This topic is in the 2016 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 201690mm MF Alt for A7?
p.9 #190mm MF Alt for A7?
Tim, assuming you get a good copy the 90/2 OM macro is likely going to make it a contender.
If you're also looking at 85mm lenses I just posted a series in the Sony thread with the 85mm 2.5 Contax Sonnar.
Mike
If you're also looking at 85mm lenses I just posted a series in the Sony thread with the 85mm 2.5 Contax Sonnar.
Mike
Apr 28, 2016 at 10:29 AM
p.9 #290mm MF Alt for A7?
seattle 4.4.163231 by artistwithlight, on FlickrNikkor 105 f4 ai-s macro, gets you to 1:2, unless you got extension. I got mine for just over $100, from keh.
Apr 28, 2016 at 02:03 PM
p.9 #390mm MF Alt for A7?
Thanks taran, but I haven't considered the NAiS 105 macro, having owned it years back. Good at close to mid distance, but not brilliant for distance and very prone to veiling flare.
My OM Z 90/2 arrived this morning. Initial tests look good, seems it might be the good copy that I'd hoped for.
A group photo of my shortlist next, then if the weather ever improves (more like a grey, wet, winter than spring here this week and forecast to carry on into next
), I'll get out and do some real comparison testing.
My OM Z 90/2 arrived this morning. Initial tests look good, seems it might be the good copy that I'd hoped for.
A group photo of my shortlist next, then if the weather ever improves (more like a grey, wet, winter than spring here this week and forecast to carry on into next
), I'll get out and do some real comparison testing.Apr 29, 2016 at 06:09 AM
p.9 #490mm MF Alt for A7?
Here they are, the six finalists 
Things haven't gone smoothly though. The Camdiox EF - FE adapter took 2 weeks to reach me, and only makes very intermittent contact between the TS-E 90/2.8 and body, so I'm searching out another make. It only needed to control the aperture, but even that was too much for it
So my comparison testing is on hold again.
Things haven't gone smoothly though. The Camdiox EF - FE adapter took 2 weeks to reach me, and only makes very intermittent contact between the TS-E 90/2.8 and body, so I'm searching out another make. It only needed to control the aperture, but even that was too much for it
So my comparison testing is on hold again.
Apr 30, 2016 at 06:37 AM
p.9 #590mm MF Alt for A7?
Here they are, the six finalists
Arranged in order of weight, lightest left, heaviest right. I've also lost my 2nd Olympus OM 55mm cap!
The rubber ring on the FD 100/2 is because I always find FD aperture rings too smooth and tight to grasp easily.
Things haven't gone smoothly though. I'd planned to get out this morning (between heavy showers), and start the testing. However, the Camdiox EF - FE adapter, which took over 2 weeks to arrive (from 50 miles away!), only makes very intermittent contact between the TS-E 90/2.8 and body, so I'm searching out another make. It only needed to control the aperture, but even that was too much for it
So my comparison testing is on hold yet again.
With the danger of swerving the subject off course, I am imagining that all the cheaper (~£55) EF to FE AF adapters by: Camdiox, Commlite, Fotga, Meike (ABS), and Viltrox, are all much of a muchness? They all seem to score about 4 on Amazon feedback, and the common fault is lack of contact, as with my Camdiox)
I've gone for the Meike (ABS plastic body, metal mounts), as I have their extension tube set and they work well. Also the cheapest ;o) We'll see!
Arranged in order of weight, lightest left, heaviest right. I've also lost my 2nd Olympus OM 55mm cap!
The rubber ring on the FD 100/2 is because I always find FD aperture rings too smooth and tight to grasp easily.
Things haven't gone smoothly though. I'd planned to get out this morning (between heavy showers), and start the testing. However, the Camdiox EF - FE adapter, which took over 2 weeks to arrive (from 50 miles away!), only makes very intermittent contact between the TS-E 90/2.8 and body, so I'm searching out another make. It only needed to control the aperture, but even that was too much for it
So my comparison testing is on hold yet again.
With the danger of swerving the subject off course, I am imagining that all the cheaper (~£55) EF to FE AF adapters by: Camdiox, Commlite, Fotga, Meike (ABS), and Viltrox, are all much of a muchness? They all seem to score about 4 on Amazon feedback, and the common fault is lack of contact, as with my Camdiox)
I've gone for the Meike (ABS plastic body, metal mounts), as I have their extension tube set and they work well. Also the cheapest ;o) We'll see!
Apr 30, 2016 at 06:37 AM
p.9 #690mm MF Alt for A7?
Concerning the OM Z 90/2, I have just completed some simple comparison tests at infinity, mid distance and close range...and all I can say is WOW! What a lens!
At close distance, non of my shortlist can touch it, bokeh, sharpness, clarity...
At mid distance, my "reference" MD 100/2.5 has finally met its match....
but what really amazes me is that at infinity too, the OM Z 90/2 not only matches the MD 100/2.5, but it starts sharp right to the far corners at F/2.0, and hasn't a trace of veiling.
Again, OM Z 90/2 WOW!
I can now see why it has such a high reputation! In fact, by comparison, my OM Z 100/2 looked so lacklustre that I've sent it to OM-Labor in Frankfurt for a second service, by someone experienced with OM lenses! (I paid for it to be "serviced" 2-3 years ago, with a clean and relube by an Olympus approved service centre)
The (newly serviced) FDn 100/2 has an annoying "veiling/glow" wide open, it's completely gone one stop down at F/2.8, but that makes it just a good F/2.8 lens, and I prefer the OM Z 100/2 at F/2.0
I haven't been able to assess the TS-E 90/2.8 yet. The new Meike adapter arrived today, and the lens now makes connection with the body. However, every time I turn on, the lens shows as F/1.3, and I have to slightly unmount and remount (Just a fractional turn to disconnect, then reconnect contacts) to make it register F/2.8. It stays connected, whatever I do, until I turn off.
I don't know if this is an adapter problem, or just something the A7 does with EF lenses? I can live with it, though it's a nuisance.
Assessing the NAiS 105/2.5, it seems to come in 2nd to my favourites (MD 100/2.5 and OM Z 90/2) in every comparison. It definitely isn't a landscape lens, as the corners need F/8-11 before getting sharp. Also dof is very shallow even stopped down. I'd say it's a portrait lens...though it may be a bit sharp in the centre for that too!
I'll be interested in hearing what Gordon at OM-Labor has to say about the OM Z 100/2. Up against the 90/2 it really didn't impress in its present state...and it used to be my favourite lens on the 5DII, after I sold the MP!
I think with the OM Z 90/2 I have found the closest to the Zeiss MP 100/2 that I set out to find. I'm so glad I persevered in tracking one down. I haven't yet done a test for CA. As the OM Z 100/2 has quite a lot, I expect it to be similar.
I'll probably sell on the NAiS 105/2.5 and the FDn 100/2 and reassess the OM Z 100/2 when I get it back, together with the TS-E 90/2.8.
[Edit] Probably been too cavalier with the decision to sell-on the NAiS 105/2.5 and the FDn 100/2. I think they are both great lenses, and I really need to try them more before coming to a final decision. It's just that they're up against the excellent OM Z 100/2 and 90/2 (and the TS-E 90/2.8, which I'm also loving.)
Edited on May 07, 2016 at 11:34 AM · View previous versions
At close distance, non of my shortlist can touch it, bokeh, sharpness, clarity...
At mid distance, my "reference" MD 100/2.5 has finally met its match....
but what really amazes me is that at infinity too, the OM Z 90/2 not only matches the MD 100/2.5, but it starts sharp right to the far corners at F/2.0, and hasn't a trace of veiling.
Again, OM Z 90/2 WOW!
I can now see why it has such a high reputation! In fact, by comparison, my OM Z 100/2 looked so lacklustre that I've sent it to OM-Labor in Frankfurt for a second service, by someone experienced with OM lenses! (I paid for it to be "serviced" 2-3 years ago, with a clean and relube by an Olympus approved service centre)
The (newly serviced) FDn 100/2 has an annoying "veiling/glow" wide open, it's completely gone one stop down at F/2.8, but that makes it just a good F/2.8 lens, and I prefer the OM Z 100/2 at F/2.0
I haven't been able to assess the TS-E 90/2.8 yet. The new Meike adapter arrived today, and the lens now makes connection with the body. However, every time I turn on, the lens shows as F/1.3, and I have to slightly unmount and remount (Just a fractional turn to disconnect, then reconnect contacts) to make it register F/2.8. It stays connected, whatever I do, until I turn off.
I don't know if this is an adapter problem, or just something the A7 does with EF lenses? I can live with it, though it's a nuisance.
Assessing the NAiS 105/2.5, it seems to come in 2nd to my favourites (MD 100/2.5 and OM Z 90/2) in every comparison. It definitely isn't a landscape lens, as the corners need F/8-11 before getting sharp. Also dof is very shallow even stopped down. I'd say it's a portrait lens...though it may be a bit sharp in the centre for that too!
I'll be interested in hearing what Gordon at OM-Labor has to say about the OM Z 100/2. Up against the 90/2 it really didn't impress in its present state...and it used to be my favourite lens on the 5DII, after I sold the MP!
I think with the OM Z 90/2 I have found the closest to the Zeiss MP 100/2 that I set out to find. I'm so glad I persevered in tracking one down. I haven't yet done a test for CA. As the OM Z 100/2 has quite a lot, I expect it to be similar.
I'll probably sell on the NAiS 105/2.5 and the FDn 100/2 and reassess the OM Z 100/2 when I get it back, together with the TS-E 90/2.8.
[Edit] Probably been too cavalier with the decision to sell-on the NAiS 105/2.5 and the FDn 100/2. I think they are both great lenses, and I really need to try them more before coming to a final decision. It's just that they're up against the excellent OM Z 100/2 and 90/2 (and the TS-E 90/2.8, which I'm also loving.)
Edited on May 07, 2016 at 11:34 AM · View previous versions
May 04, 2016 at 12:29 PM
p.9 #890mm MF Alt for A7?
timballic wrote:
Concerning the OM Z 90/2, I have just completed some simple comparison tests at infinity, mid distance and close range...and all I can say is WOW! What a lens!
At close distance, non of my shortlist can touch it, bokeh, sharpness, clarity...
At mid distance, my "reference" MD 100/2.5 has finally met its match....
but what really amazes me is that at infinity too, the OM Z 90/2 not only matches the MD 100/2.5, but it starts sharp right to the far corners at F/2.0, and hasn't a trace of veiling.
Again, OM Z 90/2 WOW!
I can now see...Show more →
Thanks for the report! How would you rate the handling of the OM 2/90 against the MP 2/100?
My OM 2/100 ha a very little bit of haze inside so I would be interested in hearing about your experience with OM-Labor as well.
Concerning the OM Z 90/2, I have just completed some simple comparison tests at infinity, mid distance and close range...and all I can say is WOW! What a lens!
At close distance, non of my shortlist can touch it, bokeh, sharpness, clarity...
At mid distance, my "reference" MD 100/2.5 has finally met its match....
but what really amazes me is that at infinity too, the OM Z 90/2 not only matches the MD 100/2.5, but it starts sharp right to the far corners at F/2.0, and hasn't a trace of veiling.
Again, OM Z 90/2 WOW!
I can now see...Show more →
Thanks for the report! How would you rate the handling of the OM 2/90 against the MP 2/100?
My OM 2/100 ha a very little bit of haze inside so I would be interested in hearing about your experience with OM-Labor as well.
May 05, 2016 at 01:01 AM
p.9 #990mm MF Alt for A7?
Phillip Reeve wrote:
Thanks for the report! How would you rate the handling of the OM 2/90 against the MP 2/100?
My OM 2/100 ha a very little bit of haze inside so I would be interested in hearing about your experience with OM-Labor as well.
The 2/90 is slightly heavier (30g) than the 2/100, otherwise very similar in feel and balance, though the aperture ring is in front of the focus ring on the 100/2 and behind it (but not far back) on the 90/2 I didn't prefer one position over the other. Definitely the 90/2 was sharper at all distances, however the bokeh of the 100/2 was slightly more pronounced on the 100/2, but very pleasing and gentle on both. The difference may just be the FL ratio difference, 100/2 : 90/2. Both have some CA...but less than the MP.
Gordon's servicing of my OM Z 2/50 was so good, that I can recommend him highly. You can tell him I said so.
(In fact, he found he couldn't get the performance of my 50/2 to quite match his reference copy of it, so he sold me that one instead, for just a little more.)
His charge for a full service with re-lube is €100
Contact details: [email protected]
Gordon Friedrich
Beethovenstr.51
Frankfurt
60325
Germany
Thanks for the report! How would you rate the handling of the OM 2/90 against the MP 2/100?
My OM 2/100 ha a very little bit of haze inside so I would be interested in hearing about your experience with OM-Labor as well.
The 2/90 is slightly heavier (30g) than the 2/100, otherwise very similar in feel and balance, though the aperture ring is in front of the focus ring on the 100/2 and behind it (but not far back) on the 90/2 I didn't prefer one position over the other. Definitely the 90/2 was sharper at all distances, however the bokeh of the 100/2 was slightly more pronounced on the 100/2, but very pleasing and gentle on both. The difference may just be the FL ratio difference, 100/2 : 90/2. Both have some CA...but less than the MP.
Gordon's servicing of my OM Z 2/50 was so good, that I can recommend him highly. You can tell him I said so.
(In fact, he found he couldn't get the performance of my 50/2 to quite match his reference copy of it, so he sold me that one instead, for just a little more.)
His charge for a full service with re-lube is €100
Contact details: [email protected]
Gordon Friedrich
Beethovenstr.51
Frankfurt
60325
Germany
May 05, 2016 at 07:13 AM
p.9 #1090mm MF Alt for A7?
After a few hours with the OM Z 90/2, in my local bluebell woods, I'm sorry to report that the bokeh of this lens is often "double" and busy, beyond the plane of focus. Something I never found with the OM Z 100/2. Maybe, if OM -Labor makes enough difference to it, the 100/2 is the better lens for me? I'll post some examples later today. As the 100/2 is now away I can't do a direct comparison. I may go again with the "Bokina" instead, though I know it is rather flat by comparison.
May 07, 2016 at 12:55 AM
p.9 #1290mm MF Alt for A7?
I am a bit surprised that you find the Bokina so flat. Sure it doesn't like large bright areas in the image and those reduce the contrast a lot so I don't use it for product photography with a white background but for most shooting scenarios I never found it flat.
May 07, 2016 at 02:37 PM
p.9 #1390mm MF Alt for A7?
Phillip, maybe mine is an earlier version than yours, with different coatings? (Ser. # 9001xxx)
Again it's only by comparison with the excellent OMs and the TS-E that it shows up.....it can still take lovely photos, (with the right person behind it. ;o))
As the example below shows, the lower contrast of the Bokina isn't always very apparent.
A comparison of bokeh (carried out over 2 days, so can't be exact.)
First the OM Z 90/2 (1st day) I think even here a slight nervousness of bokeh is visible, cf the other two.
Then the TS-E 90/2.8 (2nd day) Loving this lens.
Last The Tokina 90/2.5 (exact set up as the TS-E)
Again it's only by comparison with the excellent OMs and the TS-E that it shows up.....it can still take lovely photos, (with the right person behind it. ;o))
As the example below shows, the lower contrast of the Bokina isn't always very apparent.
A comparison of bokeh (carried out over 2 days, so can't be exact.)
First the OM Z 90/2 (1st day) I think even here a slight nervousness of bokeh is visible, cf the other two.
Then the TS-E 90/2.8 (2nd day) Loving this lens.
Last The Tokina 90/2.5 (exact set up as the TS-E)
May 08, 2016 at 01:20 AM
p.9 #1490mm MF Alt for A7?
There is more magnification on the Tokina and Canon shots, so the same object in the background will be more blurred. They need to have the same magnification and framing to make a fair conclusion. The colors look better on the Oly.
May 08, 2016 at 04:33 AM
p.9 #1590mm MF Alt for A7?
pdmphoto wrote:
There is more magnification on the Tokina and Canon shots, so the same object in the background will be more blurred. They need to have the same magnification and framing to make a fair conclusion. The colors look better on the Oly.
Hi, yes, that's why I said it wasn't a direct comparison, as taken on two separate days. (Interesting how the bluebells have opened out. ;o)
There is more magnification on the Tokina and Canon shots, so the same object in the background will be more blurred. They need to have the same magnification and framing to make a fair conclusion. The colors look better on the Oly.
Hi, yes, that's why I said it wasn't a direct comparison, as taken on two separate days. (Interesting how the bluebells have opened out. ;o)
May 08, 2016 at 04:40 AM
p.9 #1690mm MF Alt for A7?
timballic wrote:
Concerning the OM Z 90/2, I have just completed some simple comparison tests at infinity, mid distance and close range...and all I can say is WOW! What a lens!
At close distance, non of my shortlist can touch it, bokeh, sharpness, clarity...
At mid distance, my "reference" MD 100/2.5 has finally met its match....
but what really amazes me is that at infinity too, the OM Z 90/2 not only matches the MD 100/2.5, but it starts sharp right to the far corners at F/2.0, and hasn't a trace of veiling.
Again, OM Z 90/2 WOW!
I can now see...Show more →
Interesting findings on your copy of the Oly 100/2. I wasn't too impressed by my first copy (tested on 5DII), but the one I have now (tested on A7R) is just WOW! I've owned a ton of 80-100mm lenses, and this one is the best of the bunch. It's a great performer wide open, and it gets even better stopped down. Excellent sharpness across the entire frame. I posted this on before, but its a good example wide open:
http://www.imaginenature.com/_DSC8192_v1_small.jpg
Concerning the OM Z 90/2, I have just completed some simple comparison tests at infinity, mid distance and close range...and all I can say is WOW! What a lens!
At close distance, non of my shortlist can touch it, bokeh, sharpness, clarity...
At mid distance, my "reference" MD 100/2.5 has finally met its match....
but what really amazes me is that at infinity too, the OM Z 90/2 not only matches the MD 100/2.5, but it starts sharp right to the far corners at F/2.0, and hasn't a trace of veiling.
Again, OM Z 90/2 WOW!
I can now see...Show more →
Interesting findings on your copy of the Oly 100/2. I wasn't too impressed by my first copy (tested on 5DII), but the one I have now (tested on A7R) is just WOW! I've owned a ton of 80-100mm lenses, and this one is the best of the bunch. It's a great performer wide open, and it gets even better stopped down. Excellent sharpness across the entire frame. I posted this on before, but its a good example wide open:
http://www.imaginenature.com/_DSC8192_v1_small.jpg
May 08, 2016 at 04:43 AM
p.9 #1790mm MF Alt for A7?
Beautiful!
To me the OM Z 100/2 has always been the "best" bokeh lens I've come across. (Best for me, means smooth and gentle with no "jitteriness".) I'm really looking forward to getting it back from service, then I can do a head-to-head with it and the 90/2.
To me the OM Z 100/2 has always been the "best" bokeh lens I've come across. (Best for me, means smooth and gentle with no "jitteriness".) I'm really looking forward to getting it back from service, then I can do a head-to-head with it and the 90/2.
May 08, 2016 at 04:49 AM
p.9 #1890mm MF Alt for A7?
Thanks, I love its excellent and unique bokeh. I'm also impressed with its full frame sharpness, the color, and how it renders. I've had three copies of the Oly 90/2, and while it is one of my favorite macro lenses, I prefer the 100/2 for general photography. It's a great performer throughout its range.
May 08, 2016 at 04:59 AM
p.9 #1990mm MF Alt for A7?
When the OM 100/2 comes back, I'll do a full bokeh series including the NAiS 105/2.5; OM Z 100/2; OM Z 90/2;
TS-E 90/2.8 and the FDn 100/2, (ie. my "shortlist" lenses),...though being different FLs, I'm not quite sure how best to do it
TS-E 90/2.8 and the FDn 100/2, (ie. my "shortlist" lenses),...though being different FLs, I'm not quite sure how best to do it
May 08, 2016 at 06:25 AM