mco_970 wrote:
I do think it causes a heavier vignette. Fred is sending me a bit of the light blocking material he recommended, and I will try making a baffle with a slightly larger opening. I also think I have my baffle just slight off center, see 2nd image here - test shot, stopped down to f/8. One corner is dark. Both images A7 + OM50/1.2
Yup. The baffle requires some fine-tuning for this lens. A bit of vignetting is less disturbing than the flares though.
Something is wrong with their sample Noctilux, by 1.4 the Noct is sharper then anything I've seen. At f/2 it's so sharp I have to turn down my LR sharpness setting from default 25 to 0 (please also keep in mind I say this while owning the 50APO and 50Summilux-asph).
adamdewilde wrote:
Something is wrong with their sample Noctilux, by 1.4 the Noct is sharper then anything I've seen. At f/2 it's so sharp I have to turn down my LR sharpness setting from default 25 to 0 (please also keep in mind I say this while owning the 50APO and 50Summilux-asph).
Center or everywhere? After having FE55, I feel It is close enough to match my impression about these lenses other than hyper0.95 I have no viewing experience. *(at least with A7R)
That is a great illustration. Leica need work on their MKII now. Leica people don't care price, but it hurt to tell them their lens is not best now (I am kidding, my tool is still 50 year old but I feel no need to upgrade.)
Several point:
50lux isnot flawless but behave noticeably better on M9. We know Fle is not good with converter.
The portrait illustration do have motion blur though.
adamdewilde wrote:
Something is wrong with their sample Noctilux, by 1.4 the Noct is sharper then anything I've seen. At f/2 it's so sharp I have to turn down my LR sharpness setting from default 25 to 0 (please also keep in mind I say this while owning the 50APO and 50Summilux-asph).
he stuck the focus point right in the midzone where the noct (and lux) are at their worst.
sebboh wrote:
he stuck the focus point right in the midzone where the noct (and lux) are at their worst.
I have no idea what's going on, I just know that's not the results I get from either lens in real world shooting. I'm glad that the Otus and FE are looking good, since I plan to add them in the future.
zhangyue wrote:
Center or everywhere? After having FE55, I feel It is close enough to match my impression about these lenses other than hyper0.95 I have no viewing experience. *(at least with A7R)
That is a great illustration. Leica need work on their MKII now. Leica people don't care price, but it hurt to tell them their lens is not best now (I am kidding, my tool is still 50 year old but I feel no need to upgrade.)
Several point:
50lux isnot flawless but behave noticeably better on M9. We know Fle is not good with converter.
The portrait illustration do have motion blur though.
Nice images as usual zhangyue (especially like the shot of your little girl a few pages back, ALMOST has the same look as your 50lux-m9 shots.. Not better not worse, just different a slight bit, but nobody would notice if you didn't mention it).
I'm actually just shocked at the results, I'm curious if the M lenses don't play nice with the A7, or if the reviewer was doing something wrong?
adamdewilde wrote:
...or if the reviewer was doing something wrong?
Focusing wide open and then stopping down without refocusing perhaps? The slightest focus shift would ruin everything at that short distance, once you start stopping down.
Mudo, thanks for posting this. Seems I suck also on googling stuff, I did not find this when I yesterday searched.
I made half an hour exercise today and Argyll seems to work really great. Can't wait to try this tomorrow for outdoors photos (if it's not raining). For sure it makes workflow pretty crappy compared to using just Lightroom.
Open two images (links below) to tabs for comparison, Argyll removed the yellowish tint what has been haunting me also in forest photos; the greens are realistic, door on top right corner appears real color, curtain on top left appears real color, floor is real color - all matches when I compared the profiled version from profiled monitor to what I see on the floor:
1. Adobe Camera RAW best result
2. Adobe Camera RAW + profile applied PhotoShop
(and yes FE55 hoods works with FE35 as well, no vignetting)
Instructions if somebody wants to try:
Prerequisites:
- color target, Kodak Q60 works great (Argyll web page lists other compatible)
- computer (Windows, Linux, Mac anything goes...)
- Argyll installed to computer
Process (not optimal, but OK just for trying the process):
1. Take well exposed photo including color target
2. Create TIFF of RAW image with best white balance you can pick and using very neutral settings (black should not clip, neither the white patches on target)
3. Crop TIFF so that it only contains color target and save as TIFF
4. Create TI3 file (file having color patch values) by using command line:
-dipn = options to use (see more in Argyll documentation)
Livingroom_G90.tif = the image I made in step 3
ref/it8.cht = file telling where every square in your target is located
R1200006.Q60 = file from Kodak telling my Q60 target color values in every square
diagnostic.tif = filename into which Argyll can save number of patches
5. Check diagnostics.tif to check that Argyll has recognized your target properly
6. Create ICM-profile from the TI3-file by using command line:
-A "Sony" = defines that Sony is the camera manufacturer
-M "A7" = defines that model name is A7
-D "Livingroom Contax G90" = the profile name shown in PhotoShop (the list where it says "sRGB IEC61966-2.1", "Adobe RGB (1998)", "ProPhoto RGB"...)
-qh = high quality
-u = doesn't adjust whitepoint (=when profile is applied it doesn't change exposure)
Livingroom_G90 = the basename of TI3 file (don't add ".ti3", since then it doesn't find the TI3-file)
7. As a result you will get Livingroom_G90.icm named profile, copy it to location, from which your system searches profiles (in Windows 7: C:\Windows\System32\spool\drivers\color)
8. Open RAW-image again with Adobe Camera RAW, using same settings and Open Image
9. In PhotoShop "Edit" -> "Assign profile..." and select your new profile from the list.
Now every photo I take in my livingroom has really good colors. At least lenses, which share similar contrast to Contax G90 (=Zeiss ZE/ZF and Contax G45 at least). Since option -u was used, you can also adjust blacks etc. in ACR and colors remain relatively good.
Hopefully the ColorChecker based DNG-profiling is as good - it would make possible to enjoy great results in simple Adobe Lightroom based workflow.
joakim wrote:
I'm pretty sure it was at f/4.
Thanks, like the subject separation and boke quality. I have seen lots of images, but I still can't make my mind do I want the ZM 50 Planar or ZM 50 Sonnar. Have to get something to fill the hole in Leica M-adapter...but no hurry with this one, have way too many 45-58mm lenses, or can there be too many
I agree with Adam, and I am surprised by the 50 Nocti and 50 Lux Asph results. From my portraits so far with the A7r, the 50 Nocti is incredibly defined with a wonderful roll off at f/1.0. At f/1.4 the lens is very sharp, detailed and smooth at 100%. The 50 Lux even more so. The 50 Nocti f/1.0 and 50 Lux almost perform better than the M240. The only issue with the 50 Lux Asph and 35 Lux FEL, is the adapters, as changing the adapters can have a large effect on mid to distance near the edges. The adapter issue has raised so many questions that I have decided to send my 2 A7r's and 4 adapters to Camera Clinic in Melbourne, after chatting with Wayne Rogers, head technician, and they will fully check the alignment of both A7r's the sensors, distances and depth to the flange ensuring both parallel and equal in distance. If needed they will correct the sensor placement if needed. Next test the adapters, and re mill the ones that do not fit, the ones not allowing for focus at infinity, but also not excessive either. It will be fully tested on the bench with the 35 Lux Asph FLE and 50 Lux Asph with test results. This will only take a few days, and much cheaper and less frustrating than buying more adapters hoping the tolerances may be right. So far my results with the 35 Lux FLE best performs with the Metabones adapter, when the infinity just falls in line, or past. The Novaflex adapters are 0.15mm less, and there seems to be more vignetting with the 35 Lux FLE even though there is no issues with infinity. In chatting with the Wayne, the adapters do have to correct in his opinion, and feels this will affect the performance of the 35 Lux FLE. I will send A7r's this week and see how the test results align. Main point, is to have matched adapters, that will work to their best ability.
I am curious to see the results as they have M9/M240's on the bench, time permitting where they can run comparisons after the modifications!
Finally the FE 55/1.8 is an amazing lens, feels like a min Otus As it has been suggested it is different than the M240 50 Lux combo. The A7r combined with the FE 55/1.8 is an amazing lens for street portraits, and I am really looking forward to my next trip in Asia! Much of the portraits are evening to late, so the contrast and feel will be ideal with the FE 55.
I have added an example with the 50 Nocti f/1.0 at f/1.0 with the A7r 1/250s and 100 ISO. The 50 Nocti f/1.0, is not as sharp as the 50 Nocti 0.95.
charles.K wrote:
The adapter issue has raised so many questions that I have decided to send my 2 A7r's and 4 adapters to Camera Clinic in Melbourne, after chatting with Wayne Rogers, head technician, and they will fully check the alignment of both A7r's the sensors, distances and depth to the flange ensuring both parallel and equal in distance. If needed they will correct the sensor placement if needed. Next test the adapters, and re mill the ones that do not fit, the ones not allowing for focus at infinity, but also not excessive either. It will be fully tested on the bench with the 35 Lux Asph FLE and 50 Lux Asph with test results. ...Show more →
Does anyone know if there's a company in the US that does this kind of work?
I also think I have my baffle just slight off center, see 2nd image here - test shot, stopped down to f/8. One corner is dark. Both images A7 + OM50/1.2
(I am kidding, my tool is still 50 year old but I feel no need to upgrade.)
