I already bought the 1m Proxar, trying to take out the lens. I have ordered the spanners (the rubber and metal ones) from the net. They are not too expensive and can be handy for future uses. I should be able to get hold of a cheap small drill. Will see how it goes
I received the tools and managed to take out the lens form 1M Proxia and adapted it for my ZM 25mm. Thanks for all the advises. Next step is to work on the infinity focusing. A bit nervous here as I have never taken a lens apart before
While I was waiting for the tools, I talked to a camera repair shop guy, thinking of asking him to do the removal of the shims for me. He was kind of laughing on what I am trying to do As he was trying to discourage me, he also mentioned that the alteration is not exactly easily reversed. Just putting back the shims doesn’t guarantee that the lens will be back to the original precise infinity focus. How much strength to apply in screwing back the part also affect the focus…. Does what he said makes sense? As I no longer own any M body at this moment, I will not be able to verify if the infinity focusing is correctly restored. What are your experiences?
I still plan to adapt my ZM 25mm. Just want to know how to manage this. Thanks again for the helps.
wstam wrote:
I received the tools and managed to take out the lens form 1M Proxia and adapted it for my ZM 25mm. Thanks for all the advises. Next step is to work on the infinity focusing. A bit nervous here as I have never taken a lens apart before
While I was waiting for the tools, I talked to a camera repair shop guy, thinking of asking him to do the removal of the shims for me. He was kind of laughing on what I am trying to do As he was trying to discourage me, he also mentioned that the alteration is not exactly easily reversed. Just putting back the shims doesn’t guarantee that the lens will be back to the original precise infinity focus. How much strength to apply in screwing back the part also affect the focus…. Does what he said makes sense? As I no longer own any M body at this moment, I will not be able to verify if the infinity focusing is correctly restored. What are your experiences?
I still plan to adapt my ZM 25mm. Just want to know how to manage this. Thanks again for the helps. ...Show more →
Arrogance is a huge problem along sales man...
Same happened to me when I was asking a german company if they could also perform a thin filter mod.
First thing he said it won't help with RF wideangle lenses, so I tried pointing him to this forum and the Kolari homepage.
His reaction: "I am in bussiness for 20 years, some americans ain't telling me anything"
Furthermore he mixed up AF adjustment and adjustment of flange distance (to me 2 completely different things, in his opinion both the same )
Most incompetent guy I ever talked to, did not and won't get a single dime from me!
I'm still a little confused on the shims if your a Sony only shooter do you need to take them out. I'm okay with infinity not being at the hard stop as long as I get it. I have both the ZM 35 and 25 coming with the Proxar 1mm for it. I also just bought the Hawk adapter as well which I can adjust infinity. I would rather not take the shims out but will if I have too.
GMPhotography wrote:
I'm still a little confused on the shims if your a Sony only shooter do you need to take them out. I'm okay with infinity not being at the hard stop as long as I get it. I have both the ZM 35 and 25 coming with the Proxar 1mm for it. I also just bought the Hawk adapter as well which I can adjust infinity. I would rather not take the shims out but will if I have too.
You must remove internal shims or modify the adapter to be able to focus at infinity with certain lenses+PCX strengths combinations. (Yes, that's for the A7RII)
Modifying the adapter is not as easy as it sounds. Removing the shims is extremely easy, especially for the ZM 35/1.4.
All is needed is to remove 4 screws for the rear flange to come out. Once that's out, you will see 4 shims. (gold, silver and two copper). For the PCX 5m, you may have to leave only the gold (thicker) or gold + copper depending on your adapter.
Here is a post by @BatianK demonstrating this: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1453834/20#13857702
The ZM 25 and 28/2.8 take a little more work. You need a spanner to unscrew the rear element. Once that's unscrewed the entire optical system comes out and you will see the shims. I had to remove all but one to be able to focus the 28/2.8 to infinity. Don't let that scare you, the whole process takes about a minute and is totally reversible. Here is a video by @candreyo@: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1453834/11#13839430
BastianK wrote:
Arrogance is a huge problem along sales man...
Same happened to me when I was asking a german company if they could also perform a thin filter mod.
First thing he said it won't help with RF wideangle lenses, so I tried pointing him to this forum and the Kolari homepage.
His reaction: "I am in bussiness for 20 years, some americans ain't telling me anything"
Furthermore he mixed up AF adjustment and adjustment of flange distance (to me 2 completely different things, in his opinion both the same )
Most incompetent guy I ever talked to, did not and won't get a single dime from me!...Show more →
yeah, i've had the same issue talking to shop people. mostly it's just been because they don't think about manual focus lenses at all – they're trying to sell new lenses and if they repair a lens it's usually due to AF issues or electronic issues. if you can find people that specialize in old collectible lenses they'll usually be much more knowledgeable (but also aghast at the idea of modifying a lens rather than just repairing it).
wstam wrote:
While I was waiting for the tools, I talked to a camera repair shop guy, thinking of asking him to do the removal of the shims for me. He was kind of laughing on what I am trying to do As he was trying to discourage me, he also mentioned that the alteration is not exactly easily reversed. Just putting back the shims doesn’t guarantee that the lens will be back to the original precise infinity focus. How much strength to apply in screwing back the part also affect the focus…. Does what he said makes sense? As I no longer own any M body at this moment, I will not be able to verify if the infinity focusing is correctly restored. What are your experiences? ...Show more →
it's not much of an issue, just keep the shims clean and flat and keep screws tight without putting a huge amount of force into tightening them. the screws might come loose a bit over time if the lens is subject to lots of vibrations (as they sometimes do from the factory) and you can just tighten them again. if you want a rangefinder lens and camera to have a perfect infinity focus calibration you need to send them both in to be calibrated every 6-12 months anyway.
GMPhotography wrote:
I'm still a little confused on the shims if your a Sony only shooter do you need to take them out. I'm okay with infinity not being at the hard stop as long as I get it. I have both the ZM 35 and 25 coming with the Proxar 1mm for it. I also just bought the Hawk adapter as well which I can adjust infinity. I would rather not take the shims out but will if I have too.
the issue is that putting a closeup filter in front of the lens makes it unable to reach infinity (as appose to focusing past infinity) without removing shims. if you want to be able to focus on something further than 10ft away you'll probably need to remove some shims unless your lens adapter combo focuses waaaayyyyy past infinity without the closeup filter.
A rough calcul says that a ZM35 + 5m filter shifts infinity about 0.25mm. A ZM25 + 1m filter shifts infinity 0.6mm. In the first case is not impossible that the Hawks allows that much of infinity adjust, or even a cheapish adapter might be 0.25mm thinner than the standard distance. I recall HaruhikoT mentioning a Pixco adapter that worked fine for this purpose.
Instead, with a ZM25 +1m filter, it seems that removing shims is compulsory.
artur5 wrote:
A rough calcul says that a ZM35 + 5m filter shifts infinity about 0.25mm. A ZM25 + 1m filter shifts infinity 0.6mm. In the first case is not impossible that the Hawks allows that much of infinity adjust, or even a cheapish adapter might be 0.25mm thinner than the standard distance. I recall HaruhikoT mentioning a Pixco adapter that worked fine for this purpose.
Instead, with a ZM25 +1m filter, it seems that removing shims is compulsory.
The ZM 35/1.4 + 5m filter does not allow infinity focus with the Hawk's or my copy of the Pixco (suggested by Haruhiko). There's a need for shim removal or adapter modification. I am not sure about the ZM 25/2.8 as I never used it but in the case of the ZM 28/2.8, ALL shims must be removed and it's still very hard to focus at infinity using the Proxar 1m lens. (I could only achieve this with TAP parked to infinity using aperture f/36)
Fred Miranda wrote:
The ZM 35/1.4 + 5m filter does not allow infinity focus with the Hawk's or my copy of the Pixco (suggested by Haruhiko). There's a need for shim removal or adapter modification. I am not sure about the ZM 25/2.8 as I never used it but in the case of the ZM 28/2.8, ALL shims must be removed and it's still very hard to focus at infinity using the Proxar 1m lens. (I could only achieve this with TAP parked to infinity using aperture f/36)
So Fred, if using the TAP in AF mode, we can achieve infinite focus, but in MF mode, we need to use F36 to park it slightly beyond to compensate for the filter?
We wouldn't be able to just focus at infinite in MF mode if the filter is on?
Jan 14, 2017 at 02:16 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
I think my plan is to build the 5m filter for the ZM 35 f/1.4, but just put it on for portraits closer than 10m. At infinity it does not sound like it would help enough to be worth it. If I have interpreted Fred's comments rightly at infinity and f/5.6 or maybe f/6.3 or narrower, the filter will get you slightly better corners but at the cost of less contrast. Since the performance increase in the corners seems to be small, I think I would rather use the lens without the filter at infinity. I wouldn't shoot infinity at wider apertures, so I wouldn't need to modify the lens. I would like the increased performance at closer distances especially for portraits, but you can get that without modifying the lens if that is all you want. Perhaps I am wrong on this, but it seems a much easier way to go. Treat the filter as what it is--a close up lens--and just use it for close in shooting. Am I missing something?
Steve Spencer wrote:
I think my plan is to build the 5m filter for the ZM 35 f/1.4, but just put it on for portraits closer than 10m. At infinity it does not sound like it would help enough to be worth it. If I have interpreted Fred's comments rightly at infinity and f/5.6 or maybe f/6.3 or narrower, the filter will get you slightly better corners but at the cost of less contrast. Since the performance increase in the corners seems to be small, I think I would rather use the lens without the filter at infinity. I wouldn't shoot infinity at wider apertures, so I wouldn't need to modify the lens. I would like the increased performance at closer distances especially for portraits, but you can get that without modifying the lens if that is all you want. Perhaps I am wrong on this, but it seems a much easier way to go. Treat the filter as what it is--a close up lens--and just use it for close in shooting. Am I missing something?...Show more →
Everyone as he (or she) pleases.
If the filter does not screw with flare resistance I will use it all the time.
Jan 14, 2017 at 03:27 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
BastianK wrote:
Everyone as he (or she) pleases.
If the filter does not screw with flare resistance I will use it all the time.
Of course to each as he or she pleases, but I wonder what people are seeing as the benefits to leaving it on. Is it just that putting it on and off would be too much fiddling? Is it that you think the improvement at infinity is worth adapting the lens? Is it that you want to be able to shoot at wider apertures at infinity without the decreased performance? None of these are important issues to me, but they might be to others and I also wonder if there is some other benefit that I am missing. I just wanted to understand other people's thinking and see whether it affects my own thinking.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Is it just that putting it on and off would be too much fiddling?
Yes. Is it that you think the improvement at infinity is worth adapting the lens?
Partly. Decent across frame sharpness at f/1.4 can sure come in handy. Is it that you want to be able to shoot at wider apertures at infinity without the decreased performance?
See above.
Most important for me is bokeh at 2-4m. Easily worth it alone. Couple this with your first point and you have my answer
For me I'm not taking it off and on. It either works on through all apertures as better overall through close-up , mid zone and infinity. The bigger reason for me is off center if I can expand that zone for people more wide open than that's really what I'm going for. For the 35 I see the advantage there otherwise at F6.3 the corners look great without it but it's that falloff just off center I'm interested in than a small group of let's say 3 people the left and right folks won't fall off so fast.
The ZM 25 I'm not sure yet if I really need it but I don't have the lens yet so I'm going to test it first than start seeing if I do or do not. This is more a landscape lens for me as it would keep the 24-70 home, so have to see. If f6.3 in the corners works without I may leave it off. Just have to see. I'll have all these parts early next week.so I can start testing the 25 right away. I got a nice deal on it as a demo from Adorama.
I have to upload some crops today showing all apertures but I tend to agree with Steve. If you are shooting smaller than f/6.3, there is no practical reason for the filter. From f/1.4 until f/5.6 there is very noticeable corner gain at expense of contrast. (The wider the aperture, the bigger the resolution gain)
If after removing all the shims still doesn't reach infinity, the only way is grinding the adapter a bit. You need only a couple of grades of sanding paper. What is not easy is to achieve an even thickness all around the adapter. You need a good caliper and a lot of patience. I did it in the past and I'm not looking forward to do it again soon.
BTW a 28mm lens + 1m filter is a worst case scenario -it requires 0.75mm. to be shortened either by removing shims, grinding the adapter or both.
I'm not sure if this was very clear from previous posts but the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM is capable of very sharp corners at f/1.4 (wide open) even without the 5m front-lens. The issue with the Sony sensor stack is mainly field curvature and not so much astigmatism. (probably due to the distagon vs biogon design)
So, the use of the front-lens for this lens mainly flattens the image field. With the front-lens, if I focus on center, the extreme corners are also sharp for a flat infinity subject. Without the front-lens, it's not possible to achieve sharpness across the field at wider apertures due to the pronounced induced field curvature.
Here is an example shot at f/1.4 (extreme corners of the frame.)
The image on the left is without any front-lens but focused on the extreme edge
The image on the right is without any front-lens focused on the mid-field.
That's wide open without any front-lens. (There is pretty much no astigmatism in the extreme corners wide open even without any front-lens help)
Next, I will add the 5m front-end lens to the mix.
Below is a comparison showing the extreme edge, center and mid-field with the front-lens and without it. (At f/1.4)
Both focused at mid-field. (keep in mind that with the 5m front-lens, the ZM 35/1.4 becomes more flat-field so careful focusing at mid-field is no longer an issue)
As you can see from the 1:1 crops, the 5m front-lens helps the extreme edges AND center stay in focus while the crop without the 5m front-lens, shows worse extreme edges and center.
The edges look much better, the mid-field noticeably better and the center a little better with the 5m filter ON with the lens wide-open. Remember, all the front-lens is doing is flattening the field for this lens.
PS: As you can see the mid-field still looks better with the 5m front-lens. Some reports were showing it looked worse with the front-lens but I believe this was due to misalignment of the front-lens set-up. As long as the lens is perfectly center inside the filter ring set-up, you should be fine.
extreme edges at f/1.4 (5m front-lens: LEFT - No front-lens: RIGHT)
center at f/1.4 (5m front-lens: LEFT - No front-lens: RIGHT)
mid-field at f/1.4 (5m front-lens: LEFT - No front-lens: RIGHT)
As he was trying to discourage me, he also mentioned that the alteration is not exactly easily reversed. Just putting back the shims doesn’t guarantee that the lens will be back to the original precise infinity focus. How much strength to apply in screwing back the part also affect the focus…. Does what he said makes sense? As I no longer own any M body at this moment, I will not be able to verify if the infinity focusing is correctly restored. What are your experiences?
