully. From memory, you also have the FD 100 f/2 - what's your impression of their relative merits?
I have always been a bit disappointed with my landscapes so I am now trying improve things a little which means you may occasionally be subjected to my attempts . This is A7R with the Rokkor 35-70 1:3.5, but sadly lacking the macro.
Michiel, that planar 100 delivers beautifully. From memory, you also have the FD 100 f/2 - what's your impression of their relative merits?
Regards, John
Honestly John, I am very bad at this, never did a comparison test but I think the C/Y Zeiss is a bit sharper and has better separation wide open.
But the FD is an outstanding lens as well, much smaller and lighter, sharp as well, beautifull colors and bokeh.
So I want to keep them both
Here are some with the Canon FD
Peter T wrote:
I have always been a bit disappointed with my landscapes so I am now trying improve things a little which means you may occasionally be subjected to my attempts . This is A7R with the Rokkor 35-70 1:3.5, but sadly lacking the macro.
Just keep taking shots, and work out what disappoints you...
Peter T wrote:
I have always been a bit disappointed with my landscapes so I am now trying improve things a little which means you may occasionally be subjected to my attempts . This is A7R with the Rokkor 35-70 1:3.5, but sadly lacking the macro.
Clear blue skys in the daytime are not so good for landscapes. You need clouds and changing light
sculptormic wrote:
Honestly John, I am very bad at this, never did a comparison test but I think the C/Y Zeiss is a bit sharper and has better separation wide open.
But the FD is an outstanding lens as well, much smaller and lighter, sharp as well, beautifull colors and bokeh.
So I want to keep them both
Here are some with the Canon FD
Thanks Michiel - that makes sense - your images with the FD 100 have always impressed me not only for the optics, but also for the way that you use them - its one on my 'to have' list...
