GMPhotography wrote:
I'm just a wee bit concerned if I have a good copy. Shot a lot this morning so going to hit computer soon. I may rent one to double check .
I apologize for all the questions , I'm very anal on this stuff
I thought you were looking for a warm body in your previous post.... .
GMPhotography wrote:
Yea I need a model. And I need to rent another copy of this lens to make sure I got a good copy of it
Guy,
You can do a few things:
1) Make sure your lens is centered. Most of the time I get softer results (even in the center) if an element is tilted inside a lens.
2) Use TAP in continuous AF. I find it more accurate than AF-S. With TAP, make sure you set the aperture to f/25 and than back to f/2 if you are using IBIS.
3) Use a regular adapter or TAP in manual focus and do some controlled tests on a tripod in good lighting.
Alternatively you could still return the lens and get another brand new copy. (You could also try finding a cheaper mint copy at around $650-$700)
Lastly, if you would like, send it to me and I will compare it with mine.
I'm thinking of maybe sending it to you as I know your copy is good out of the gate. But here are a bunch of 1.7 shots. I also found a slight secret in post adding a little structure goes a long way in C1 along with a touch of clarity as well. These are either 1.7 or F2 and many with Tap and some without. TAP is pretty accurate for the most part. I still am getting a little back an forth on the focusing once it nails it but either with TAP on manual or a fixed adapter I'm a little better so I need to watch the AF stuff. No diffrence though manually focusing either the TAP or fixed as there is no difference there. But given the subject here which we all would expect to be brilliantly sharp in these type of scenes the Sonnar bucked the that trend and still gave it the punch. So i view this as really good as this is not really what the lens if typically for but the bokeh is just gorgeous
Great and thanks. Yea the look is their no question it's pure Zeiss with 3D pop and great bokeh. I have to get used too it's about a half a stop less sharp than the GM85 until F4. Thats what is throwing me off , I just need to get used to that
GMPhotography wrote:
I'm thinking of maybe sending it to you as I know your copy is good out of the gate. But here are a bunch of 1.7 shots. I also found a slight secret in post adding a little structure goes a long way in C1 along with a touch of clarity as well. These are either 1.7 or F2 and many with Tap and some without. TAP is pretty accurate for the most part. I still am getting a little back an forth on the focusing once it nails it but either with TAP on manual or a fixed adapter I'm a little better so I need to watch the AF stuff. No diffrence though manually focusing either the TAP or fixed as there is no difference there. But given the subject here which we all would expect to be brilliantly sharp in these type of scenes the Sonnar bucked the that trend and still gave it the punch. So i view this as really good as this is not really what the lens if typically for but the bokeh is just gorgeous ...Show more →
Nice! Yes, clarity and structure sliders in C1 were really improved in v9.. very handy tools, but one where tiny movements are called for.
GMPhotography wrote:
Great and thanks. Yea the look is their no question it's pure Zeiss with 3D pop and great bokeh. I have to get used too it's about a half a stop less sharp than the GM85 until F4. Thats what is throwing me off , I just need to get used to that
Wow Guy...you must have a great copy if it's only half a stop less sharp that the GM85 until f4.
Don't get me wrong, I love this lens, and the central area is sharp enough for what we want it for, but sharpness is not it's strong suit - so I'd be surprised if for example at f 2.5 it's as sharp as the GM at f2! Maybe you mean viewed as a whole image?
Yes the Sonnar at 2.8 is damn good on center. I shot a couple wider shots stopped down. In a pinch they looked really good too
DavidBM wrote:
Wow Guy...you must have a great copy if it's only half a stop less sharp that the GM85 until f4.
Don't get me wrong, I love this lens, and the central area is sharp enough for what we want it for, but sharpness is not it's strong suit - so I'd be surprised if for example at f 2.5 it's as sharp as the GM at f2! Maybe you mean viewed as a whole image?
GMPhotography wrote:
Me too it's my expectations might have been to high. I really like it
Yep that's what I was about to say: we can't expect modern lens resolution levels from this design, though it is surprisingly sharp in the middle for what is basically a 1930s design. And that's plenty sharp enough. And the look (which is a byproduct of some of the aberrations that reduce the sharpness compared to a GM or modern Zeiss) is just gorgeous.
GMPhotography wrote:
Yes the Sonnar at 2.8 is damn good on center. I shot a couple wider shots stopped down. In a pinch they looked really good too
I did a quick walk-around downtown and stopped it down to f/4 - 5.6.. I was really impressed with the sharpness, but even more so the color / saturation.. it was really nice, vivid, but not Sony style saturated (I swear sometimes I feel Sony colors border on cartoonish).
This is sooc, didn't touch a thing other than raw->jpg via C1. Not a great shot, but illustrates what I'm talking about.. I think this was f/4.
edwardkaraa wrote:
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.
Yes, Edward, focus shift is a problem with SLR lenses, too. But, as far as the ZM C-Sonnar is concerned in this thread about the ZM C-Sonnar, it is a rangefinder issue. Leica M camera shooters like yourself, who may like to shoot the ZM C-Sonnar at f/2.0 more than f/1.5 may like to have the lens in-focus more at f/2.0. There apparently was/is a lens service that would adjust the lens to be sharp at the stopped down aperture of f/2.0 at closer distances. This is basically a modification of infinity focus with lens shims. That's all I'm saying.
BTW, I have a first cousin that has lived in Bangkok for years.
JimBuchanan wrote:
Yes, Edward, focus shift is a problem with SLR lenses, too. But, as far as the ZM C-Sonnar is concerned in this thread about the ZM C-Sonnar, it is a rangefinder issue. Leica M camera shooters like yourself, who may like to shoot the ZM C-Sonnar at f/2.0 more than f/1.5 may like to have the lens in-focus more at f/2.0. There apparently was/is a lens service that would adjust the lens to be sharp at the stopped down aperture of f/2.0 at closer distances. This is basically a modification of infinity focus with lens shims. That's all I'm saying.
BTW, I have a first cousin that has lived in Bangkok for years.
.
