This topic is in the 2016 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2016CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
p.1 #1CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
I've been looking around for a really small but good tele for wilderness walking - longer than my CV 75 2.5 to pair with a 55 (or indeed the CY 3570 I'm waiting on)
My shortlist was the OM 100 2.8 (of fond memory from my film days), CY 85 2.8 and CY 100 3.5
I wanted nothing larger - I'd take my Batis 85 then, which I do for travel that's not hiking with a weeks food on my back.
The duch guy who runs (or ran - it's been idle for a while) slrlensreview seemed to measure better results with the 85 than the 100 CY. But that's inconsistent with the Zeiss published MTF so I put it diwn to sample variation (though he's not the only one to say this)
Inspired by Jannik Peters review on Philip Bloom's site when I saw an apparently good copy of an MMJ 100 3.5 I pushed the button. I've ordered an adapter with a helicoid for close focus too ... In normal mode it's just a regular adapter that allows infinity focus, but you can then rack it out which I thought could be handy when not taking a macro lens with me (and taking extension tubes on and off while hiking with others is antisocial)
So when it arrives I'll post! In the mean time anyone have comments on this lens? Did I make the right decision? Anyone with samples?
My shortlist was the OM 100 2.8 (of fond memory from my film days), CY 85 2.8 and CY 100 3.5
I wanted nothing larger - I'd take my Batis 85 then, which I do for travel that's not hiking with a weeks food on my back.
The duch guy who runs (or ran - it's been idle for a while) slrlensreview seemed to measure better results with the 85 than the 100 CY. But that's inconsistent with the Zeiss published MTF so I put it diwn to sample variation (though he's not the only one to say this)
Inspired by Jannik Peters review on Philip Bloom's site when I saw an apparently good copy of an MMJ 100 3.5 I pushed the button. I've ordered an adapter with a helicoid for close focus too ... In normal mode it's just a regular adapter that allows infinity focus, but you can then rack it out which I thought could be handy when not taking a macro lens with me (and taking extension tubes on and off while hiking with others is antisocial)
So when it arrives I'll post! In the mean time anyone have comments on this lens? Did I make the right decision? Anyone with samples?
Apr 22, 2016 at 08:09 AM
p.1 #2CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
I have the 100mm S f3.5, bought it for when I do not want to carry the 70-200 F4...in a quick test of cityscape with both at 100mm the Sonnar was as sharp as the zoom with a tad more contrast. I'm using the Metabones adapter and there is some play in mine and I often wonder if this affects the performance
Apr 22, 2016 at 08:28 AM
p.1 #3CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
I have the 100/3.5, also with the helicoid adapter. Great combo.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1365016/0#13433674
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1365016/0#13433674
Apr 22, 2016 at 11:32 AM
p.1 #4CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
I don't think you can wrong with a good copy of either the 85 or 100, but if your use is mostly landscapes, the 100's probably the better choice.
Apr 22, 2016 at 01:29 PM
p.1 #5CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
I see that your first adapter wasn't quite wide enough for full frame. I too ordered the cheap rather than Kipon one that describes itself as C/Y to NEX. But it does list A7 and A7r in the compatibility list.
Fingers crossed!!!
Fingers crossed!!!
Apr 22, 2016 at 04:22 PM
p.1 #6CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
The MTF for the sonnar 100..
http://applications.zeiss.com/C12578B8004E8E1D/0/0CD47B8CEA971A9BC12578BE002CF5D7/$file/sonnar_t_35_100_ger.pdf
http://applications.zeiss.com/C12578B8004E8E1D/0/0CD47B8CEA971A9BC12578BE002CF5D7/$file/sonnar_t_35_100_ger.pdf
Apr 22, 2016 at 04:27 PM
p.1 #7CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
DavidBM wrote:
I see that your first adapter wasn't quite wide enough for full frame. I too ordered the cheap rather than Kipon one that describes itself as C/Y to NEX. But it does list A7 and A7r in the compatibility list.
Fingers crossed!!!
Maybe they upgraded it .. good luck! I just bought an 85/2.8 C/Y that I'll be using it with as well.
I see that your first adapter wasn't quite wide enough for full frame. I too ordered the cheap rather than Kipon one that describes itself as C/Y to NEX. But it does list A7 and A7r in the compatibility list.
Fingers crossed!!!
Maybe they upgraded it .. good luck! I just bought an 85/2.8 C/Y that I'll be using it with as well.
Apr 22, 2016 at 05:24 PM
p.1 #8CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
DavidBM wrote:
The MTF for the sonnar 100..
http://applications.zeiss.com/C12578B8004E8E1D/0/0CD47B8CEA971A9BC12578BE002CF5D7/$file/sonnar_t_35_100_ger.pdf
Thanks for the link. I just picked up a C/Y 100/3.5 to complement my FE 70-200/4. It would be interesting to compare it against the zoom at 100mm. MTF looks great especially for contrast.
The MTF for the sonnar 100..
http://applications.zeiss.com/C12578B8004E8E1D/0/0CD47B8CEA971A9BC12578BE002CF5D7/$file/sonnar_t_35_100_ger.pdf
Thanks for the link. I just picked up a C/Y 100/3.5 to complement my FE 70-200/4. It would be interesting to compare it against the zoom at 100mm. MTF looks great especially for contrast.
Apr 22, 2016 at 07:11 PM
p.1 #9CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Amusing to see CZ Contax/Yashica lenses in favor again. Thank you, Sony! The S85 and S100 are essentially identical in performance and rendering, with both lenses delivering the archetypical Sonnar look. For backpacking, the S85 is very slightly more compact. I favor the S100 as a portrait FL and for the slightly better edges:
The resident S100 expert on FM is Philip Partridge with his Tibet series in the Sony FE Images Thread
The resident S100 expert on FM is Philip Partridge with his Tibet series in the Sony FE Images Thread
Apr 22, 2016 at 07:38 PM
p.1 #10CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Fred Miranda wrote:
http://applications.zeiss.com/C12578B8004E8E1D/0/0CD47B8CEA971A9BC12578BE002CF5D7/$file/sonnar_t_35_100_ger.pdfThanks for the link. I just picked up a C/Y 100/3.5 to complement my FE 70-200/4. It would be interesting to compare it against the zoom at 100mm. MTF looks great especially for contrast.
Yep it'll be interesting to see how it compares to the FE at 100 - which is one of the FE zoom's stronger FLs in my experience!
The MTF does look good doesn't it. In fact, aside from a little astigmatism as you stop down in the corners, it's not a hundred miles away from the MP 100 at shared apertures.
So with a close focus adapter, I can think of it as a mini-MP for hiking! (don't jump on me, world, I know the limitations...)
The one I got is an MMJ; scuttlebut is that coatings improved in the MM series as against AE, but who knows...
DavidBM wrote
The MTF for the sonnar 100..http://applications.zeiss.com/C12578B8004E8E1D/0/0CD47B8CEA971A9BC12578BE002CF5D7/$file/sonnar_t_35_100_ger.pdf
Yep it'll be interesting to see how it compares to the FE at 100 - which is one of the FE zoom's stronger FLs in my experience!
The MTF does look good doesn't it. In fact, aside from a little astigmatism as you stop down in the corners, it's not a hundred miles away from the MP 100 at shared apertures.
So with a close focus adapter, I can think of it as a mini-MP for hiking! (don't jump on me, world, I know the limitations...)
The one I got is an MMJ; scuttlebut is that coatings improved in the MM series as against AE, but who knows...
Apr 22, 2016 at 08:17 PM
p.1 #11CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
The Yashica 100mm f3.5 macro is quite good too. I can try and get some infinity samples done, but it's not far off the Contax G 90mm f2.8 I have if at all.
Apr 22, 2016 at 08:42 PM
p.1 #12CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
I really like my Yashica 55/2.8 ML macro but lust after the 100/3.5 ML because it might be the best performer in their lineup. However, its greater weight and length won't win any favors in the backpack—unless the macro feature is desired. 
Apr 22, 2016 at 09:13 PM
p.1 #13CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Take a look at my aperture series at 85mm and 100mm (f8):
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1424887
We have compared both Sonnars and the FE 4/70-200. At least for my copies of the zoom and the Sonnars, both Sonnars are superior in the corners.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1424887
We have compared both Sonnars and the FE 4/70-200. At least for my copies of the zoom and the Sonnars, both Sonnars are superior in the corners.
Apr 23, 2016 at 01:27 AM
p.1 #14CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
DavidBM wrote:
http://applications.zeiss.com/C12578B8004E8E1D/0/0CD47B8CEA971A9BC12578BE002CF5D7/$file/sonnar_t_35_100_ger.pdfThanks for the link. I just picked up a C/Y 100/3.5 to complement my FE 70-200/4. It would be interesting to compare it against the zoom at 100mm. MTF looks great especially for contrast.Yep it'll be interesting to see how it compares to the FE at 100 - which is one of the FE zoom's stronger FLs in my experience!
The MTF does look good doesn't it. In fact, aside from a little astigmatism as you stop down in the corners, it's not a hundred miles away from the MP 100 at shared apertures.
I've tested my A7R2 and a FE70-200 v c/y 100mm 3.5 in the extreme corners @f5.6 @infinity. I haven't done a tests on high tolerance adapter. But I have one coming in the mail. I bought 3 cheap adapters, one was good, one was not bad and the other was a dog (and is going into the bin).
Both lenses are really about as sharp as each other in the central parts of a frame. My guess is different adapters or lens copies will make more of a difference. Maybe more contrast to the C/Y.
My FE 70-200 never gets as sharp as the C/Y in the corners. It is a not massive, but noticeable difference.
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
The MTF for the sonnar 100..http://applications.zeiss.com/C12578B8004E8E1D/0/0CD47B8CEA971A9BC12578BE002CF5D7/$file/sonnar_t_35_100_ger.pdf
The MTF does look good doesn't it. In fact, aside from a little astigmatism as you stop down in the corners, it's not a hundred miles away from the MP 100 at shared apertures.
I've tested my A7R2 and a FE70-200 v c/y 100mm 3.5 in the extreme corners @f5.6 @infinity. I haven't done a tests on high tolerance adapter. But I have one coming in the mail. I bought 3 cheap adapters, one was good, one was not bad and the other was a dog (and is going into the bin).
Both lenses are really about as sharp as each other in the central parts of a frame. My guess is different adapters or lens copies will make more of a difference. Maybe more contrast to the C/Y.
My FE 70-200 never gets as sharp as the C/Y in the corners. It is a not massive, but noticeable difference.
Apr 23, 2016 at 02:44 AM
p.1 #15CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Jannik Peters wrote:
Take a look at my aperture series at 85mm and 100mm (f8):
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1424887
We have compared both Sonnars and the FE 4/70-200. At least for my copies of the zoom and the Sonnars, both Sonnars are superior in the corners.
Thanks Jannik. That's interesting. I'll do the same when I get mine to see if my samples of the FE zoom and the Sonnar 100 perform similarly. I'll do a 2 m series as well, and compare the close focus with the helicoid adapter with a real macro lens ar the same magnification to see if the results are worth th extra weight of the helicoid adapter over a plain one.
Take a look at my aperture series at 85mm and 100mm (f8):
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1424887
We have compared both Sonnars and the FE 4/70-200. At least for my copies of the zoom and the Sonnars, both Sonnars are superior in the corners.
Thanks Jannik. That's interesting. I'll do the same when I get mine to see if my samples of the FE zoom and the Sonnar 100 perform similarly. I'll do a 2 m series as well, and compare the close focus with the helicoid adapter with a real macro lens ar the same magnification to see if the results are worth th extra weight of the helicoid adapter over a plain one.
Apr 23, 2016 at 02:48 AM
p.1 #16CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
100% zoom in and crop. Both shot at f5.6. 40 sharping in Lightroom and nothing else done.
As you can see a bit more CA on the Zeiss. In the extreme corners the Zeiss wins, but by mid frame they are even, with the Zeiss with more contrast but no more sharpness.
FE 70-200mm F4 V C/Y 100mm F3.5 extreme corner
Edited on Apr 23, 2016 at 10:06 AM · View previous versions
As you can see a bit more CA on the Zeiss. In the extreme corners the Zeiss wins, but by mid frame they are even, with the Zeiss with more contrast but no more sharpness.
FE 70-200mm F4 V C/Y 100mm F3.5 extreme corner
Edited on Apr 23, 2016 at 10:06 AM · View previous versions
Apr 23, 2016 at 06:26 AM
p.1 #17CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Thanks for the test. That's what I'm after. A small and light alternative to my 70-200/4 for long hikes. The Zeiss seems to pull more resolution in this area and that is really interesting since 100-135mm is the zoom sweet FL.
TakenWild wrote:
100% zoom in and crop. Both shot at f5.6. 40 sharping in Lightroom and nothing else done.
As you can see a bit more CA on the Zeiss. In the extreme corners the Zeiss wins, but by mid frame they are even, with the Zeiss with more contrast but no more sharpness.
TakenWild wrote:
100% zoom in and crop. Both shot at f5.6. 40 sharping in Lightroom and nothing else done.
As you can see a bit more CA on the Zeiss. In the extreme corners the Zeiss wins, but by mid frame they are even, with the Zeiss with more contrast but no more sharpness.
Apr 23, 2016 at 08:45 AM
p.1 #18CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Thanks for the test. That's what I'm after until Zeiss gives us a Loxia 100mm..a compact/light alternative to my 70-200/4 and 135/2L for long hikes. The Zeiss seems to pull more resolution in this area and that is really interesting since 100-135mm is the zoom sweet FL.
TakenWild wrote:
100% zoom in and crop. Both shot at f5.6. 40 sharping in Lightroom and nothing else done.
As you can see a bit more CA on the Zeiss. In the extreme corners the Zeiss wins, but by mid frame they are even, with the Zeiss with more contrast but no more sharpness.
TakenWild wrote:
100% zoom in and crop. Both shot at f5.6. 40 sharping in Lightroom and nothing else done.
As you can see a bit more CA on the Zeiss. In the extreme corners the Zeiss wins, but by mid frame they are even, with the Zeiss with more contrast but no more sharpness.
Apr 23, 2016 at 08:46 AM
p.1 #19CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
Yep, the 70-200 f4 is very good, but it doesn't get corner sharpness like c/y 35-70 or 100 3.5 or very good primes do.
Looking forward to taking it with me hiking in Europe in June. The 70-200 will stay in Australia. Also, if the MC 200mm f4 I've ordered can compete with the zoom, I might even sell it.
Looking forward to taking it with me hiking in Europe in June. The 70-200 will stay in Australia. Also, if the MC 200mm f4 I've ordered can compete with the zoom, I might even sell it.
Apr 23, 2016 at 10:59 AM
p.1 #20CY 100 3.5 for backpacking
One interesting thing here is that zooms have got so good that we use older quality primes we seeing only small but real improvements at best at wider apertures, and similar performance stopped down.
And yet lots of users are really interested in these primes. Why? Because we want small light hiking lenses that will be about the same speed and similar or slightly better IQ to our larger zooms.
But the primes we get given are either huge and fast, or ocassionally small but budget. Where are the ones we want?(Not all of us - of course big fast and small inexpensive are important!) The small great but slowish?
The L21 seems to be the first of this breed in the modern era (and if it had been f4 it could have been even smaller). Given how good the budget 28 f2 FE is, imagine a no holds barred 28 2.8! And a modern 180 f4 so I can retire my Apo Lanthar, and a lox 100 2.8 so the collectors of C/Y glass don't have competition from those of us that want to use it!
And yet lots of users are really interested in these primes. Why? Because we want small light hiking lenses that will be about the same speed and similar or slightly better IQ to our larger zooms.
But the primes we get given are either huge and fast, or ocassionally small but budget. Where are the ones we want?(Not all of us - of course big fast and small inexpensive are important!) The small great but slowish?
The L21 seems to be the first of this breed in the modern era (and if it had been f4 it could have been even smaller). Given how good the budget 28 f2 FE is, imagine a no holds barred 28 2.8! And a modern 180 f4 so I can retire my Apo Lanthar, and a lox 100 2.8 so the collectors of C/Y glass don't have competition from those of us that want to use it!
Apr 23, 2016 at 05:03 PM