I'm thinking of going with a 25 zm based on the great info in this thread. I was originally leaning towards a loxia 21 but being able to use the zm on TAP would be a plus. Has anyone shot this 25 zm vs the loxia 21 and care to post results?
It's the Techart Pro Adapter. It adapts Leica M to Sony FE and gives legacy and MF lenses AF ability. Plus with an additional adapter, you can use a variety of other legacy MF lenses and give them AF. It works very well!
35 ZM at f/1.4 with 5m PCX and Haida Clear Night filter.
Two shots blended, sky is 15s ISO6400, foreground is 8x 30s ISO3200 stacked using SR app.
Green in the sky is faint aurora (see the reflections on the snow)
Only illumination was starlight and aurora (no moon)
may I ask which adapter are you using with CV 35mm and optosigma filter? I cannot focus on infinity. I tried already Fotodiox and K&F adapters. Thank you!
may I ask which adapter are you using with CV 35mm and optosigma filter? I cannot focus on infinity. I tried already Fotodiox and K&F adapters. Thank you!
Jorge
You probably need to remove one shim. Unscrew the bayonet from the backside and remove one or two shims.. I found a silver and a gold shim on mine and had to remove the silver (thinner) shim. After that I could focus to infinity on my TAP, the C/V close focus adapter and my Fotodiox adapter.
Nevertheless, I have no idea, how to open the Voigtländer correctly. Is there some iinstructions... in internet? photographs... Soemthing i can follow?
Nevertheless, I have no idea, how to open the Voigtländer correctly. Is there some iinstructions... in internet? photographs... Soemthing i can follow?
Regards
Sorry, it was my mistaken. The ZM 35 has shims, not the C/V 35. With the C/V you need to find a suitable adapter. I think Phillip Reeve has a Fotodiox adapter that works.
may I ask which adapter are you using with CV 35mm and optosigma filter? I cannot focus on infinity. I tried already Fotodiox and K&F adapters. Thank you!
Jorge
You have to rely on sample variation to find one short enough. At least some fotodiox are short enough; it’s a pain you just have to keep trying samples till you find one.
DavidBM wrote:
You have to rely on sample variation to find one short enough. At least some fotodiox are short enough; it’s a pain you just have to keep trying samples till you find one.
What David said!
I found a K&F Concepts that allow me to focus at infinity (CV 35/1.7 + 5m). You may have to buy a few until you get one that works. My Techart Pro adapter also works but it could also have some variation.
I completed the first part of my foray into corrective front lenses and dissected some Hasselblad Proxars, and am now left with a 0.5m, 1.0m, and 2.0m lenses trapped in their respective step-rings. Interestingly, the black versions have retaining rings on the back, while the silver version did not. I was only able to remove one of the retention rings on the 0.5m filter after using a dremel with pointy tip to make a notch my spanner wrench could catch. The 2.0m ring wouldn't budge. Then I blemished the edge of the lens trying to use the wrench.
Plan B involved a dremel with the spinning disc, and I was able to cut notches through the metal rings 180 degrees from each other, and then pulled the ring apart, glass intact for the remaining two filters. In case anyone else tries this, you'll know when you've transitioned from cutting metal to cutting glass as you are rewarded with bigger sparks
Sadly, none of the filters are a raging success for my ZM 35/2.8 C-Biogon. Even after removing all of the shims (one silver, two brass for mine), I couldn't reach infinity with the 0.5m or 1.0m lenses, which include Voigtlander, Metabones, and Fotox. I could reach past infinity with the 2.0m, but there is remaining astigmatism/smearing and I'll have to do controlled tests to see if it's an improvement at all. It looks like I can remove the rear element of the lens as there is a notched cylindrical nut just below the rear element, under which there are some additional shims. I'm not sure if that's good to mess with, as it will change the relationship of the rear element to the other elements. But I may try just for kicks.
This leads me to a question. Do the planoconvex lenses cause the same degree of "close-up" effect as the meniscus lenses? I'd be willing to try an Optosigma lens, but honestly I'm not sure which to get and there is a decent lead time now to get one, and I don't really want to order a whole set.
I'll be playing around with the ZM25 next, which I hope is satisfactory with the Proxar 1m, as well as the ZM50/1.5 to flatten out the field curvature. I'm hoping to pick up a ZM18 from a fellow FM'er soon as well to try out.
One interesting side note. The lens that popped out of the silver colored Hassy filter was of slightly greater diameter than the others, and had a rounded bevel to the front edge. It's big enough that it can be trapped between a 46-55 step up ring and 55-52 step down ring, without the need for a retention ring harvested from a UV filter. However it can't fit between the rings flipped around. The other lenses are smaller in diameter and required the retention ring to stay in place, as I've seen with other lenses folks have used in this thread.
for what you said, it implies simply that build tolerances are so large that buying the same adapter, same model I mean, I will get one convenient?
Regards
Yes, that’s right with these cheaper adapters. Rayqual and Novoflex are more consistent. But you need to use the sloppy tolerances of the cheap ones to your advantage. K&F are quite nicely built, but a bit variable, as well as cheaper than metabones so you might try a few of them. It is a nuisance...
uscmatt99 wrote:
I completed the first part of my foray into corrective front lenses and dissected some Hasselblad Proxars, and am now left with a 0.5m, 1.0m, and 2.0m lenses trapped in their respective step-rings. Interestingly, the black versions have retaining rings on the back, while the silver version did not. I was only able to remove one of the retention rings on the 0.5m filter after using a dremel with pointy tip to make a notch my spanner wrench could catch. The 2.0m ring wouldn't budge. Then I blemished the edge of the lens trying to use the wrench.
Plan B involved a dremel with the spinning disc, and I was able to cut notches through the metal rings 180 degrees from each other, and then pulled the ring apart, glass intact for the remaining two filters. In case anyone else tries this, you'll know when you've transitioned from cutting metal to cutting glass as you are rewarded with bigger sparks
Sadly, none of the filters are a raging success for my ZM 35/2.8 C-Biogon. Even after removing all of the shims (one silver, two brass for mine), I couldn't reach infinity with the 0.5m or 1.0m lenses, which include Voigtlander, Metabones, and Fotox. I could reach past infinity with the 2.0m, but there is remaining astigmatism/smearing and I'll have to do controlled tests to see if it's an improvement at all. It looks like I can remove the rear element of the lens as there is a notched cylindrical nut just below the rear element, under which there are some additional shims. I'm not sure if that's good to mess with, as it will change the relationship of the rear element to the other elements. But I may try just for kicks.
This leads me to a question. Do the planoconvex lenses cause the same degree of "close-up" effect as the meniscus lenses? I'd be willing to try an Optosigma lens, but honestly I'm not sure which to get and there is a decent lead time now to get one, and I don't really want to order a whole set.
I'll be playing around with the ZM25 next, which I hope is satisfactory with the Proxar 1m, as well as the ZM50/1.5 to flatten out the field curvature. I'm hoping to pick up a ZM18 from a fellow FM'er soon as well to try out.
One interesting side note. The lens that popped out of the silver colored Hassy filter was of slightly greater diameter than the others, and had a rounded bevel to the front edge. It's big enough that it can be trapped between a 46-55 step up ring and 55-52 step down ring, without the need for a retention ring harvested from a UV filter. However it can't fit between the rings flipped around. The other lenses are smaller in diameter and required the retention ring to stay in place, as I've seen with other lenses folks have used in this thread....Show more →
Which Proxars did you try? The B57 or the B60? I'm looking at getting the 1.3 and 2m Proxars for my 40/1.2 for closer in work to improve the IQ (at the expense of loosing infinity focus of course), but have not been able to determine if the older B57 Proxars are multi-coated while the B60 say Zeiss T* which I assume does mean multi-coated. The B57 Proxars would be a better match to the 40/1.2 E mount since it has a 58mm filter thread.
I too have wondered how hard it would be to extract the lens from the Hassey Proxar frame . . . and now I know.
jhinkey wrote:
Which Proxars did you try? The B57 or the B60? I'm looking at getting the 1.3 and 2m Proxars for my 40/1.2 for closer in work to improve the IQ (at the expense of loosing infinity focus of course), but have not been able to determine if the older B57 Proxars are multi-coated while the B60 say Zeiss T* which I assume does mean multi-coated. The B57 Proxars would be a better match to the 40/1.2 E mount since it has a 58mm filter thread.
I too have wondered how hard it would be to extract the lens from the Hassey Proxar frame . . . and now I know.
I used B57 filters that I got from KEH. They had some that were labeled T* that were new and triple the price, so I cheaped out as I didn't want to botch it with the more expensive filters. I believe they are coated, but I haven't done any testing to confirm absence of flare. That will be difficult as it's gray and cold here in Michigan for the next few days.
I did try out the Proxar 1.0m and it worked on my ZM25 with removal of 3 brass colored shims, and leaving one silver shim in place, to achieve infinity at the hard stop. Much improved performance over stock on the A7ii in the viewfinder, but I haven't done formal tripod tests.
Removing the glass from the ring wasn't too bad once I got the technique down. Using a Dremel and thin cutting disc, I cut all the way through one side and shaved a 0.5mm notch in the side of the lens. Then I went nearly through the opposite side, and was able to gently bend the ring at the hinge and release the lens. I don't have a workbench, so I just used 2 C-clamps from the hardware store, one to hold the lens, the second to hold the clamp to a solid surface, in this case my wife's treadmill. Finally got some usage out of that thing! Honestly it was much easier than the battle I had with the retaining rings, though this may have been easier if I'd had the right rubber tools to disassemble in the first place.
The ZM25/2.8 performance is quite improved with the Proxar 1.0m lens in place, convex surface facing away from the camera. It's great to the corners by f/8.
The ZM35/2.8 didn't mesh will with the Proxar 2.0m lens in place with convex surface away from the camera. For kicks I flipped it and with the convex surface facing the camera, the lens is much improved. The extreme corners never sharpen up completely, but the majority of the frame is great. I compared it to my CV 35/1.2 vII and the ZM35 matches it or slightly exceeds it at all apertures everywhere except the corners. Even the CV has some corner smearing, but not as much as the ZM. Interestingly, the ZM corners are best when focused to infinity. In my experience this lens has the typical RF lens curvature away from the camera at the edges in it's native form. The Proxar has flipped this as I'm able to reach critical focus at around 20 feet in the corners, but not at infinity.
Summary, both ZM lenses are more than usable for me, but probably not up to the level of the native Sony 35/2.8 nor the Batis 25/2.0 at like apertures across the frame at infinity, though I've never shot with those, and base that opinion off of the work of others here.
Anyone have thoughts/tips how to better center/align the PCX in the holder? Mine has less than 1mm of play, but seems to be affecting performance. Checked the bare lens (G28) with and without filter and it’s clearly getting worse with the filter. Thoughts appreciated.
Mathieu18 wrote:
Anyone have thoughts/tips how to better center/align the PCX in the holder? Mine has less than 1mm of play, but seems to be affecting performance. Checked the bare lens (G28) with and without filter and it’s clearly getting worse with the filter. Thoughts appreciated.
Thanks Fred. Out of curiosity, since it’s your test and you’ve said it’s a brutal one, would you mind giving your thoughts on this? It’s the bare lens, no filter, focused top left.
I received my ZM 18/4 several days ago from a fellow FM'er. I tried out the Proxar 0.5m lens and I couldn't reach infinity even after shim removal. My lens came with two brass and one silver shims and was focusing perfectly at infinity at the hard stop in the center prior to shim removal on the A7ii with a VM-E helicoid adapter. I tried out the Proxar 2m lens, placing it directly over the front element and trapping it with a step-down ring and retaining ring, and got some improvement while easily focusing past infinity, though the corners remained smudgy.
So I took Samuli's advice from his blog and ordered 52mm and 58mm versions of the Hoya close-up lenses. I removed the rear retaining ring of the 52mm +1, which is spring loaded and a bit difficult to extract. Then I placed some tiny squares of gaffer tape on the front face of the ZM, laid the lens on these, and trapped it under a 58-52mm step down ring with a retaining ring. I may try again later with the 58mm +1, but I'm not sure if the thickness will allow for a 58mm empty filter ring to trap it sufficiently. As it stands, there is no hard vignetting when stopped down, but I can't use a filter of any sort without vignetting.
I've only done some early testing, but I'm pretty impressed with the improvement. Without a front corrective lens I'd consider the ZM18 unusable at the outer third of the frame. With it in place, the field curvature flattens considerably, and the edges and corners are usable at f/4, very good at f/8. There is some significant color shift in addition to soft vignetting at the edges and corners, which will require the flat field plug-in or an upgrade to an A7rii.
Summary: ZM18/4, Hoya +1 52mm with convex side facing away, 58-52mm step down ring, retaining ring. Leaving one brass shim allows me to focus at infinity at the hard stop with my camera and adapter.
