Luvwine wrote:
I used to have the FE 55/1.8 but sold it after I got the Loxia 50. Only thing I occasionally miss is autofocus,and that rarely.
Not mad at all! I went the same route. First I swapped the 55 1.8 for the Loxia 50. Then I got rid of all other lenses and got the full Loxia line up. Best decision I've made!
The "new" lens arrived today, courtesy of Jim "Grenache". I've just taken it out for a spin, and frankly, I'm stunned at how good it is! In comparison to the lens I sent back as defective (which was almost good enough to try to make me want to keep it somehow!), this lens is amazing. There's a lot that could be said, but suffice to say this is probably the best imaging 35mm format lens that I've ever shot, and if not, it is somehow tied with the best. It has all the great qualities I adore in the Loxia 35, coupled with intense sharpness, micro-contrast, and DOF. Really just impressive! And none of the "defects" that made me hate and sell my brand new ZE 21/2.8 a few years back.
Wow!
Thanks Jim, for the quick shipping and good deal, on top of such an amazing lens! I feel like I've won a lifetime achievement award just by now owning it!
Here are a couple of my very first shots, one wide open, the other stopped down a little. I gave it my full PP attention, but did not apply any LR lens profile or distortion correction or any reduction in vignetting -- really low distortion!
The new lens looks great. Where did you get the defective one from? And did understand your first post to mean that the lens cap included was a generic cap, i.e., not from Zeiss?
chiron wrote:
The new lens looks great. Where did you get the defective one from? And did understand your first post to mean that the lens cap included was a generic cap, i.e., not from Zeiss?
Hi Chiron!
The camera was listed on eBay by Camera West in the Bay Area. They are a well respected high-end dealer and re-seller with a store as well as on-line sales. To their credit, their customer service was terrific and no hassle return and instant recredit after their inspection of the package.
I had let them know there were optical issues with the lens besides the shortcomings in the expected accessories. Despite my warning, apparently the lens was immediately relisted, as I got a PM from a member who was asking me if it was the same as the one I'd been describing.
I will say that the optical problems would escape casual inspection of the image files -- you'd need to take shots in high contrast and view at 100% -- at which point they jump off the screen. Otherwise, the lens only seems a bit dull and low contrast at screen resolution.
Yes, I meant to say the original front lens cap was missing, and a generic snap-on with extended "ears" had been used in it's place, making it impossible to replace the cap, and even difficult to pry off. Removing the lens hood with the cap in place caused the cap to go flying off. Not a great touch.
Anyway, all's well that ends well. I got to deal with Grenache, which is a pleasure! And the thrill of owning two of the same expensive lens at the same time passed without tragedy! I'll put that in the win-win column.
Just back from an 8-day trip to Ireland with my wife. This was more a vacation then a photography-centered trip so I didn't have the time for more serious planning and scouting of locations. All-in-all I'm pleased with the pictures that I did manage to take and have started going through them as time permits. 98% of the shots including all the multi-shot panoramas were shot hand-held. I can't say enough about how wonderful the IBIS worked with the A7r2. This was such a change for me as I normally shoot 95% of my serious photography on a tripod.
I contemplated taking only autofocus lenses including my 24-70 GM but at the last minute I decided to make myself work a little harder with mainly an all manual focus prime kit. I ended up taking my Loxia 21, Distagon 35 ZM, Loxia 50 and Loxia 85, I also threw in the Batis 18 just in case I needed a bit wider indoors at churches, etc...
I found that I really could have taken just the Loxia 21, Distagon 35 ZM and the Loxia 85 and I would have been fine. In fact out of 1,672 shots I used the Distagon 35 ZM - 40.8%; the Loxia 21 - 35.8%; and the Loxia 85 - 13.5%.
Here are few from the "Ring of Kerry" in County Kerry which is a very popular 95 mile loop around a peninsula on very winding narrow roads and switchbacks. The views of landscapes and seascapes are just amazing. The driving is terrifying as there are spots where two vehicles can barely squeeze by each other and rock walls inches away on both sides of the roads. In a few spots there are narrow bridges that only one vehicle can pass at a time. There were big tour buses and large construction trucks as well as the stray sheep to be on the look out for as you meandered around these narrow roads!
The people were very friendly and it was a very enjoyable trip. I highly recomend it!
Note: the four shots taken at ISO 1250 was not on purpose. I mistakenly adjusted the ISO and didn't discover it until an hour or so of shooting. The good news is that I always shoot "to the right" on the histogram so these were very clean files with barely any noticable Luminous noise in the shadows. I made a slight 15-20 adjustment in LRCC on the Luminous Noise slider and you would think these were shot at ISO 200-400.
Chuck
6-image stitched panorama in LRCC of Ross Castle in Killarney National Park
The camera was listed on eBay by Camera West in the Bay Area. They are a well respected high-end dealer and re-seller with a store as well as on-line sales. To their credit, their customer service was terrific and no hassle return and instant recredit after their inspection of the package.
I had let them know there were optical issues with the lens besides the shortcomings in the expected accessories. Despite my warning, apparently the lens was immediately relisted, as I got a PM from a member who was asking me if it was the same as the one I'd been describing.
I will say that the optical problems would escape casual inspection of the image files -- you'd need to take shots in high contrast and view at 100% -- at which point they jump off the screen. Otherwise, the lens only seems a bit dull and low contrast at screen resolution.
Yes, I meant to say the original front lens cap was missing, and a generic snap-on with extended "ears" had been used in it's place, making it impossible to replace the cap, and even difficult to pry off. Removing the lens hood with the cap in place caused the cap to go flying off. Not a great touch.
Anyway, all's well that ends well. I got to deal with Grenache, which is a pleasure! And the thrill of owning two of the same expensive lens at the same time passed without tragedy! I'll put that in the win-win column. ...Show more →
Good for you on inspecting the lens carefully and getting it replace. Pretty bad to get a "new" lens that doesn't have the original lens cap and shows signs of significant damage. And terrible that they just re-list the lens.
chiron wrote:
Good for you on inspecting the lens carefully and getting it replace. Pretty bad to get a "new" lens that doesn't have the original lens cap and shows signs of significant damage. And terrible that they just re-list the lens.
It was certainly listed as used, and I knew there was no box or the usual, other than hood, and caps. But I expected the front cap to be Zeiss, and it seems only sensible that the de-click tool would be there. Otherwise, you'd need to be pretty good at knowing what to look for -- the very center was mostly fine about 25% of frame, then it started failing further out, even with smaller apertures. Still, if you were checking the center and its functions, the lens worked on casual use or inspection, so I don't blame them. But it's my money, so it's my job to confirm what I buy is as I expect it to be. It pays to do a thorough check on any used purchase (or new, for that matter!).
Gunzorro wrote:
It was certainly listed as used, and I knew there was no box or the usual, other than hood, and caps. But I expected the front cap to be Zeiss, and it seems only sensible that the de-click tool would be there. Otherwise, you'd need to be pretty good at knowing what to look for -- the very center was mostly fine about 25% of frame, then it started failing further out, even with smaller apertures. Still, if you were checking the center and its functions, the lens worked on casual use or inspection, so I don't blame them. But it's my money, so it's my job to confirm what I buy is as I expect it to be. It pays to do a thorough check on any used purchase (or new, for that matter!). ...Show more →
Ah--I didn't realize it had been listed as used. I thought it was sold as a new lens. That does change the seller's responsibility.
chiron wrote:
Ah--I didn't realize it had been listed as used. I thought it was sold as a new lens. That does change the seller's responsibility.
Sorry for the confusion! This was for used Loxia lens, not new, but was sold by a bricks-and-mortar retailer/reseller of high end gear. They also have a strong on-line presence, including eBay listings.
Yes, it was listed very clearly as used, and only the listing only specified front and rear caps and hood, no mention of box, de-clicker, paperwork -- which usually means they don't come with, and buyer should ask in advance -- I had no expectation they were included.
My complaint was the substitute front cap not being listed as replacement, and the de-clicker should be mentioned or specifically state as MIA. As to the optical problems, I don't expect used goods to be thoroughly vetted or warranted as new items would be. The lens was listed as "Buy It Now" with option to "Make An Offer", which I did, and my $1100 offer was accepted immediately. And as I mentioned, the seller very promptly re-credited my PP account upon receipt. I will happy consider them as a future source of used goods, just as I would KEH, who I've bought from successfully numerous times.
I went out again yesterday afternoon to do a little more shooting with the Loxias. I'm fairly happy with the 35mm f2 although the very extreme corners do tend to get a bit soft at wider apertures - but where you focus in the scene seems to affect that as well.
What I am finding hard to deal with is the fiddly aperture ring on all of these lenses, being too close to the camera body and too close to the focusing ring. I don't know how many times I accidentally moved the focusing ring while trying to change the aperture.
Yay! Just bought Loxia 50 from transientgolf! Should come in handy here for Washington spring colors -- I beat the rhododendron bloomings! This completes my intended Loxia collection: 21, 35, 50.
Gunzorro wrote:
Yay! Just bought Loxia 50 from transientgolf! Should come in handy here for Washington spring colors -- I beat the rhododendron bloomings! This completes my intended Loxia collection: 21, 35, 50.
Don't like the 85? My trio is 21, 50, 85. All are great!
