scrappydog wrote:
My significant other did me a favor and tested my Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM + OptoSigma filter for me while I was at work. I fixed the centering of the filter by fitting four small pieces of rubberband in between the lens and the step-up/step-down filter stack in a North, South, East, West configuration.
I uploaded the images to my Flickr account at full resolution. You can download all of the shots from Flickr. Link: https://flic.kr/s/aHskQd6cew
I also included a shot of how I centered the lens.
Only checked the 1.4 shots so far, but looks better to me now.
Optosigma filter is definetly the way to go with this lens.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I will have it on Thursday and will definitely test for center and mid-zone degradation.
Already waiting for it ;-)
BastianK wrote:
Only checked the 1.4 shots so far, but looks better to me now.
There is no mid-field dip when the lens is properly centered. All apertures up to about f/8 look better to me in the corners. The field flattens at all apertures.
scrappydog wrote:
There is no mid-field dip when the lens is properly centered. All apertures up to about f/8 look better to me in the corners. The field flattens at all apertures.
Looks the same to me and much like Haruhiko's samples.
In my case centering was not the issue unfortunately, the Eksma lens is just worse for this.
scrappydog wrote:
There is no mid-field dip when the lens is properly centered. All apertures up to about f/8 look better to me in the corners. The field flattens at all apertures.
I agree. I checked it yesterday and it looks great! No mid-field issues and big corner improvement. Centering the lens is crucial. Thanks for posting.
After checking the Contax 28/2.8 G's MTF graph, I decided to give this lens a try. It's around $250 used, so what do we have to lose?
Question: With the 1.5m PCX (reversed) on it: Were you able to focus at infinity? Did you try any other adapter other than the Techart? I purchased the new Fotodiox MF adapter and I'm hoping I will be able to focus at infinity.
Let me know!
PS: My PCX 5m just arrived (for the ZM 35/1.4) but it's pouring outside.
I was thinking of getting the ZM 25mm. Fred has a lens for me if I want it but he mentioned I may have to remove some shims on the lens. I'm only shooting it on a Sony so is this the case and how many shims do I remove
No problem reaching infinity with Contax G lenses, Fred. They have enough leeway by construction. I suppose Zeiss wanted to avoid that the AF mechanism would hit the hard stop each time you focused up to infinity. I tried this Biogon G 28 with a 1.4m. Nikon lens and I can confirm this fact. Even a 1m. close up lens allowed me to reach infinity. Unfortunately the results weren't that good. I expect that a Plano convex lens, instead of a meniscus, will do better.
would anyone like to collaborate on making small productions of filters made to fit? Just producing 10 will bring costs down quite a bit on having glass put into a casing made for this purpose. I have set this up with a shop specializing in lens modifications and am about to speak to another.
anyone try the T* coated vs the standard Hasselblad Proxar 1M? Considering.
davidzimand wrote:
would anyone like to collaborate on making small productions of filters made to fit? Just producing 10 will bring costs down quite a bit on having glass put into a casing made for this purpose. I have set this up with a shop specializing in lens modifications and am about to speak to another.
I would surely be interested, but are we talking about coated lenses?
That really makes a big difference as I have seen.
So, I put together the filter system today for the PCX 5m lens in front of the ZM 35/1.4. Thanks @HaruhikoT for the tips! (Added elastic shims to make sure it's as centered as possible)
I had to remove (1) copper and (1) silver shims for the lens to be perfectly adjusted to the infinity hard stop (Thanks @BastianK ) and my Hawk's helicoid adapter. (Other adapters may vary)
Like I wrote, it's been raining pretty hard today and I was not able to take a good test but I did a try a couple frames from my kitchen's door showing the yard and the mountains at infinity distance. I'm very impressed.
Here is a 1:1 crop showing the extreme edge of the frame at f/1.4 (wide open!). This was using the infinity hard stop and the 5m lens. Without the 5m lens, the extreme edges at infinity look absolutely horrible as my ZM 35/1.4 shooters know.
Tomorrow I will post a proper test.
Best,Fred
Extreme edges at f/1.4 (wide open) using the PCX 5m lens in front. At this aperture, only the houses are in focus.
This is beginning to look very promising for the ZM 35/1.4. Has anyone checked out a source of the Optosigma 1500 planoconvex (SLB-50-5000PM) lenses within Australasia/Oceania? I'd be interested in pursuing, but we're a long way from the action down here...
davidzimand wrote:
would anyone like to collaborate on making small productions of filters made to fit? Just producing 10 will bring costs down quite a bit on having glass put into a casing made for this purpose. I have set this up with a shop specializing in lens modifications and am about to speak to another.
anyone try the T* coated vs the standard Hasselblad Proxar 1M? Considering.
After checking the Contax 28/2.8 G's MTF graph, I decided to give this lens a try. It's around $250 used, so what do we have to lose?
Question: With the 1.5m PCX (reversed) on it: Were you able to focus at infinity? Did you try any other adapter other than the Techart? I purchased the new Fotodiox MF adapter and I'm hoping I will be able to focus at infinity.
I tried techart AF and pixco MF adapter with the G28 + PCX1.5m reversed, both can reach infinity without modification.
I don't have the Fotodiox adapter but I expect a 90% chance of reaching infinity.
Other 10% is maybe Fotodiox's is thicker than others, but even in that case you can adjust infinity by removing shim inside the G28.
See this post: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1159122/0
HaruhikoT wrote:
I tried techart AF and pixco MF adapter with the G28 + PCX1.5m reversed, both can reach infinity without modification.
I don't have the Fotodiox adapter but I expect a 90% chance of reaching infinity.
Other 10% is maybe Fotodiox's is thicker than others, but even in that case you can adjust infinity by removing shim inside the G28.
See this post: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1159122/0
Thank you.
Do you like the TechArt adapter? Is it easy to manual focus the lens?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thank you.
Did you like the Pixco MF adapter? Was it easy to manual focus the lens?
I like Pixco's because it's cheap, lightweight than other expensive adapters. Focus ring is usable, but is not smooth compared to native MF lenses.
Lack of distance indicator is only a problem for me.
EDIT: Techart AF adapter is also usable. Electronic DMF with its small screw is quite useful surprisingly. With G28, AF speed is acceptable but its AF precision is not good so I prefer to use DMF in most time.
navmannz wrote:
This is beginning to look very promising for the ZM 35/1.4. Has anyone checked out a source of the Optosigma 1500 planoconvex (SLB-50-5000PM) lenses within Australasia/Oceania? I'd be interested in pursuing, but we're a long way from the action down here...
-John
I submitted a quote request on the optosigma page to have the PCX delivered to Australia and they put me in touch with the local supplier AusOptics
Fred Miranda wrote:
So, I put together the filter system today for the PCX 5m lens in front of the ZM 35/1.4. Thanks @HaruhikoT@ for the tips! (Added elastic shims to make sure it's as centered as possible)
I had to remove (1) copper and (1) silver shims for the lens to be perfectly adjusted to the infinity hard stop (Thanks @BastianK@ ) and my Hawk's helicoid adapter. (Other adapters may vary)
Like I wrote, it's been raining pretty hard today and I was not able to take a good test but I did a try a couple frames from my kitchen's door showing the yard and the mountains at infinity distance. I'm very impressed.
Here is a 1:1 crop showing the extreme edge of the frame at f/1.4 (wide open!). This was using the infinity hard stop and the 5m lens. Without the 5m lens, the extreme edges at infinity look absolutely horrible as my ZM 35/1.4 shooters know.
Tomorrow I will post a proper test.
Best,Fred...Show more →
Fred,
That one image alone is very impressive indeed. I am eagerly awaiting your full test.
I have a question and a request regarding the PCX lens on the ZM 35/1.4:
1. Is it possible to use a hood in conjunction with the PCX?
2. Could you please post some photos of the front end assembly? I still don't have a clear picture in my mind as to how it is all put together.
That one image alone is very impressive indeed. I am eagerly awaiting your full test.
I have a question and a request regarding the PCX lens on the ZM 35/1.4:
1. Is it possible to use a hood in conjunction with the PCX?
2. Could you please post some photos of the front end assembly? I still don't have a clear picture in my mind as to how it is all put together.
Thanks,
Rob
I did some preliminary tests this morning while it's not raining but more tests are needed to get a clear idea of what improvements are.
I know a few things for sure:
1) One would have to modify their ZM 35/1.4 lens (removal of one or more shims depending on the adapter used) to be able to focus at infinity. It's extremely easy to do it though. An alternative would be to modify the adapter instead of the lens.
2) There is a slight loss in contrast when using the filter. How much? In LR, I need to dial +15 contrast to match the contrast of the image without the front-lens. So, it's something that can be fixed in post, but it's a negative in my view.
3) The front-lens is very efficient correcting astigmatism and field curvature towards the corners from f/1.4 to f/4 apertures. That means, one would be able to shoot landscapes (nightscapes) at wider apertures and also position their subject off center for other applications like portraits.
The field curvature bokeh issue towards the corners when shooting at 2m+ subject distance wide open is no longer a problem with the front-lens.
4) After f/5.6, the lens without the front-lens performs very similarly (center/mid/corner) but the corners and mid-field are still marginally better (resolution-wise) with the front-lens.
5) There is a slight increase in focal length. With the front-lens, the 35/1.4 becomes seems to become a 35.5mm.
6) The 5m front-lens with (49-55 step-up, 55-52 step-down and 52 retention metal rings) weight a total of 25 grams. it's about the same weight of the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM original hood. So, it's s very light set-up and also acts as a protection filter for your lens.
7) There is no mid-field dip (as reported earlier) as long as the the front-lens is perfectly centered inside the step up ring. (I used 2mm elastic band pieces to keep the lens aligned and in place)
1) It's possible if you get a third party 52mm wide angle hood. Not possible with the original Zeiss hood
2) I will post some pictures later on today or tomorrow.
@Fred Miranda@
If possible a few comparison shots regarding flare would be appreciated:
Sun inside the frame / Sun outside the frame / Cityscape at night (lanterns)
As it looks I still have to wait almost a full month to get mine.
