GMPhotography wrote:
Question. I remember someone mentioning this lens is optimized for 2.8 and you can have Zeiss change it for 1.5. Has anyone done this and provide more details about it. I'm thinking about it if this is the case.
from 'crazy' man Steve Huff's review -
"the key is to get the focus right, and using a rangefinder makes it tough because this lens is usually calibrated for use at f/2.8 which means focusing with your rangefinder at 1.5 will not be accurate and will result in a soft “dreamy” look. It is called “Focus Shift”. Keep in mind that this only affects rangefinder cameras and using the rangefinder focusing patch. If you use this lens on a mirrorless system with live view you will not experience focus shift."
GMPhotography wrote:
Question. I remember someone mentioning this lens is optimized for 2.8 and you can have Zeiss change it for 1.5. Has anyone done this and provide more details about it. I'm thinking about it if this is the case.
Guy if you are talking about the C-Sonnar the optimisation is to deal with the focus shift on a rangefinder (in other words out of the box if you focus with the rangefinder it will be accurate if the lens is set to f2.8; but inaccurate at wider apertures. The option is to adjust the rangefinder coupling so that if you focus with the rangefinder it will be accurate at f1.5 (but inaccurate at smaller apertures).
But this is of course irrelevant to us on a mirrorless camera as we have no rangefinder (but of course you have to focus at taking aperture to get accurate focus on this lens)
GMPhotography wrote:
Question. I remember someone mentioning this lens is optimized for 2.8 and you can have Zeiss change it for 1.5. Has anyone done this and provide more details about it. I'm thinking about it if this is the case.
Guy, I was the one who posted this question on the forum earlier. I read this comment on the C-Sonnar B&H sales page
"This Zeiss lens is optimized for focus at f/2.8 when it is produced at the factory. However, if a customer is interested in using the lens wide open and having it optimized for optimum performance at f/1.5 and if the lens is still under warranty, this service can be provided at no cost."
However, a few on this forum commented that it doesn't apply to mirrorless only rangefinder. Someone else commented doesn't apply for use with TAP because the TAP physically moves the lens to focus. I don't own the lens or the TAP but when I was investigating the lens this seemed like an interesting caveat to me. I also read the Steve Huff comment about the same, but he was using the lens on a Leica too.
GMPhotography wrote:
Okay it was more a RF thing than why they did 2.8. Thamks
They originally optimised it for f 1.5 (and you could change to 2.8) ; but people who bought it were shooting down a couple of stops usually so their pictures were out of focus and they complained. So they changed the default to f2.8.
But doesn't make any difference on a mirrorless. Except that you must focus at the taking aperture. If you focus wide open to get extra light, or the thinner DOF for focus, and then stop down to shoot, the image will be quite out of focus.
GMPhotography wrote:
Thanks David, that I knew I just thought there was something in it for us mirror less folks to change
One other crazy thought...if it doesn't make any difference to use the free service to optimize 1.5 for mirrorless, then it wouldn't hurt to optimize it for 1.5 and maybe a resale benefit for those looking to use this lens on a RF afterwards? I have a feeling I will be seeing a few of these lenses up for sale in the not too distant future.
LBJ2 wrote:
One other crazy thought...if it doesn't make any difference to use the free service to optimize 1.5 for mirrorless, then it wouldn't hurt to optimize it for 1.5 and maybe a resale benefit for those looking to use this lens on a RF afterwards? I have a feeling I will be seeing a few of these lenses up for sale in the not too distant future.
That's really depend on whether or not that's what most RF users want. Is there a clear pattern of the f/1.5 optimized lenses being worth more on the market? Sounds like there's a risk of not having the lens for a few weeks and not gaining anything in the process.
My question is what if I did do it maybe there is some advantage for a Sony user. It's a crazy thought I know but leaves a question that maybe worth hearing the answer from Zeiss
I bought brand new so I do have that opportunity and I already registered it and got a extra year warranty and 125 rebate coming. From what I read here it would have to go to Germany. We need a Zeiss person here. Lol
There is zero advantage sending your lens to Zeiss for optimization as with mirrorless, focus is achieved in live feedback, meaning, what you see is what you get. As long as you shoot at working aperture you should be able to nail focus every time. (Manually or using TAP)
arduluth wrote:
That's really depend on whether or not that's what most RF users want. Is there a clear pattern of the f/1.5 optimized lenses being worth more on the market? Sounds like there's a risk of not having the lens for a few weeks and not gaining anything in the process.
You raise a good point and I have no idea one way or the other. I don't even own the lens. Just enjoying the adventures and images others are posting in this thread and was intrigued by the possibilities of optimizing at 1.5. I don't think this lens is a bread and butter lens for a Sony mirrorless photog so I thought it might be fun to experiment.
Either way, for the reasons many have stated, nobody thinks there is any benefit.
Fred Miranda wrote:
There is zero advantage sending your lens to Zeiss for optimization as with mirrorless, focus is achieved in live feedback, meaning, what you see is what you get. As long as you shoot at working aperture you should be able to nail focus every time. (Manually or using TAP)
Fred said it all. Rangefinder optimization is about the focus shift of the C-Sonnar playing havoc with the Leica rangefinder system. You focus your M9 on a short range subject at f/1.4 and the subject is sharp. Then, you stopdown to f/2 and suddenly the focus point moves back. This is a rangefinder issue.
Most lenses have focus shift to some degree, but the smaller apertures usually cover with greater DOF. C Sonnar has more.
If the Sony a7 metered and focused wide open, then stopped down for exposure like the SLRs, that would be a different story, but the Sony a7 doesn't.
We need a photo on page 17. Just got mine unboxed last night, and of course had to mount it and take a crappily lit photo of our dog Flurry, freshly groomed from his previous dirty mop status. I can tell this is going to be a fun lens to get to know.
I'm out getting to know it. It's a different lens than normal. Tack sharp its F2.8 even F2 and pixel peep and be really happy at 1.7 it's a softer sharpness. I need to remember this as I'm used too blazing saddles wide open. What gets you is the dang look it's sweet as can be. I keep worrying I got a bad copy but I'm not so sure, it's just the way the lens is . Shot a lot this morning so I'll be looking at things. My TAP is good but I'm better so I'm weighing that out. I went to Small spit and it seems more accurate. But I'm also pinpointing things. And I'm shooting stuff that maybe this lens is not the best for. I need a warm body to shoot
^ This makes me want to compare (again) the ZM with the Voigt Nokton 50/1.5. The Voigt is also a character lens which I had for a time and then sold. I've always been sorry that I sold it but wonder how it compares to the C-Sonnar. It's certainly cheaper. As I remember, the lens had a classic Voigt look . . . sharp with a flatter color profile and nice bokeh.
JimBuchanan wrote:
Fred said it all. Rangefinder optimization is about the focus shift of the C-Sonnar playing havoc with the Leica rangefinder system. You focus your M9 on a short range subject at f/1.4 and the subject is sharp. Then, you stopdown to f/2 and suddenly the focus point moves back. This is a rangefinder issue.
Most lenses have focus shift to some degree, but the smaller apertures usually cover with greater DOF. C Sonnar has more.
If the Sony a7 metered and focused wide open, then stopped down for exposure like the SLRs, that would be a different story, but the Sony a7 doesn't....Show more →
It is not a rangefinder issue, focus shift is a big problem with SLR too. The canon 50/1.2 is an example. Only mirrorless is immune to this issue.
GMPhotography wrote:
I'm out getting to know it. It's a different lens than normal. Tack sharp its F2.8 even F2 and pixel peep and be really happy at 1.7 it's a softer sharpness. I need to remember this as I'm used too blazing saddles wide open. What gets you is the dang look it's sweet as can be. I keep worrying I got a bad copy but I'm not so sure, it's just the way the lens is . Shot a lot this morning so I'll be looking at things. My TAP is good but I'm better so I'm weighing that out. I went to Small spit and it seems more accurate. But I'm also pinpointing things. And I'm shooting stuff that maybe this lens is not the best for. I need a warm body to shoot...Show more →
I use the small AF spot for targeting a small target, like all lashes but the medium point is perfectly fine for focusing on the eye. I turn my Face Detection feature on and quite a few shots I did the other day were taken with that feature an and the results are just fine.
Yes, go to a nearby park, use your charm and ask the best looking woman out there politely to pose for you .
.
