Followed by the A7 series cameras with a Kolari modification. It does quite well on my A7rM V3 but it is somewhat unfortunate that it is subject on the camera to the edge and corner color issues requiring the usage of CornerFix or the Adobe equivalent. Though color is not so much an issue with the A7rII cameras, the lens still suffers without the Kolari mod.
Rich
Rich,
You wrote in previous posts that you mainly shoot with this lens stopped down to f/8 and mostly f/11. Although I have not tested, from the images I'm getting on the A7RII, I am very confident there won't be a difference in resolution center/mid 'and' edges using a modded sensor at these apertures. On the A7RII, there is pretty much no astigmatism after f/6.3 at infinity distance.
The main difference you would see on your images is a color cast due to a different Scott glass used for the mod.
Now, if you say you are using this lens for astro wide open or usually needs extreme edges sharp at wider apertures for your application, I agree this lens would be better served with a modded sensor or Leica, Ikon body.
We do need to be specific on what body we are talking about here. On the A7RII, there is no need for 'CornerFix' or any other color-edge software when using the ZM 35 Distagon.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Rich,
You wrote in previous posts that you mainly shoot with this lens stopped down to f/8 and mostly f/11. Although I have not tested, from the images I'm getting on the A7RII, I am very confident there won't be a difference in resolution center/mid 'and' edges using a modded sensor at these apertures. On the A7RII, there is pretty much no astigmatism after f/6.3.
The main difference you would see on your images is a color cast due to a different Scott glass used for the mod.
Now, if you say you are using this lens for astro wide open or usually needs extreme edges sharp at wide apertures for your application, I agree this lens would be better served with a modded sensor or Leica, Ikon body.
I agree that we need to be specific on what body we are talking about. On the A7RII, there is no need for 'CornerFix' or any other color-edge software with this lens....Show more →
Part of this is i have no interest in sharp corners wide open with a lens like this, I really don't have a need but if i need than F6.3. I actually prefer soft corners in the wide area, that creates nicer bokeh
Fred Miranda wrote:
Rich,
You wrote in previous posts that you mainly shoot with this lens stopped down to f/8 and mostly f/11. Although I have not tested, from the images I'm getting on the A7RII, I am very confident there won't be a difference in resolution center/mid 'and' edges using a modded sensor at these apertures. On the A7RII, there is pretty much no astigmatism after f/6.3.
The main difference you would see on your images is a color cast due to a different Scott glass used for the mod.
Now, if you say you are using this lens for astro wide open or usually needs extreme edges sharp at wider apertures for your application, I agree this lens would be better served with a modded sensor or Leica, Ikon body.
I agree that we need to be specific on what body we are talking about. On the A7RII, there is no need for 'CornerFix' or any other color-edge software when using the ZM 35....Show more →
I think some folks are looking at this lens for perfection on a Sony body. I'm not looking at it in that light but more a look character lens and the 3D pop has got it in spades. I have the perfection lens in the GM 24-70 and it's clean all around. This has got funk to it
LBJ2 wrote:
Those bokeh balls are very distracting. Any chance you can present a similar scene using the 35 ZM?
Let me add I like this lens but it's a no go if this matters to you. The Tamron 1.8 has it too, the VC 35 1.7 is pretty good. The Sigma Art is bad and so is the 24-35 sigma. I'm going from memory here. The RXr1 II is good. Only talking about onion rings. The GMs are great although once in a awhile you see some. The brighter the light or reflection the worse it is.
GMPhotography wrote:
There really bad and I don't even want to post those images. I think one of my car shots I did both lenses on. I'll check my files
They are however, good examples of what you have been describing Guy. I didn't notice the bokeh ball pattern with my FE 35 F1.4 until you mentioned it.
Well that is the worst I have come across, frankly the shots are ruined at least for me. I airbrushed the crap out of one of them for my daughter. Its a shame because its a nice lens for sure but Sony needs a new GM 35mm with their new process to eliminate it now they have the machine to do the polishing better like the two GMs. I have seen that machine in Solms on my Leica tour. Very cool
GMPhotography wrote:
Let me add I like this lens but it's a no go if this matters to you. The Tamron 1.8 has it too, the VC 35 1.7 is pretty good. The Sigma Art is bad and so is the 24-35 sigma. I'm going from memory here. The RXr1 II is good. Only talking about onion rings. The GMs are great although once in a awhile you see some. The brighter the light or reflection the worse it is.
Agreed. I like the FE 35 F1.4 too. But as you illustrated, if Bokeh is an important element of the composition I might try another lens. All part of selecting the right tool for the job.
LBJ2 wrote:
Agreed. I like the FE 35 F1.4 too. But as you illustrated, if Bokeh is an important element of the composition I might try another lens. All part of selecting the right tool for the job.
Yea and i don't mean to tear it up either I'm just reporting what i have come across. I have no allegence to any brand or product just want to try and help others here. This stuff is tough for more users without a lot of experience in the photo world or new to it.
GMPhotography wrote:
Yea and i don't mean to tear it up either I'm just reporting what i have come across. I have no allegence to any brand or product just want to try and help others here. This stuff is tough for more users without a lot of experience in the photo world or new to it.
That's what I like about the 50/1.5C ZM. There is no asphericals and therefore zero onion-ring pattern. Because of that, it's under corrected for SA and that's part of its character. For me, it's actually a plus for what I use this lens for.
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's what I like about the 50/1.5C ZM. There is no asphericals and therefore zero onion-ring pattern. Because of that, it's under corrected for SA and that's part of its character. For me, it's actually a plus for what I use this lens for.
Jochenb wrote:
I'm actually a bit surprised by this sudden love story here.
I looked at this lens numerous times because I really wanted it to be great on the A7 series. We had discussions about it in it's own thread. In the end I went for the FE 35/1.4 and later the RX1RII.
This lens sure has great qualities on any camera (colors, contrast,..), but suffers so much on the A7 sensors. On a Leica camera this lens is already fantastic wide open across the frame. You need to stop down to at least F5.6 - F8 on a stock A7.
I don't mind some softness at larger apertures, but the bokeh looks really nervous on the A7. Many examples in this thread also show it. Unpleasing double edged bokeh. This was the biggest deal breaker for me. It's worse than when using it on a Leica and the complete opposite of the 35/2 Sonnar on the RX1 cameras. The FE 35/1.4 is a lot smoother too.
Another problem is very strong field curvature on a stock sensor. There are examples of this in the ZM thread. Focusing on a mid-distance subject wide open results in background edges that are in focus.
The ZM also has really bad coma on the stock sensors. Especially the edges. ...Show more →
I think it has been a love fest, but a realistic love fest. The ZM 35 f/1.4 has very good resolution and excellent contrast in the centre even wide open giving it a pop that many people like (me included). This look isn't for everyone, but some of us like it a lot. I think that pop is why this lens reminds me of the Zeiss C/Y mount 35 f/1.4. It too has that pop, but this lens is sharper in the centre and even has better contrast. What Guy and Fred's tests also show is that stopped down to f/5.6 (maybe f/6.3) or narrower it is an excellent landscape lens as well. There is a lot in those two points to love. Hence the fest. That said, a number of us have pointed to the bokeh and field curvature as limiting factors of this lens. You will need to understand the lens to get the most out of it.
For my purposes the lens is lovely for close up shots in which the focal object encompasses a large part of the frame. I take quite a few of these shots and the sharpness wide open, the contrast, and the bokeh in these type of shots make it a fantastic choice for such work. See philber (Phillipe's) work with the lens as a great example of what this lens can do for such shots. The lens is also excellent for landscape use. For me the jury is still out for middle distance portrait work, but I have other lenses to help there. So I have no qualms about getting it. I know the field curvature and the bokeh may cause problems for some shots, but I will just try to avoid those types of shots. Personally, I have almost bought this lens several times, but I just upgraded from an A7II to an A7rII and that tipped the balance in my case.
