C-sonnar!
p.11 #1C-sonnar!
genji wrote:
I do a lot of botanical photography; and it turns out the Sonnar's distinctive bokeh is rather nice on wide aperture botanical images (made possible courtesy of the TAP)
Here is an image (not great, but illustrates the potential) where the Sonnar bokeh gives a lively spatial feel to the bokeh with could otherwise have been a flat smooth blur, which somehow to my taste would make the flower spike feel less immersed in its environment (the actual flower is a focus stack of 3 f 1.7 images, the rest of the image is from one of those)Golly, that's impressive. I wouldn't have thought it possible to do a focus stack of a "living" subject such as a flower at such a close distance. Was there absolutely no wind at all?Very little wind; but it was hand held at less than minimum focussing distance (thanks, TAP!) so my hand was as bad as wind.
The trick is after doing your auto-align in photoshop, to set the opacity of one of the layers to about 40% so you can see how it is registering, and then move it around a bit to get is as perfectly in register as you can in the exact bits where you plan to blend. Since only the subject itself is focus stacked (the rest of the image is just the closest one of these exposures, to get best bokeh) it doesn't matter if you loose registration in the rest of the image.
Once you have the layers of the flower itself in register, I blended them in manually. Basically the three images had the bottom of the flower spike, the middle and the top in focus.
But no, you couldn't do this with Helicon focus.....Hand held !? !? !?
I think I'm going to have to lie down on the sofa and have a couple of shots of tequila.
Well IBIS helps a lot; as does the fact that you are focus stacking at f1.7 so with that wide aperture you can even use base ISO!
DavidBM wrote
genji wrote
DavidBM wrote
On the other hand (relative to my last post) here is a kind of image I did not expect the Sonnar to excel at.I do a lot of botanical photography; and it turns out the Sonnar's distinctive bokeh is rather nice on wide aperture botanical images (made possible courtesy of the TAP)
Here is an image (not great, but illustrates the potential) where the Sonnar bokeh gives a lively spatial feel to the bokeh with could otherwise have been a flat smooth blur, which somehow to my taste would make the flower spike feel less immersed in its environment (the actual flower is a focus stack of 3 f 1.7 images, the rest of the image is from one of those)
The trick is after doing your auto-align in photoshop, to set the opacity of one of the layers to about 40% so you can see how it is registering, and then move it around a bit to get is as perfectly in register as you can in the exact bits where you plan to blend. Since only the subject itself is focus stacked (the rest of the image is just the closest one of these exposures, to get best bokeh) it doesn't matter if you loose registration in the rest of the image.
Once you have the layers of the flower itself in register, I blended them in manually. Basically the three images had the bottom of the flower spike, the middle and the top in focus.
But no, you couldn't do this with Helicon focus.....
I think I'm going to have to lie down on the sofa and have a couple of shots of tequila.
Well IBIS helps a lot; as does the fact that you are focus stacking at f1.7 so with that wide aperture you can even use base ISO!
Sep 10, 2016 at 05:41 AM
p.11 #2C-sonnar!
genji wrote:
I do a lot of botanical photography; and it turns out the Sonnar's distinctive bokeh is rather nice on wide aperture botanical images (made possible courtesy of the TAP)
Here is an image (not great, but illustrates the potential) where the Sonnar bokeh gives a lively spatial feel to the bokeh with could otherwise have been a flat smooth blur, which somehow to my taste would make the flower spike feel less immersed in its environment (the actual flower is a focus stack of 3 f 1.7 images, the rest of the image is from one of those)Golly, that's impressive. I wouldn't have thought it possible to do a focus stack of a "living" subject such as a flower at such a close distance. Was there absolutely no wind at all?Very little wind; but it was hand held at less than minimum focussing distance (thanks, TAP!) so my hand was as bad as wind.
The trick is after doing your auto-align in photoshop, to set the opacity of one of the layers to about 40% so you can see how it is registering, and then move it around a bit to get is as perfectly in register as you can in the exact bits where you plan to blend. Since only the subject itself is focus stacked (the rest of the image is just the closest one of these exposures, to get best bokeh) it doesn't matter if you loose registration in the rest of the image.
Once you have the layers of the flower itself in register, I blended them in manually. Basically the three images had the bottom of the flower spike, the middle and the top in focus.
But no, you couldn't do this with Helicon focus.....Hand held !? !? !?
I think I'm going to have to lie down on the sofa and have a couple of shots of tequila.
Take several as I get steadier the more I drink. Lol
DavidBM wrote
genji wrote
DavidBM wrote
On the other hand (relative to my last post) here is a kind of image I did not expect the Sonnar to excel at.I do a lot of botanical photography; and it turns out the Sonnar's distinctive bokeh is rather nice on wide aperture botanical images (made possible courtesy of the TAP)
Here is an image (not great, but illustrates the potential) where the Sonnar bokeh gives a lively spatial feel to the bokeh with could otherwise have been a flat smooth blur, which somehow to my taste would make the flower spike feel less immersed in its environment (the actual flower is a focus stack of 3 f 1.7 images, the rest of the image is from one of those)
The trick is after doing your auto-align in photoshop, to set the opacity of one of the layers to about 40% so you can see how it is registering, and then move it around a bit to get is as perfectly in register as you can in the exact bits where you plan to blend. Since only the subject itself is focus stacked (the rest of the image is just the closest one of these exposures, to get best bokeh) it doesn't matter if you loose registration in the rest of the image.
Once you have the layers of the flower itself in register, I blended them in manually. Basically the three images had the bottom of the flower spike, the middle and the top in focus.
But no, you couldn't do this with Helicon focus.....
I think I'm going to have to lie down on the sofa and have a couple of shots of tequila.
Take several as I get steadier the more I drink. Lol
Sep 10, 2016 at 05:59 AM
p.11 #3C-sonnar!
DavidBM wrote:
Some people on the web talk about the C-Sonnar as being two lenses in one: a great character lens at wide apertures, and a modern sharp lens across the field stopped down.
Now I didn't buy the lens for stopped down use, but some preliminary testing suggests that (as I expected) at f8 this is a bit optimistic. It's plenty sharp over most of the field, but the corners are not a patch on the Loxia, or (I imagine) the G-Master zoom, or the 1.4/50.
i never would have expected it to be sharp, even stopped down, only because lenscore has its 'sharpness' rating as the lowest on the m-mount. not that i ever care about 'scores' but i do look at 'general' categories and this just doesn't stand out as a "laser" (quite the opposite) but that doesn't seem like the reason to buy it at all.
it seems like it would be the perfect lens to compliment other sharp lenses at nearby focal lengths. a lot of people say they carry EITHER a 35mm OR a 50mm - but if you had the 35/1.4 ZM which seems pretty darn sharp but also with great rendering, then this could be your 'character' lens and then a sharp 85 or 90 on the other side. a great trio.
btw - i'm glad i sold my a7r2 2 wks ago in anticipation of the next body - b/c i'd be jumping all over a 35/1.4ZM w/ the TAP and probably do something crazy and get the C-Sonnar and Leica 90....but then i'd have to change my screenname to Guy2. at least now i can try to let the fever pass.
Some people on the web talk about the C-Sonnar as being two lenses in one: a great character lens at wide apertures, and a modern sharp lens across the field stopped down.
Now I didn't buy the lens for stopped down use, but some preliminary testing suggests that (as I expected) at f8 this is a bit optimistic. It's plenty sharp over most of the field, but the corners are not a patch on the Loxia, or (I imagine) the G-Master zoom, or the 1.4/50.
i never would have expected it to be sharp, even stopped down, only because lenscore has its 'sharpness' rating as the lowest on the m-mount. not that i ever care about 'scores' but i do look at 'general' categories and this just doesn't stand out as a "laser" (quite the opposite) but that doesn't seem like the reason to buy it at all.
it seems like it would be the perfect lens to compliment other sharp lenses at nearby focal lengths. a lot of people say they carry EITHER a 35mm OR a 50mm - but if you had the 35/1.4 ZM which seems pretty darn sharp but also with great rendering, then this could be your 'character' lens and then a sharp 85 or 90 on the other side. a great trio.
btw - i'm glad i sold my a7r2 2 wks ago in anticipation of the next body - b/c i'd be jumping all over a 35/1.4ZM w/ the TAP and probably do something crazy and get the C-Sonnar and Leica 90....but then i'd have to change my screenname to Guy2. at least now i can try to let the fever pass.
Sep 10, 2016 at 10:23 AM
p.11 #4C-sonnar!
Guy2 is not a bad thing. Lol
In all seriousness I think very long and hard about this stuff and it seems whimsical but it's not. Here is the key element here that lets me play with my primes. I have a very seriously outstanding 24-70 that will get almost any job I get done. I'm never without that thought in my head. From 24-50 it's just flat out great and it has nice bokeh and sharpness to boot. It will always get the job done. I have the GM 85 and again it's a amazing optic and it will cover my 50 1.4 that I just sold plus I got the 50 in the zoom. So my ass is covered. I always have to cover myself. But the new update to the TAP also played a big role. It's not a novelty anymore. It's AF is pretty dang good so that helps me a great deal to get a little crazy go after some lenses that I loved in the past and visit them again with a very high Mpx camera in hand. If any lens might not be able to do it all it is the ZM 50 but I have the zoom and I have a 85 as a foot zoom for 50 focal length if I can get back far enough.
The 50 1.4 is outstanding no question about it but it's also a specialty lens which I still would not mind having but I can get by with no real issues. Hell I can rent it too
The good news it's out on the market and I can always get it back in my hands fast if I need it.
In all seriousness I think very long and hard about this stuff and it seems whimsical but it's not. Here is the key element here that lets me play with my primes. I have a very seriously outstanding 24-70 that will get almost any job I get done. I'm never without that thought in my head. From 24-50 it's just flat out great and it has nice bokeh and sharpness to boot. It will always get the job done. I have the GM 85 and again it's a amazing optic and it will cover my 50 1.4 that I just sold plus I got the 50 in the zoom. So my ass is covered. I always have to cover myself. But the new update to the TAP also played a big role. It's not a novelty anymore. It's AF is pretty dang good so that helps me a great deal to get a little crazy go after some lenses that I loved in the past and visit them again with a very high Mpx camera in hand. If any lens might not be able to do it all it is the ZM 50 but I have the zoom and I have a 85 as a foot zoom for 50 focal length if I can get back far enough.
The 50 1.4 is outstanding no question about it but it's also a specialty lens which I still would not mind having but I can get by with no real issues. Hell I can rent it too
The good news it's out on the market and I can always get it back in my hands fast if I need it.
Sep 10, 2016 at 10:36 AM
p.11 #5C-sonnar!
ecarlino wrote:
Now I didn't buy the lens for stopped down use, but some preliminary testing suggests that (as I expected) at f8 this is a bit optimistic. It's plenty sharp over most of the field, but the corners are not a patch on the Loxia, or (I imagine) the G-Master zoom, or the 1.4/50.i never would have expected it to be sharp, even stopped down, only because lenscore has its 'sharpness' rating as the lowest on the m-mount. not that i ever care about 'scores' but i do look at 'general' categories and this just doesn't stand out as a "laser" (quite the opposite) but that doesn't seem like the reason to buy it at all.
it seems like it would be the perfect lens to compliment other sharp lenses at nearby focal lengths. a lot of people say they carry EITHER a 35mm OR a 50mm - but if you had the 35/1.4...Show more →
I am keen to see what camera they come up with too. I sold my original A7r mk1 in anticipation of a new camera announcement this year, but am keeping my A7rII for now. Like you said the temptation is there to check out the 35 F1.4ZM and the C Sonnar but currently I am very happy with the FE 50 F1.4 and the FE 35 F1.4. I don't think I've ever had a lens as tack sharp at 1.4 as the FE 50 F1.4 and I'm all over that look and least for now. I did pre-order the TAP last night, so lets see where that takes me.....
DavidBM wrote
Some people on the web talk about the C-Sonnar as being two lenses in one: a great character lens at wide apertures, and a modern sharp lens across the field stopped down.Now I didn't buy the lens for stopped down use, but some preliminary testing suggests that (as I expected) at f8 this is a bit optimistic. It's plenty sharp over most of the field, but the corners are not a patch on the Loxia, or (I imagine) the G-Master zoom, or the 1.4/50.
it seems like it would be the perfect lens to compliment other sharp lenses at nearby focal lengths. a lot of people say they carry EITHER a 35mm OR a 50mm - but if you had the 35/1.4...Show more →
I am keen to see what camera they come up with too. I sold my original A7r mk1 in anticipation of a new camera announcement this year, but am keeping my A7rII for now. Like you said the temptation is there to check out the 35 F1.4ZM and the C Sonnar but currently I am very happy with the FE 50 F1.4 and the FE 35 F1.4. I don't think I've ever had a lens as tack sharp at 1.4 as the FE 50 F1.4 and I'm all over that look and least for now. I did pre-order the TAP last night, so lets see where that takes me.....
Sep 10, 2016 at 10:41 AM
p.11 #6C-sonnar!
The thing is take your time , you don't have clients breathing down your neck so build a system that makes the most sense. Throwing money down this black hole can be deadly. Why I'm not shooting Leica or Medium Format anymore. I got out of that madness. Lol
Sony is not as painful. Still hurts but I can at least breath. Lol
Sony is not as painful. Still hurts but I can at least breath. Lol
Sep 10, 2016 at 10:52 AM
p.11 #7C-sonnar!
Threads like these are potentially expensive, ZM 35/1.4, ZM 50/1.5, ZM 85/4, TAP adapter.... 
Sep 10, 2016 at 10:53 AM
p.11 #8C-sonnar!
the TAP really changes things as far as opening up great optics.
but it's such a big change and there are so many variables that i'm happy to wait and see how this plays out.
the rendering and sharpness of photos being posted look great - but honestly, they're downrezzed for the screen and frankly, even iphone shots can look great on the screen (most don't but the point is they 'can'). i'm not a pixel peeper but i like to print big and resolution does end up playing a part in that. although i trust in Fred's adoption as a sign that there are no major weaknesses. every m-mount lens needs a Fred Landscape / Guy Bronco test mounted on the TAP so we can get a good sense of their performance.
also, it's not clear to me just how much the AF performance equals a native lens (Chad Wadsworth had a great TAP write-up and suggested central single spot AF was suggested, not sure what version of the firmware he had, i think v3).
but i do know that if the resolution of the 35/1.4zm and leica 90/2.8, even into the corners is sufficient and the AF not a bummer, then having it all in a 'rangefinder sized package' is VERY appealing.
one question for TAP users - any concerns on basic stuff like light leaks, alignment, or other typical adapter problems that have shown up with other brands?
but it's such a big change and there are so many variables that i'm happy to wait and see how this plays out.
the rendering and sharpness of photos being posted look great - but honestly, they're downrezzed for the screen and frankly, even iphone shots can look great on the screen (most don't but the point is they 'can'). i'm not a pixel peeper but i like to print big and resolution does end up playing a part in that. although i trust in Fred's adoption as a sign that there are no major weaknesses. every m-mount lens needs a Fred Landscape / Guy Bronco test mounted on the TAP so we can get a good sense of their performance.
also, it's not clear to me just how much the AF performance equals a native lens (Chad Wadsworth had a great TAP write-up and suggested central single spot AF was suggested, not sure what version of the firmware he had, i think v3).
but i do know that if the resolution of the 35/1.4zm and leica 90/2.8, even into the corners is sufficient and the AF not a bummer, then having it all in a 'rangefinder sized package' is VERY appealing.
one question for TAP users - any concerns on basic stuff like light leaks, alignment, or other typical adapter problems that have shown up with other brands?
Sep 10, 2016 at 10:56 AM
p.11 #9C-sonnar!
GMPhotography wrote:
The thing is take your time , you don't have clients breathing down your neck so build a system that makes the most sense. Throwing money down this black hole can be deadly. Why I'm not shooting Leica or Medium Format anymore. I got out of that madness. Lol
Sony is not as painful. Still hurts but I can at least breath. Lol
I hear you. I do have clients breathing down my neck but not for my photography
( maybe some day ) On the other hand my wife is a Manolo Blahnik fan too, so my photog purchases cost me a bit more than some 
Edited on Sep 10, 2016 at 11:36 AM · View previous versions
The thing is take your time , you don't have clients breathing down your neck so build a system that makes the most sense. Throwing money down this black hole can be deadly. Why I'm not shooting Leica or Medium Format anymore. I got out of that madness. Lol
Sony is not as painful. Still hurts but I can at least breath. Lol
I hear you. I do have clients breathing down my neck but not for my photography
( maybe some day ) On the other hand my wife is a Manolo Blahnik fan too, so my photog purchases cost me a bit more than some Edited on Sep 10, 2016 at 11:36 AM · View previous versions
Sep 10, 2016 at 11:11 AM
p.11 #10C-sonnar!
Have not seen any issues with miss alignment or light leaks, just some power failures which was addressed in version 4. Just FYI the TAP with the ZM 35 was as fast as the native 50 1.4 and as accurate. Now with the 85 it slowed down some but still very good. Obviously bigger lens more weight will do that but the ZM 35 is not exactly feather weight either so that's a good sign.
I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.
I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.
Sep 10, 2016 at 11:16 AM
|
p.11 #11C-sonnar!
GMPhotography wrote:
Have not seen any issues with miss alignment or light leaks, just some power failures which was addressed in version 4. Just FYI the TAP with the ZM 35 was as fast as the native 50 1.4 and as accurate. Now with the 85 it slowed down some but still very good. Obviously bigger lens more weight will do that but the ZM 35 is not exactly feather weight either so that's a good sign.
I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to...Show more →
I am sure the ZM 50/2 Planar would be a better choice for infinity distance starting at f/5.6. The Sonnar 50C is clearly not optimized for long distances. I tested it and it only starts to show some life towards the corners at very small apertures. I don't consider the 50/1.5C and Leica 90/2.5 landscape lenses and was expecting the same for the ZM 35/1.4. To my surprise the ZM 35/1.4 surpassed all my native lenses in terms of resolution and contrast after f/6.3.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.
Have not seen any issues with miss alignment or light leaks, just some power failures which was addressed in version 4. Just FYI the TAP with the ZM 35 was as fast as the native 50 1.4 and as accurate. Now with the 85 it slowed down some but still very good. Obviously bigger lens more weight will do that but the ZM 35 is not exactly feather weight either so that's a good sign.
I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to...Show more →
I am sure the ZM 50/2 Planar would be a better choice for infinity distance starting at f/5.6. The Sonnar 50C is clearly not optimized for long distances. I tested it and it only starts to show some life towards the corners at very small apertures. I don't consider the 50/1.5C and Leica 90/2.5 landscape lenses and was expecting the same for the ZM 35/1.4. To my surprise the ZM 35/1.4 surpassed all my native lenses in terms of resolution and contrast after f/6.3.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.
Sep 10, 2016 at 11:29 AM
p.11 #12C-sonnar!
Thanks Fred exactly what I thought. I'm not a big 50 landscape anyway. 15,21,35 and 85 yes big time
Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.I am sure the ZM 50/2 Planar would be a better choice for infinity distance starting at f/5.6. The Sonnar 50C is clearly not optimized for long distances. I tested it and it only starts to show some life towards the corners at very small apertures. I don't consider the 50/1.5C and Leica 90/2.5 landscape lenses and was expecting the same for the ZM 35/1.4. To my surprise the ZM 35/1.4 surpassed all my native lenses in terms of resolution and contrast after f/6.3.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM...Show more →
Fred Miranda wrote:
GMPhotography wrote
Have not seen any issues with miss alignment or light leaks, just some power failures which was addressed in version 4. Just FYI the TAP with the ZM 35 was as fast as the native 50 1.4 and as accurate. Now with the 85 it slowed down some but still very good. Obviously bigger lens more weight will do that but the ZM 35 is not exactly feather weight either so that's a good sign.I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM...Show more →
Sep 10, 2016 at 11:55 AM
p.11 #13C-sonnar!
Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.I am sure the ZM 50/2 Planar would be a better choice for infinity distance starting at f/5.6. The Sonnar 50C is clearly not optimized for long distances. I tested it and it only starts to show some life towards the corners at very small apertures. I don't consider the 50/1.5C and Leica 90/2.5 landscape lenses and was expecting the same for the ZM 35/1.4. To my surprise the ZM 35/1.4 surpassed all my native lenses in terms of resolution and contrast after f/6.3.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM...Show more →
Yep. That's what I found yesterday with some infinity images of a forest looking down from a lookout. The c-sonnar was mush in quite a large corner area at f8. It's what I expected (and what the mtf says) but I thought I'd have a look. I suppose it could improve at f11 but it had a long way to go! But we aren't getting this lens for corners st infinity - and I'm in love with its close and wide look.
I could maybe post samples of infinity corners tomorrow - but it's the middle of the night here just not sleeping coz of a nasty cold so can't do now.. But they just show what you should expect.
GMPhotography wrote
Have not seen any issues with miss alignment or light leaks, just some power failures which was addressed in version 4. Just FYI the TAP with the ZM 35 was as fast as the native 50 1.4 and as accurate. Now with the 85 it slowed down some but still very good. Obviously bigger lens more weight will do that but the ZM 35 is not exactly feather weight either so that's a good sign.I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM...Show more →
Yep. That's what I found yesterday with some infinity images of a forest looking down from a lookout. The c-sonnar was mush in quite a large corner area at f8. It's what I expected (and what the mtf says) but I thought I'd have a look. I suppose it could improve at f11 but it had a long way to go! But we aren't getting this lens for corners st infinity - and I'm in love with its close and wide look.
I could maybe post samples of infinity corners tomorrow - but it's the middle of the night here just not sleeping coz of a nasty cold so can't do now.. But they just show what you should expect.
Sep 10, 2016 at 12:00 PM
p.11 #14C-sonnar!
DavidBM wrote:
I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.I am sure the ZM 50/2 Planar would be a better choice for infinity distance starting at f/5.6. The Sonnar 50C is clearly not optimized for long distances. I tested it and it only starts to show some life towards the corners at very small apertures. I don't consider the 50/1.5C and Leica 90/2.5 landscape lenses and was expecting the same for the ZM 35/1.4. To my surprise the ZM 35/1.4 surpassed all my native lenses in terms of resolution and contrast after f/6.3.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.Yep. That's what I found yesterday with some infinity images of a forest looking down from a lookout. The c-sonnar was mush in quite a large corner area at f8. It's what I expected (and what the mtf says) but I thought I'd have a look. I suppose it could improve at f11 but it had a long way to go! But we aren't getting this lens for corners st infinity - and I'm in love with its close and wide look.
I could maybe post samples of infinity corners tomorrow - but it's the middle of the night here just...Show more →
When you go to sleep, we wake up! That's why this thread never ends.
Yes, f/11 improve the corners even further.
Fred Miranda wrote
GMPhotography wrote
Have not seen any issues with miss alignment or light leaks, just some power failures which was addressed in version 4. Just FYI the TAP with the ZM 35 was as fast as the native 50 1.4 and as accurate. Now with the 85 it slowed down some but still very good. Obviously bigger lens more weight will do that but the ZM 35 is not exactly feather weight either so that's a good sign.I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.
I could maybe post samples of infinity corners tomorrow - but it's the middle of the night here just...Show more →
When you go to sleep, we wake up! That's why this thread never ends.
Yes, f/11 improve the corners even further.
Sep 10, 2016 at 12:05 PM
p.11 #15C-sonnar!
I am expecting mine to be delivered today... I am looking forward to that lens.
Sep 10, 2016 at 12:05 PM
p.11 #16C-sonnar!
GMPhotography wrote:
Thanks Fred exactly what I thought. I'm not a big 50 landscape anyway. 15,21,35 and 85 yes big time
I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.I am sure the ZM 50/2 Planar would be a better choice for infinity distance starting at f/5.6. The Sonnar 50C is clearly not optimized for long distances. I tested it and it only starts to show some life towards the corners at very small apertures. I don't consider the 50/1.5C and Leica 90/2.5 landscape lenses and was expecting the same for the ZM 35/1.4. To my surprise the ZM 35/1.4 surpassed all my native lenses in terms of resolution and contrast after f/6.3.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.
I do want that Loxia 28 though!
Thanks Fred exactly what I thought. I'm not a big 50 landscape anyway. 15,21,35 and 85 yes big time
Fred Miranda wrote
GMPhotography wrote
Have not seen any issues with miss alignment or light leaks, just some power failures which was addressed in version 4. Just FYI the TAP with the ZM 35 was as fast as the native 50 1.4 and as accurate. Now with the 85 it slowed down some but still very good. Obviously bigger lens more weight will do that but the ZM 35 is not exactly feather weight either so that's a good sign.I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.
I do want that Loxia 28 though!
Sep 10, 2016 at 12:06 PM
p.11 #17C-sonnar!
Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.I am sure the ZM 50/2 Planar would be a better choice for infinity distance starting at f/5.6. The Sonnar 50C is clearly not optimized for long distances. I tested it and it only starts to show some life towards the corners at very small apertures. I don't consider the 50/1.5C and Leica 90/2.5 landscape lenses and was expecting the same for the ZM 35/1.4. To my surprise the ZM 35/1.4 surpassed all my native lenses in terms of resolution and contrast after f/6.3.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.I do want that Loxia 28 though!
How about the second version Leica-R 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit with built-in sliding hood, Fred? Bob is enjoying his and his results speak for themselves. I had that lens before and it was an awesome performer but for whatever reasons I sold it during the Leica heyday and it was sold in minutes.
GMPhotography wrote
Thanks Fred exactly what I thought. I'm not a big 50 landscape anyway. 15,21,35 and 85 yes big timeFred Miranda wrote
GMPhotography wrote
Have not seen any issues with miss alignment or light leaks, just some power failures which was addressed in version 4. Just FYI the TAP with the ZM 35 was as fast as the native 50 1.4 and as accurate. Now with the 85 it slowed down some but still very good. Obviously bigger lens more weight will do that but the ZM 35 is not exactly feather weight either so that's a good sign.I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.
How about the second version Leica-R 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit with built-in sliding hood, Fred? Bob is enjoying his and his results speak for themselves. I had that lens before and it was an awesome performer but for whatever reasons I sold it during the Leica heyday and it was sold in minutes.
Sep 10, 2016 at 12:08 PM
p.11 #18C-sonnar!
If you see it before me just order me one. Lol
I want it too
Fred Miranda wrote:
GMPhotography wrote
Thanks Fred exactly what I thought. I'm not a big 50 landscape anyway. 15,21,35 and 85 yes big timeFred Miranda wrote
GMPhotography wrote
Have not seen any issues with miss alignment or light leaks, just some power failures which was addressed in version 4. Just FYI the TAP with the ZM 35 was as fast as the native 50 1.4 and as accurate. Now with the 85 it slowed down some but still very good. Obviously bigger lens more weight will do that but the ZM 35 is not exactly feather weight either so that's a good sign.I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.
Sep 10, 2016 at 12:39 PM
p.11 #19C-sonnar!
Price it's steep at around 2200 used. That pinches a little. Lol
AGeoJO wrote:
I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.I am sure the ZM 50/2 Planar would be a better choice for infinity distance starting at f/5.6. The Sonnar 50C is clearly not optimized for long distances. I tested it and it only starts to show some life towards the corners at very small apertures. I don't consider the 50/1.5C and Leica 90/2.5 landscape lenses and was expecting the same for the ZM 35/1.4. To my surprise the ZM 35/1.4 surpassed all my native lenses in terms of resolution and contrast after f/6.3.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.I do want that Loxia 28 though!How about the second version Leica-R 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit with built-in sliding hood, Fred? Bob is enjoying his and his results speak for themselves. I had that lens before and it was an awesome performer but for whatever reasons I sold it during the Leica heyday and it was sold in minutes.
AGeoJO wrote:
Fred Miranda wrote
GMPhotography wrote
Thanks Fred exactly what I thought. I'm not a big 50 landscape anyway. 15,21,35 and 85 yes big timeFred Miranda wrote
GMPhotography wrote
Have not seen any issues with miss alignment or light leaks, just some power failures which was addressed in version 4. Just FYI the TAP with the ZM 35 was as fast as the native 50 1.4 and as accurate. Now with the 85 it slowed down some but still very good. Obviously bigger lens more weight will do that but the ZM 35 is not exactly feather weight either so that's a good sign.I'm going to do a big bronco test next week just to find where the corners are coming alive. I don't expect the 50 to be landscape type lens. Of course I thought the same of the ZM 35 so will see.
So, I would expect the ZM 50/1.5C to be far behind the ZM 35/1.4 and ZM 85/4's performance at infinity. My choice for that focal length at long distances is the Loxia 50/2.
Sep 10, 2016 at 12:40 PM
p.11 #20C-sonnar!
The bokeh gets funky at f/1.5 (disregard the EXIF) but I like it when light is low:
 |
||
 |
||
|
Sep 10, 2016 at 12:42 PM