I got my head turned by the latest conversion projects and the deep discounts available on new cameras had me considering picking up a new one and sending my current off to be converted. Thoroughly disillusioned, I'm back to this. I put in the order for a 1000 and 5000, though it looks like the 5000 will take a while, which is fine. I'm most interested in getting the 24 working well.
Is anyone working on a solution for the ZM Distagon 18?
mcbroomf wrote:
Bastian, thanks for posting the VM 35 Ultron shots. Perhaps you mentioned it already, but what did you need to do to get back to infinity with the 5m lens?
Thx, Mike
You can find the information you are looking for in this post
Or the article where I try to summarize all the findings.
freaklikeme wrote:
I got my head turned by the latest conversion projects and the deep discounts available on new cameras had me considering picking up a new one and sending my current off to be converted. Thoroughly disillusioned, I'm back to this. I put in the order for a 1000 and 5000, though it looks like the 5000 will take a while, which is fine. I'm most interested in getting the 24 working well.
Is anyone working on a solution for the ZM Distagon 18?
According to @HaruhikoT@'s computations a Zeiss Proxar 0.5m might be the way to go (also see link above), but this solution is still untested afaik.
BastianK wrote:
According to @HaruhikoT@@'s computations a Zeiss Proxar 0.5m might be the way to go (also see link above), but this solution is still untested afaik.
Thanks, Bastian. If I can figure out a way to get it in place without vignetting, I may be able to test it.
freaklikeme wrote:
Thanks, Bastian. If I can figure out a way to get it in place without vignetting, I may be able to test it.
You can find Zeiss Proxar 0.5m with Hasselblad B60 bayonet on ebay, diameter of the lens should be approximately 60mm.
I would try a 58-> 67 step up, 67->62 step down and some small 62mm retaining ring (from amazon basics UV filter) to clamp it.
A 58mm. Hoya HMC +2 close-up filter would be easier to set up. You simply screw it on front of the lens. From Guy's tests with the ZM25, Hoyas and Proxars perform similarly. Possibly 58mm.would vignette a bit, because close up lenses come in thick mounts, so maybe a 58-62 step-up ring + Hoya 62mm. will be better.
artur5 wrote:
A 58mm. Hoya HMC +2 close-up filter would be easier to set up. You simply screw it on front of the lens. From Guy's tests with the ZM25, Hoyas and Proxars perform similarly. Possibly 58mm.would vignette a bit, because close up lenses come in thick mounts, so maybe a 58-62 step-up ring + Hoya 62mm. will be better.
We'll call the Hoya plan B, although my dad's got a couple of 58mm Canon close up lenses as well, the 250D and 500D. May as well how those work out.
BastianK wrote:
You can find Zeiss Proxar 0.5m with Hasselblad B60 bayonet on ebay, diameter of the lens should be approximately 60mm.
I would try a 58-> 67 step up, 67->62 step down and some small 62mm retaining ring (from amazon basics UV filter) to clamp it.
And plan C. I've already got the B57's on the way and enough filter and step rings here to make a go with them.
Edited to add: The B60's optics should be around 67mm in diameter. Aren't the B50/57's around 57mm in diameter?
freaklikeme wrote:
Is anyone working on a solution for the ZM Distagon 18?
See p7 #14 and p18 #11.
I have not yet received rubber tools to remove retention ring from my B57 Proxars. So I had to duct tape the Hasselblad filter into front plate of ZM18. I have tested front filter solution with A7v2 and A7r thick filter stack cameras, and this doesn't do miracles, improves for sure but I don't think this will work good enough for landscapes. Results were good for close-ups. If interested I can share RAW-files from A7v2.
Also I removed both shims like instructed in p12 #2, but maximum focus distance is ~120cm (measured indoors, not 100% sure as yesterday outdoors 0C[for imperial people: water freezing point temperature, whatever that is in the F-scale] it seemed to focus somewhere between 150-200cm range). Ordered punch of cheap Leica-M adapters from eBay to later test if some of them would focus further.
PS. As this thread is so long and contains lots of off-topic discussion I made wiki-page containing link to pages where solution for each lens has been mentioned, OP has done similar summary to beginning of the thread: wiki page of issues caused by thick filter stack
I have not yet received rubber tools to remove retention ring from my B57 Proxars. So I had to duct tape the Hasselblad filter into front plate of ZM18. I have tested front filter solution with A7v2 and A7r thick filter stack cameras, and this doesn't do miracles, improves for sure but I don't think this will work good enough for landscapes. Results were good for close-ups. If interested I can share RAW-files from A7v2.
Also I removed both shims like instructed in p12 #2, but maximum focus distance is ~120cm (measured indoors, not 100% sure as yesterday outdoors 0C[for imperial people: water freezing point temperature, whatever that is in the F-scale] it seemed to focus somewhere between 150-200cm range). Ordered punch of cheap filter from eBay to later test if some of them would focus further.
PS. As this thread is so long and contains lots of off-topic discussion I made wiki-page containing link to pages where solution for each lens has been mentioned, OP has done similar summary to beginning of the thread: wiki page of issues caused by thick filter stack
Thanks for sharing that and for the wiki, Samuli. Very helpful. Fortunately, I already have the vacuum tube to disassemble the B57's. Out of curiosity, approximately how far away from the front of the lens did your duct tape solution leave the filter? I'm wondering if your maximum focus distance might be impacted by that. That's why my first thought is to set it in a simple 58mm frame. Assuming it works, that should get it as close as possible to the front element and still allow for the hood.
I'm hopeful we can get this working and happy I'm not the only one trying. Perfect landscape performance isn't my goal. I just want to improve the corners for city and architecture where I'm at hyperfocal distances or closer.
LBJ2 wrote:
baltmin wrote:
Has anybody tested the voigtlander 35mm 1.2 II?
Everybody talks about its character, the unique bokeh but no comments about the corners. It would be interesting to see what PCX/Proxar can do with this extreme lens.
I use the Voight 35 1.2 ver II on the A7rII with TAP and don't seem to notice problematic corners. Since you mentioned it, I'll take another look and scrutinze extreme corners more cloesly. Do you have any examples you can post ?
Thank you for your response. I had the impression that all the Leica M-mount lenses wider than 50mm have the same problem with smearing in the borders/corners. I was looking forward to buy this lens but I changed my mind after reading the above. This thread however made me reconsider trying it.
I haven't seen any samples with the A7 series. I don't know if there is any out there available in full size. Obviously you are happy with its corner performance, which is good news. But there is still a question whether it can perform even better based on what we have read in this thread, especially in small apertures.
---------------------------------------------
LBJ2 wrote:
baltmin wrote:
LBJ2 wrote:
baltmin wrote:
Has anybody tested the voigtlander 35mm 1.2 II?
Everybody talks about its character, the unique bokeh but no comments about the corners. It would be interesting to see what PCX/Proxar can do with this extreme lens.
I use the Voight 35 1.2 ver II on the A7rII with TAP and don't seem to notice problematic corners. Since you mentioned it, I'll take another look and scrutinze extreme corners more cloesly. Do you have any examples you can post ?
Thank you for your response. I had the impression that all the Leica M-mount lenses wider than 50mm have the same problem with smearing in the borders/corners. I was looking forward to buy this lens but I changed my mind after reading the above. This thread however made me reconsider trying it.
I haven't seen any samples with the A7 series. I don't know if there is any out there available in full size. Obviously you are happy with its corner performance, which is good news. But there is still a question whether it can perform even better based on what we have read in this thread, especially in small apertures.
Hello: I use this lens mostly at 1.2 and 1.4 on the A7r2 not really paying too much attention to the corners. I don't mind taking some time this coming weekend to scrutinize the corners stopped down to F8 and will let you know.
One quick test shot with the Voightlander 35 F1.2 ver II on the A7rII with the Techart Pro adapter @ F8. IMO the corners look pretty good and no need for the filter glass discussed in this forum.
Note: Due to the adapter the EXIF data displayed in this test image is not correct
One quick test shot with the Voightlander 35 F1.2 ver II on the A7rII with the Techart Pro adapter @ F8. IMO the corners look pretty good and no need for the filter glass discussed in this forum.
Note: Due to the adapter the EXIF data displayed in this test image is not correct
Almost all rangefinder lenses look more or less good in the corners at f/8.0 (except for mainly some Biogons).
We are discussing options to get at least usable corners wide open.
freaklikeme wrote:
Out of curiosity, approximately how far away from the front of the lens did your duct tape solution leave the filter? I'm wondering if your maximum focus distance might be impacted by that. That's why my first thought is to set it in a simple 58mm frame. Assuming it works, that should get it as close as possible to the front element and still allow for the hood.
B57 was sitting on top of the front plate (where "Carl Zeiss" etc. is printed) - Only function of the duct tape was to keep the filter in place = minimum possible distance. When following p7 #14 instructions the glass will be 1-2mm further away from the ZM18 front lens element. I'll take a photo of "the structure" when I get home, as well as some test photos (awful feather, full cloud cover, little rain, temperature water freezing point...)
FYI: OptoSigma Plano-Convex 1500mm, 3000mm, 4000m and 5000mm seems to be 313EUR including VAT and shipping, just got reply to my order.
I got to see the ZM18+0.5m Proxar photos for 1st time in computer. Initial impression was not very good when shooting, but now looking them in computer they are better than expected. As lens doesn't focus to infinity (or even 5 meters) I could not shoot "tilted landscape". So I shoot what I usually shoot, but took photo with every aperture from each scene.
Looking at the images the Proxar filter corrected the main problem I have with rangefinder lenses:
even with Kolari mod camera corners may be in focus @ infinity when center is focused to 2-5 meter (=6-15 feet distance), which makes any lens 100% useless paperweight for me.
Prime example of such behaviour; ZM 2/35@f/2.8 with Kolari modified A7, so nice boke but corners ruin the photo. BTW. ZM 2/35 can take nice "all sharp" landscapes f/8-11 with A7m (m=Kolari modified), so issue only concerns boke photos, which for me is >95% usage. I hope that 3000, 4000 or 5000 Plano Convex will correct the boke of ZM 2/35 with A7m as if excluding corners this is one of the best boke lenses I have seen, I may even prefer it over ZM 1.4/35 from rendering style point of view.
With 0.5m Proxar it seems that I can take boke photos with ZM18. I also like ZM18 rendering style; lens gets all possible contrast to subject but keeps boke contrast low, just the way how lens should render to make subject stand out. Apologies for crappy light and weather, hard to do photography in Finland at wintertime...
Close focus, f/5.6
Medium distance focus, f/5.6
Close focus, f/5.6
About 2m/6feet distance, f/16 - both bottom corners look bad (top corners would look also but they are so dark that it won't show...)
Very close focus, f/16, HDR
And the duct tape method to attach Hasselblad filter directly to ZM18 - Ugly but works (one can use rubberband around Hasselblad filter to make it tight fit=center to the 58mm front thread):
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Looking at the images the Proxar filter corrected the main problem I have with rangefinder lenses:
even with Kolari mod camera corners may be in focus @ infinity when center is focused to 2-5 meter (=6-15 feet distance), which makes any lens 100% useless paperweight for me.
Prime example of such behaviour; ZM 2/35@f/2.8 with Kolari modified A7, so nice boke but corners ruin the photo. BTW. ZM 2/35 can take nice "all sharp" landscapes f/8-11 with A7m (m=Kolari modified), so issue only concerns boke photos, which for me is >95% usage. I hope that 3000, 4000 or 5000 Plano Convex will correct the boke of ZM 2/35 with A7m as if excluding corners this is one of the best boke lenses I have seen, I may even prefer it over ZM 1.4/35 from rendering style point of view.
...Show more →
This is also what concerns me the most.
But this must be the worst example I have seen so far (and I shot many bad ones myself).
Proxar 0.5m for ZM18 is not my estimation but @candreyo's report.
I respect candreyo's experiment and ZM18 is not my own lens, but in theory Proxar (Meniscus) 0.5m seems be too strong. PCX 3m would work better. I will post simulated MTFs later.
Luckily Samuli's order includes 3m Optosigma. Looking forward to see Samuli's ZM18+PCX3m test.
Though Optosigma's 50mm diameter may be too small. I'm worrying mechanical vignetting.
And thank you for creating that wiki, Samuli!
Proxar 0.5m for ZM18 is not my estimation but @candreyo@'s report.
I respect candreyo's experiment and ZM18 is not my own lens, but in theory Proxar (Meniscus) 0.5m seems be too strong. PCX 3m would work better. I will post simulated MTFs later.
Luckily Samuli's order includes 3m Optosigma. Looking forward to see Samuli's ZM18+PCX3m test.
Though Optosigma's 50mm diameter may be too small. I'm worrying mechanical vignetting.
And thank you for creating that wiki, Samuli!
Haruhiko
The Wiki is amazing. Thanks for creating it @Samuli Vahonen !!
Haruhiko, it may be a good idea to add the wiki link to your first post.
Finally got my 35 ZM setup. 49-55, empty 55, Optima Sigma .5, retaining ring from ELPro 3. No vignette, can use hood and also additional extra filter when needed. Done
I forgot to add it's a thin 49 to start as this clears the actually lens for the hood. If your not using the hood than just the step up.
GMPhotography wrote:
Finally got my 35 ZM setup. 49-55, empty 55, Optima Sigma .5, retaining ring from ELPro 3. No vignette, can use hood and also additional extra filter when needed. Done
Awesome! Which diameter is the Elpro 3? I saw several on Wikipedia.
Thx
GMPhotography wrote:
Finally got my 35 ZM setup. 49-55, empty 55, Optima Sigma .5, retaining ring from ELPro 3. No vignette, can use hood and also additional extra filter when needed. Done
Hi Guy, why specifically is the retaining ring from ELPro 3 is required? How about the retaining ring from any 55mm filter? It's must be mentioned somewhere in this thread but I miss it.
