Phillip Reeve wrote:
mediocre is too harsh: Not as excellent as the other aspects of this lens.
Well, I've only taken it out for one afternoon in the sunny woods. So far the flare control has been excellent but I haven't used it nearly as much as others have.
The weights there but as David said it's manageable. I think really that's the key is it's not very long in size and it just feels very nice on the A9. I just don't really feel the weight that much. Now I was out and about with the Batis 135 and Sony 85 1.8. I'm able to handhold it to 1/6th of a second around in the house. Size usually bugs me more and this lens does not do that.
genji wrote:
I totally lost interest (and cancelled my trip to Crows Nest) when I read this.
It's a lot lighter in retrospect when looking at the results, and even a bit lighter when focusing in the viewfinder and saying, "wow!" That wow is like putting helium in the lens.
I made a lot of exposures this morning, often toward the sun. I only once provoked flare and didn't trip the shutter until moving the camera. Flare control is much, much better than almost any vintage lens I use a lot, only worse than my Loxia 50 and 21. Besides the Loxias, I don't think I own any other lens that has better flare control (I don't know how many lenses that includes, but it's a pretty big pile, but mostly older glass.)
Macro photos to come, but it's a busy day. I think I made some nice images. I used this lens for about 90 minutes and only once swapped in another lens, the OM 90/2. Different FL, but swapping it in for the same scene showed a pretty dramatic bokeh rendering difference.
Yea it's like who cares look at how good it is attitude. Lol
jlehet wrote:
It's a lot lighter in retrospect when looking at the results, and even a bit lighter when focusing in the viewfinder and saying, "wow!" That wow is like putting helium in the lens.
One usability issue I'm seeing with this lens is that the magnified view on the a7r2 is a bit skittish with this lens. It tends to pop out of magnification, especially when I'm turning the dials to move it. I have "magnify when turning focus ring" or whatever the setting is called turned OFF. I magnify by pushing a function button (probably the most pressed button on the camera, counting the shutter). At first I thought it had to do with the slightest touch of the aperture ring while focusing. But even taking my hand off the lens altogether (and just turning the dials to move the magnification area causes it to happen sometimes. Anyone else seeing this? Doesn't happen on old lenses with dumb adapters or the Loxias.
Yes, same thing for me. I use MF the same way and thought it was only me or that it was set wrong in camera. Hopefully, there is a work-around cause I love this lens. By the way, sometimes it seems like I'm causing it to happen by the way I'm focusing. But, I don't know for sure since it doesn't always happen. Would like to know what others have found as well.
DavidBM wrote:
A couple at wide open or near enough.
I'm loving this lens. The contrast and brilliance wide open is extraordinary. Hardly wait to try out some macro.
+1
It's hard to contain the excitement when seeing images coming from this lens. I'm almost losing objectivity. Have to control myself.
Pros:
*Oustanding resolution from center to the very edges from wide open! Similar performance to Batis 135 APO! I doubt any Otus would be much better here but I'd be curious to test it. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1451413/37#14173252
*Weight: 630g...(but no adapter.) Similar weight to 35/1.4 ZA, Batis 135 APO and Loxia 85/2.4 lenses.
*Long focus throw from infinity to close distances. A little long for portraits but great for macro.
*Good but not excellent flare resistance. I can shoot the sun without any ghosting but in some scenes it's hard to manage it. I don't see veiling flare, only ghosting when pushing it hard against the sun.
*Unusual focal length. It felt weird for me at first and many shooters may not completely warm up to it. Personally, I really like it being right in between 50 and 85mm.
I really like the focal length. First I'm not a big fan of 50 anyway and 85 is too long sometimes. Another plus it gaps so well with 35,65,135. I just need a smaller 35 as the 1.4 is really not a travel lens along with the 12-24,65,135. I can't find a Loxia 35 at a decent price to save my life. Made a few bids and got shot down. I'm starting to get pissed. Lol
GMPhotography wrote:
I really like the focal length. First I'm not a big fan of 50 anyway and 85 is too long sometimes. Another plus it gaps so well with 35,65,135. I just need a smaller 35 as the 1.4 is really not a travel lens along with the 12-24,65,135. I can't find a Loxia 35 at a decent price to save my life. Made a few bids and got shot down. I'm starting to get pissed. Lol
How about the CV 35/1.7 with 5m filter? I think you didn't like that it required f/8 for very good corners without filter but with filter it is there at f/4 and it doesn't have the midzone dip of the FE or ZM 1.4/35.
Phillip Reeve wrote:
How about the CV 35/1.7 with 5m filter? I think you didn't like that it required f/8 for very good corners without filter but with filter it is there at f/4 and it doesn't have the midzone dip of the FE or ZM 1.4/35.
The problem is getting the CV 35/1.7 to focus at infinity with the front lens. It seems like you used an adapter that worked but others reported issues with infinity focus. It's easy to adjust the shims on ZM lenses but I believe it's not the case with CVs.
I had that lens twice now. It is a nice lens but I'm over adapted glass . I did not know it did not have the mid zone dip. But with filter that lens I don't think you can adjust infinity. I do have the FE 35 1.4 so I don't want to duplicate that. Landscape / travel lens
Fred Miranda wrote:
The problem is getting the CV 35/1.7 to focus at infinity with the front lens. It seems like you used an adapter that worked but others reported issues with infinity focus. It's easy to adjust the shims on ZM lenses but I believe it's not the case with CVs.
I tried with the 28 ultron and a no go on shimming the lens.
I thought about a Leica 35 cron too but not sure if that smears or can get one cheap enough.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The problem is getting the CV 35/1.7 to focus at infinity with the front lens. It seems like you used an adapter that worked but others reported issues with infinity focus. It's easy to adjust the shims on ZM lenses but I believe it's not the case with CVs.
Sure you won't be able to use a helicoid adapter but my 20 bucks K&F works well with it and still focuses a little behind infinity. Since it focuses to 0.5m that isn't a big pain in my eyes.
GMPhotography wrote:
I had that lens twice now. It is a nice lens but I'm over adapted glass . I did not know it did not have the mid zone dip. But with filter that lens I don't think you can adjust infinity. I do have the FE 35 1.4 so I don't want to duplicate that. Landscape / travel lens
If it is strictly a landscape lens then the Lox would certaibly be a simpler solution. Personally while my focus is on landscape I would prefer to have a very able allround lens which doesn't perform worse for landscape use.
K&F you say? Off to ebay with me right now. I've got the front filter and have tried about 4 different <$20 off brand adapters and couldn't get it to work at infinity
I had been hoping to get the CV 35 1.7 tweaked before my Iceland trip, but I didn't manage that. Then I got the C/Y 35-70 3.4, which seemed pretty good at 35, so that was going to be the Iceland 35. When that lens went wobbly on the trip I was glad I brought the CV35 along. I almost didn't. The CV 35 without the front lens at f8 did just fine. I haven't printed anything or really worked on anything, but I think that lens did fine.
