Back to the 25mm ZM i got a 46mm UV filter took the glass out put the Hoya +1 in it and it is not vignetting at F8 and the hood goes on and off. Perfect solution. After its all said and done it is about equal to what I did with the Dremel.
For 35 ZM i have a Leica ElPro 3 coming tomorrow . Honestly Im tempted to get the Dremel out and see if I could grind the glass down on one of my extra 46mm closeup glass. I would love to get the dang Optima Sigma .5 to about 48mm instead of 50 and just put it in a 49mm filter ring. Seriously that would be the most ideal setups
GMPhotography wrote:
Back to the 25mm ZM i got a 46mm UV filter took the glass out put the Hoya +1 in it and it is not vignetting at F8 and the hood goes on and off. Perfect solution. After its all said and done it is about equal to what I did with the Dremel.
For 35 ZM i have a Leica ElPro 3 coming tomorrow . Honestly Im tempted to get the Dremel out and see if I could grind the glass down on one of my extra 46mm closeup glass. I would love to get the dang Optima Sigma .5 to about 48mm instead of 50 and just put it in a 49mm filter ring. Seriously that would be the most ideal setups
Guy, I have a 5m optosigma coming, and also a cheap 49mm filter with locking ring. I have spoken with a local optometrist who advises that they should be able to grind the Optosigma to the same dimensions as the 49 mm UV, once I have it out, provided that the BK7 optical glass is okay for their shaping machine. I'm expecting to be able to do this in about a week, depending on how long shipping takes from Japan to NZ. I promise that I'll report as soon as I have some news - good or bad! I agree that this would be ideal if achievable, particularly given the ability to retain use of the Zeiss hood.
Yea i think if a optometrist can do it than that is the best way. I just tried on a 46mm close up filter and its not the best way as it chips glass. The problem is knowing when to stop so the retaining ring can hide the chipping but I hate to ruin a 90 dollar lens either. But this is the way it looks with a Dremel. As you can see I could probably bite it off better.
I look forward to your report also ask him what the final cut size is so we can advice maybe a local shop here. Its 50 as it is normal. Im thinking its got to get to 48mm, maybe even 47mm. I guess we could measure the UV glass we take out. I don't have that tool but if anyone can measure one that maybe helpful.
navmannz wrote:
Guy, I have a 5m optosigma coming, and also a cheap 49mm filter with locking ring. I have spoken with a local optometrist who advises that they should be able to grind the Optosigma to the same dimensions as the 49 mm UV, once I have it out, provided that the BK7 optical glass is okay for their shaping machine. I'm expecting to be able to do this in about a week, depending on how long shipping takes from Japan to NZ. I promise that I'll report as soon as I have some news - good or bad! I agree that this would be ideal if achievable, particularly given the ability to retain use of the Zeiss hood.
I think I read earlier here that it's a problem if the optosigma is not perfectly centered. You might want as what their production tolerances are. Hopefully, the work would not have to be done by hand.
Parariss wrote:
I think I read earlier here that it's a problem if the optosigma is not perfectly centered. You might want as what their production tolerances are. Hopefully, the work would not have to be done by hand.
If you search online you'll find examples of the hardware that they use, which basically uses either a computerised template or physical blank, which enables edges to be ground with very high levels of precision, c. 0.1-0.2 mm. But the proof of the pudding will be in the eating...
Regarding the Voigtlander 35/1.2 - I believe these are better for sensor out of the box than the Zeiss ZM range. The Voigtlander is an excellent lens but a very different character, a bit softer, less micro contrast, but still very very sharp especially as you close it down. While there is a lot of curvature wide open, it is better mitigated than ZM35, and it's a large part of its character. So, where there may be some small improvements to be made or "corrected" I think it is not only unnecessary but may defeat the purpose of using such a lens.
To me, the ZM is more contrasty and super sharp, including wide open, but balances this focal length with a modern Zeiss look wide open. The Voigtlander is more of an old school look, better for weddings for example where character and softness of a degree has its place and function.
The Contax G 21 & 25 show 1.5 and 2 Metre OptoSigmas is this correct? I may have missed something!
For the 25mm 49-55 step up then 55-52 step down with the 52mm retaining ring (ex Amazon basics, works best.
Many Thanks for all the help guys
1. 25mm is not available for Contax G. If you are saying about Zeiss ZM 25mm, Hasselblad Proxar 1m was tested.
2. Zeiss ZM 25mm has 46mm filter thread so you need 46-55 stepup, not 49-55.
See also bastian's summary.
This is a quick test of Zeiss ZM 35mm f1.4 versus Leica 35mm 1.4 Fle. I used PCX 5m for both lenses. Some caveats should be mentioned here. Firstly, I didn't use tripod and didn't have lot of time to check the precision of focuses as my friends were pretty hungry. Secondly, the alignment of PCX glass may not be perfect as I am still waiting for the Silicone O-ring to center the glass in its holder. Nevertheless, the results of this test seem to be obvious to me. I would not hesitate using these two excellent lenses on distant landscape and stopping down to very slow apertures is not necessary unless one wants more DoF. Before the test I thought that the Zeiss Distagon would smoke the Leica Summilux all over. But it seems that the Leica is putting up a good fight to the last pixel. Differences seem to be small in most areas and probably not going to affect me much in the real world situations but I'm not a landscape shooter kind of guy and this conclusion may not hold for meticulous shooters here.
Below is the whole scene and red marks are cropped spots.
The first images are always from Zeiss ZM 35/1.4 and the second images are from Leica 35mm Summilux FLE. All were taken with A7RM2 and the lenses were set at F4 with front end filter (PCX 5m). You can compare these images at 100% by using links to my Flickr pages.
This is a quick test of Zeiss ZM 35mm f1.4 versus Leica 35mm 1.4 Fle. I used PCX 5m for both lenses. Some caveats should be mentioned here. Firstly, I didn't use tripod and didn't have lot of time to check the precision of focuses as my friends were pretty hungry. Secondly, the alignment of PCX glass may not be perfect as I am still waiting for the Silicone O-ring to center the glass in its holder. Nevertheless, the results of this test seem to be obvious to me. I would not hesitate using these two excellent lenses on distant landscape and stopping down to very slow apertures is not necessary unless one wants more DoF. Before the test I thought that the Zeiss Distagon would smoke the Leica Summilux all over. But it seems that the Leica is putting up a good fight to the last pixel. Differences seem to be small in most areas and probably not going to affect me much in the real world situations but I'm not a landscape shooter kind of guy and this conclusion may not hold for meticulous shooters here.
Below is the whole scene and red marks are cropped spots.
The first images are always from Zeiss ZM 35/1.4 and the second images are from Leica 35mm Summilux FLE. All were taken with A7RM2 and the lenses were set at F4 with front end filter (PCX 5m). You can compare these images at 100% by using links to my Flickr pages.
Thank you for posting quite interesting tests!
Both Lux35+PCX5m and ZM35+PCX5m look super-sharp on A7RII, and Lux35 has a bit more contrast than ZM35 in my eyes.
If you have time, I'd like to see the Lux35's wider aperture shots (F1.4 and F2.0). With PCX versus without PCX comparison would be also appreciated.
Thanks HaruhikoT for the compliment and for starting this most useful and interesting thread. I have everything that you may want to see and also images shot with M240. However, I am a kind of reluctant to post as I did the shooting too quickly and my PCX may not be propery aligned. For example, while the right hand extreme corner images are sharp from wo but on the left side, the double lines are gone by f4. I want to redo it again but even on the sub-optimal implementation of the front-end filter (on my part), I start to very much doubt the notion that M lenses are best used on M cameras!
In addition, I can throw in the Kolari v2 moded A7 for a mix.
@teeraash - you can use pieces of rubberband to act as shims to center your 5m lens in the holder. I posted a shot on my Flickr page here: https://flic.kr/p/R7FjJ2
GMPhotography wrote:
Back to the 25mm ZM i got a 46mm UV filter took the glass out put the Hoya +1 in it and it is not vignetting at F8 and the hood goes on and off. Perfect solution. After its all said and done it is about equal to what I did with the Dremel.
I did a test swapping the mount of a 58mm Hoya +1 close-up with one from a 58mm. Hoya UV. Super easy and it fits perfectly but now the curved side of the close-up filter protrudes a bit on the front, because the mount of the UV filter is 3mm. thinner. I guess it's the same for a 46mm. unit, so probably it isn't possible to use the original Zeiss lens cap ? ( BTW, design wise, those ZM caps are awful ).
Do you protect the filter with a generic cap or something when there's no hood on it or simply you leave always the hood on the lens ?
teeraash wrote:
Thanks HaruhikoT for the compliment and for starting this most useful and interesting thread. I have everything that you may want to see and also images shot with M240. However, I am a kind of reluctant to post as I did the shooting too quickly and my PCX may not be propery aligned. For example, the right hand extreme corner images are sharp from wo but on the left side, the double lines are gone by f4. I want to redo it again but even on the sub-optimal implementation of the front-end filter (on my part), I start to very doubt the notion that M lenses are best used on M cameras!
In addition, I can throw in the Kolari v2 moded A7 for a mix. ...Show more →
Thanks for sharing the photos. I wonder if you need to adjust the lenses for infinity focusing? Which adapter are you using?
I have both these lenses but originally not plan to adapt them as I plan to use them on M body too. Only did the mod to my ZM 25mm. So wonder if these two lenses can escape the mod with certain adapter.
