BastianK wrote:
Proxar 2m should arrive tomorrow (will be the last for now), the other 4 arrived already.
I have one day been shooting with the Nikon No0 and one day with the Leica Elpro4 now.
During shooting I noticed my first impression was a little off:
the critical focusing distances are more like 2 to 4m, not 1 to 2m.
The problem here is: with none of the filters focusing at these distances is possible with an unmodified adapter.
I have not yet found an adapter which would be easy to shorten and I am still trying to get a Hawks V5 in Germany
hoping -0.3mm would be enough to get me to at least 3m focusing distance....Show more →
I got my Minolta close-up filter right now and can focus as far as ~4 feet. (lens set to infinity)
As you noted there not a lot of issues at this distance but I can see more corner blur with the filter on. (at 4 feet)
It's cool that you can still use the lens hood with it (49mm). I will test more today but I think I see more CA with the filter.
Fred Miranda wrote:
As you noted there not a lot of issues at this distance but I can see more corner blur with the filter on. (at 4 feet)
I can see that as well with my filters, but for me it is necessary to be able to use them at longer distances to make real use of them,
as there are also other downsides, such as small loss of sharpness in the center of the frame, distortion and worse performance regarding flare (all depending on the filter of course).
I think 3m would be the tipping point for me. This is the maximum distance I would use for environmental portrait, for landscape/architecture at infinity I wouldn't mind taking the filter off.
I hope the hawks will be able to get me there, in case I am able to get a hawks of course.
Playing devils's advocate, I'd say that the only solution for M mount lenses is to remove internal shims, as Candreyo did. Otherwise, we better use Contax-G lenses which focus well past infinity and require no internal modification. Third solution: a Hawks-5 (but only for small infinity adustments ) or a custom/modded Leica-M adapter.
IMHO being limited to shoot only up to medium distances makes little sense, if we want those lenses for landscape use.
BastianK wrote:
I can see that as well with my filters, but for me it is necessary to be able to use them at longer distances to make real use of them,
as there are also other downsides, such as small loss of sharpness in the center of the frame, distortion and worse performance regarding flare (all depending on the filter of course).
I think 3m would be the tipping point for me. This is the maximum distance I would use for environmental portrait, for landscape/architecture at infinity I wouldn't mind taking the filter off.
I hope the hawks will be able to get me there, in case I am able to get a hawks of course....Show more →
I noticed a sharpness degradation at the maximum distance allowed by the filter and lens set to infinity. Perhaps the use of these close-up filters in lenses with floating elements is not ideal.
I will get the Nikon filter today.
As all my 5 ordered filters have arrived now I checked for the maximum focus distance today.
I checked on both my adapters, Voigtlander VM-E close focus set to infinity and Fotodiox LM-Nex which I already knew is a little short.
The measured maximum focus distances are (+-5%):
Tokina 72mm / 2.5m / 0.4 dptr / VM-E: 2.5 m / Fotodiox: 4.5 m
Zeiss Ikon 67mm / 2m / 0.5 dptr / VM-E: 2.3 m / Fotodiox: 3.5 m
Leica ELPRO4 55mm 1.5m / 0.67 dptr / VM-E: 1.5 m / Fotodiox: 1.9 m
Nikon No. 0 52mm / 1.4m / 0.7 dptr / VM-E: 1.6 m / Fotodiox: 2.1 m
Minolta No. 0 49mm / 1.07m / 0.94 dptr / VM-E: 1.25 m / Fotodiox: 1.5 m
I also tried to investigate the influence a shorter adapter in combination with the floating elements has on the image quality.
So I compared (at 1.2 m distance between sensor and subject):
lens only via VM-E adapter
lens with Nikon No.0 via VM-E adapter
lens with Nikon No.0 via the shorter Fotodiox adapter
In the frame center (where the focus was) the differences in terms of CA and resolution were not worth talking about.
candreyo wrote:
Due to the interest in this topic lately, I'm actually looking to do a YouTube video of what I did and show how I opened the Zeiss ZM lenses so others can follow in the same footsteps if they wish. Hopefully can get this done in the next few days. I'll post the link here when it's ready.
in most cases one can use a cheap set of calipers with a screw lock instead of a lens spanner. rubber rings also work nicely for opening certain lens parts.
Dec 13, 2016 at 02:08 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
BastianK wrote:
As all my 5 ordered filters have arrived now I checked for the maximum focus distance today.
I checked on both my adapters, Voigtlander VM-E close focus set to infinity and Fotodiox LM-Nex which I already knew is a little short.
The measured maximum focus distances are (+-5%):
Tokina 72mm / 2.5m / 0.4 dptr / VM-E: 2.5 m / Fotodiox: 4.5 m
Zeiss Ikon 67mm / 2m / 0.5 dptr / VM-E: 2.3 m / Fotodiox: 3.5 m
Leica ELPRO4 55mm 1.5m / 0.67 dptr / VM-E: 1.5 m / Fotodiox: 1.9 m
Nikon No. 0 52mm / 1.4m / 0.7 dptr / VM-E: 1.6 m / Fotodiox: 2.1 m
Minolta No. 0 49mm / 1.07m / 0.94 dptr / VM-E: 1.25 m / Fotodiox: 1.5 m
I also tried to investigate the influence a shorter adapter in combination with the floating elements has on the image quality.
So I compared (at 1.2 m distance between sensor and subject):
lens only via VM-E adapter
lens with Nikon No.0 via VM-E adapter
lens with Nikon No.0 via the shorter Fotodiox adapter
In the frame center (where the focus was) the differences in terms of CA and resolution were not worth talking about.
So I am still trying to get a Hawk's adapter ...Show more →
Bastian, B & H sells the Hawk's adapter. I would think they would ship it to Germany, but I am not certain.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Bastian, B & H sells the Hawk's adapter. I would think they would ship it to Germany, but I am not certain.
This is true, but with taxes, shipping and handling it will cost a whopping 306$ :-/
Dec 13, 2016 at 03:43 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
BastianK wrote:
This is true, but with taxes, shipping and handling it will cost a whopping 306$ :-/
Well that makes it a pretty ridiculous price. Amazing that for such a small and relatively inexpensive item taxes and shipping and handling would be $127.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Well that makes it a pretty ridiculous price. Amazing that for such a small and relatively inexpensive item taxes and shipping and handling would be $127.
I am sure that one of us in the US could ship the adapter to Bastian. As an example, the shipping to one of us in the USA would be free. But, I have no idea as to what the shipping and VAT would be if we shipped it to him. But, we could mark the package as a gift and used camera equipment.
BastianK wrote:
This is true, but with taxes, shipping and handling it will cost a whopping 306$ :-/
Batian,
I just ordered the Hawks adapter and should have it by Friday. If you can wait a couple days, I will be able to know if it makes a difference or not.
Fred
I have the hawk v3 adapter, and it doesn't have enough distance in it to allow infinity to be reached when the filters are installed.
Version 5 may be different though.
The two ways 2 ways I was able to reach infinity with the Planoconvex / Proxar lenses installed was either to mill down a cheap adapater off eBay about 0.5mm off the front bayonet face, or adjust the lenses internally to reach infinity.
Adjusting the Zeiss ZM lenses internally is quite easy.
With non Zeiss ZM lenses like Leica or Voigtlander, this may be more challenging. I have not tried the closeup lenses on non Zeiss ZM lenses, so can't comment on what needs to be done to get them to reach infinity.
One good thing about using TAP and adjusting the ZM lenses internally to reach infinity with the filters installed, if you want to remove the filters and shoot without them, since the Zeiss ZM lenses will then focus beyond infinity, TAP helps by its ability to regain close focus distancing with them.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Batian,
I just ordered the Hawks adapter and should have it by Friday. If you can wait a couple days, I will be able to know if it makes a difference or not.
Fred
naturephoto1 wrote:
I am sure that one of us in the US could ship the adapter to Bastian. As an example, the shipping to one of us in the USA would be free. But, I have no idea as to what the shipping and VAT would be if we shipped it to him. But, we could mark the package as a gift and used camera equipment.
Thank you, we will check what Fred's results yield and I may ask for volunteers then
Anyone visiting Stuttgart over Christmas?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Bastian,
I just ordered the Hawks adapter and should have it by Friday. If you can wait a couple days, I will be able to know if it makes a difference or not.
Fred
Will do that, as my testing showed a very small difference in thickness of the adapter can have great influence and 3-4m maximum focus distance with Hawk's adapter would work for me.
I will still keep on trying to a get a used one in Europe, as I would also be interested in comparing VM-E close focus and Hawks
I nevertheless plan on comparing bokeh at 2m subject distance at the weekend with my shorter Fotodiox adapter.
"One good thing about using TAP and adjusting the ZM lenses internally to reach infinity..."
I maybe missing the point here (reading only 1st and last page of this post) but wouldn't be better to avoid all the hustle of modifying each lens for specific camera by just getting a brand spanking new, un-boxed A7R and sending it to Kolari for a mod?
It looks like the way around has more 'around' turns than [limited] benefits.
JaKo wrote:
I maybe missing the point here (reading only 1st and last page of this post) but wouldn't be better to avoid all the hustle of modifying each lens for specific camera by just getting a brand spanking new, un-boxed A7R and sending it to Kolari for a mod?
If you live outside of north america: good luck with "just sending a new camera to Kolari".
Apart from that there are many other downsides:
Colors will be rendered differently
There might/will be a negative impact on lenses with short flange distance optimized for the A7 sensor (I am looking at you, Loxia 21mm)
If you ever decide to get a new camera (I know, won't happen to anyone here ) the whole process starts over
I considered this, but as I live in Europe, sending the camera to the US to be modified, I would be VAT'd at 20% on its return, making this an expensive proposition.
Equally, as others have said, the mod to the lenses can carry over to other Sony cameras, and I did not want to deal with the colours being off.
I also wanted to retain the base sensors configuration for my native Sony lenses.
There is benefit to Leica M cameras aswell, which I hope to post photos at a later date. But an example is that older Leica M and Zeiss ZM lenses arent necessarily designed for digital, but for film, and suffer to some degree with corner smearing also.
JaKo wrote: "One good thing about using TAP and adjusting the ZM lenses internally to reach infinity..."
I maybe missing the point here (reading only 1st and last page of this post) but wouldn't be better to avoid all the hustle of modifying each lens for specific camera by just getting a brand spanking new, un-boxed A7R and sending it to Kolari for a mod?
It looks like the way around has more 'around' turns than [limited] benefits.
BastianK wrote:
If you live outside of north america: good luck with "just sending a new camera to Kolari".
Apart from that there are many other downsides:
Colors will be rendered differently
There might/will be a negative impact on lenses with short flange distance optimized for the A7 sensor (I am looking at you, Loxia 21mm)
If you ever decide to get a new camera (I know, won't happen to anyone here ) the whole process starts over
I do live within NA but outside US free shipping area (well, US postal address, US bank account, shipping address) but I get your point on this.
Colour rendering is easily adjustable within camera. No additional aids are needed aside from a clear white paper sheet. There are FM post related to it; check them out.
New cameras can be as unpredictable, usually better for adopted lenses. Let's see.
I am very early (2013) adoptee of mirrorless gear and few RF lenses and I still believe a single dedicated, converted camera maybe a better way to go.
Just follow the RF diehards - most move to better designed modern lenses for Sony format. Mods maybe temporary for very specific lenses to keep for a very short time to have
candreyo wrote:
I considered this, but as I live in Europe, sending the camera to the US to be modified, I would be VAT'd at 20% on its return, making this an expensive proposition.
Equally, as others have said, the mod to the lenses can carry over to other Sony cameras, and I did not want to deal with the colours being off.
I also wanted to retain the base sensors configuration for my native Sony lenses.
There is benefit to Leica M cameras aswell, which I hope to post photos at a later date. But an example is that older Leica M and Zeiss ZM lenses arent necessarily designed for digital, but for film, and suffer to some degree with corner smearing also.
JaKo wrote:
I do live within NA but outside US free shipping area (well, US postal address, US bank account, shipping address) but I get your point on this.
Colour rendering is easily adjustable within camera. No additional aids are needed aside from a clear white paper sheet. There are FM post related to it; check them out.
New cameras can be as unpredictable, usually better for adopted lenses. Let's see.
I am very early (2013) adoptee of mirrorless gear and few RF lenses and I still believe a single dedicated, converted camera maybe a better way to go.
Just follow the RF diehards - most move to better designed modern lenses for Sony format. Mods maybe temporary for very specific lenses to keep for a very short time to have
Are the Kolari colors issues related to color cast (temp/tint) or individual color changes?
If the later, a simple profile using X‑Rite ColorChecker Passport could fix it.
It really depends on how many m-mount lenses one would want to adapt. For those with many wide and ultra-wide M mount lenses, that could be the best approach.
For me, the ZM 35 is my only wide m-mount lens. I do see an issue with bokeh towards the corners at mid-distance using wide apertures. A simple filter combined with the right adapter (or adjusting the lens itself) could fix this. For landscapes, I would not worry about it since after f/6.3 FC is no longer an issue and the lens is sharp edge to edge with the stock A7RII.
