philber wrote:
The two lenses are different designs, Luka. Loxia 50mm f:2.0 is a Planar, Milvus 50mm f:1.4 is a Distagon.
Phillippe,
Right, however, I have not noticed this type of rendering difference within Z family, I have noticed CY to be cooler, ZF to be a bit warmer, Milvus feels almost a tad cooler than CY. Or native Sony mounts may give camera to auto correct something ?
By the way, it is interesting to learn Loxia is planar, I have always loved planar rendering, Loxia feels more clinical than good old planar, must be more corrected, seems like a nice lens, Sorry I sound like some lumberjack came out from mountains, certainly feels that way, as I am still on DSLR
Phillip Reeve wrote:
WB was the same. I will have ab closer look at color differences. I was a bit surprised as well about how noteable the difference is in these images. I think I will have to do a similar test with another light source to rule out that the lamps my cheap softboxes are the reson for the difference.
I never doubted you would change WB, I am curious to learn your findings,
Luka, I owned a Loxia, and it didn't feel cooler than the other Zeiss I owned. When I owned both ZM 50 f:2.0, the predecessor to the Loxia 50, and ZM 35C f:2.8, I felt the 35 was the cooler of the two.
I am not at home at the moment and can't run a proper test but when I pointed the camera towards the wall and let the camera determine the WB it repeatedly gave me 5900k for the Milvus and 6100k for the Loxia.
philber wrote:
Luka, I owned a Loxia, and it didn't feel cooler than the other Zeiss I owned. When I owned both ZM 50 f:2.0, the predecessor to the Loxia 50, and ZM 35C f:2.8, I felt the 35 was the cooler of the two.
Phillipe, I certainly trust the statement on color from you. I don't trust mine, but yours, yes. By the way, why did you let go loxia?
:
I am not at home at the moment and can't run a proper test but when I pointed the camera towards the wall and let the camera determine the WB it repeatedly gave me 5900k for the Milvus and 6100k for the Loxia.
I loved my little Loxia. I feel it really fit and complemented the A7R. Then my blog partner, who also bought one, tried a Otus 85. He decided, because he knew that 50mm is my favorite focal length, that I had to try an Otus 55, and he was right. Then, there was no room anymore for the Loxia... Out of the maybe 40 lenses I owned, it is one of the 3 or 4 over which I have seller's remorse.
I don't know. I'd be plenty satisfied with the vignetting and CA if it was a normal-sized 50/1.4, but knowing that it's nearly the size and weight of a 180/2.8 APO-Elmarit I expected more. I am glad to see that your shots show pretty nice bokeh (nicer than the Loxia's, which I've never been super knocked out with), without the ugly fringing Lloyd's shot had. Hopefully that issue is very situational.
Now, on the resolution front, it certainly seems not to disappoint. And maybe Lloy'd justification for the CA is right - that it doesn't actually have more CA, it's just so high resolution and well corrected that it doesn't sort of "smudge over" the CA as a lesser lens would. But IMHO that's a bad design decision. You have to balance these characteristics. So far it's looking to me like Otus-level resolution is overkill without Otus-level APO correction.
We haven't seen nearly enough to make final judgements, but I'm not sold quite yet. So far we've seen excellent resolution, nice-but-not-astonishing bokeh, and very ordinary vignetting and CA performance. To me at least that's not enough to justify the size/weight. If it impresses on field curvature and focus shift, though, I think I'd be on board.
Huge sacrifice in size/ergonomics with a lens like this. What we need is a full sized SLR with EVF. Perhaps shooting with the grip would be a different story.
I would guess that based on its size the Milvus is superior to the Loxia. But it doesn't look like something that would be fun to carry around on a day to day basis.
I used it quite a bit today and handling with my L-bracket attached is okay, nothing I would take on a hiking trip but for a 3-4 hours city trip with a good camera bag it's okay.
Some more samples. Since I am on my tablet only ooc jpgs:
So far I have never tested for field curvature, my idea would be a infinity aperture series once focused at the center/ the midrfame region /the corner region. Or doesn anyone have a better idea?
Phillip Reeve wrote:
So far I have never tested for field curvature, my idea would be a infinity aperture series once focused at the center/ the midrfame region /the corner region. Or doesn anyone have a better idea?
it would probably help to do a mid distance test (1-3m) too where you can see the plane of focus. e.g. camera 2 feet above a textured flat surface tilted diagonally so that the focus plane passes through opposite corners.
when you do the infinity test field curvature test it's best to use 3 or so midzone tests as many lenses with mexican hat field curvature will look much at worse at one spot.
Oct 10, 2015 at 12:47 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Phillip Reeve wrote:
I used it quite a bit today and handling with my L-bracket attached is okay, nothing I would take on a hiking trip but for a 3-4 hours city trip with a good camera bag it's okay.
Some more samples. Since I am on my tablet only ooc jpgs:
The bokeh in the fountain images is still not any good. More fringe than we get from the Loxia.
Flare.... the green blob is what it is, what can one expect, and better than the Loxia? The contrast seem OK but not as good as with the Loxia.
Size and weight related to performance make me looking for other options (no matter how good it may perform when checking other parameters). Thanks again Phillip!
docholliday wrote:
Looks decently sharp, but that CA is atrocious!
Really ? I did not find the CA atrocious, even wide open, and it will take just 5 secs to remove it in LR/PS. EDIT : it does look pretty bad for a modern lens in the fountain shots.
Thanks for the reviews Philip !
If you do any sharpening though, as you mentioned later on, it should be stated up front along with the exact details of the sharpening applied. Did you apply the same sharpening to the shots from both lenses ?
philber wrote:
I loved my little Loxia. I feel it really fit and complemented the A7R. Then my blog partner, who also bought one, tried a Otus 85. He decided, because he knew that 50mm is my favorite focal length, that I had to try an Otus 55, and he was right. Then, there was no room anymore for the Loxia... Out of the maybe 40 lenses I owned, it is one of the 3 or 4 over which I have seller's remorse.
That explains. I was not sure why you did not keep the little gem.
I hear you..It is impossible to have room for all the lenses we enjoy! I have never sold any lenses I have owned so far, as I am in general satisfied with each in different ways. And, It takes me a while to learn each lens's strength and weaknesses . And the more lenses I own, less time I can spend with each!
