Makten wrote:
It's an SLR lens, so no need for a filter. The exit pupil is far enough from the sensor not to cause any major problems.
Edit: And I really hope you're not gonna buy it from Adorama at that price! It's more like 100-150 dollars used.
Thanks much! Meanwhile I recognized its a SLR lens ;-)
And no, I bought it cheaper and use it mainly for very close focus and on my tilt/shift adapter.
It is really sharp and nice but soft in the corners from 2.8 to somewhere for probably some other reason then.
It’s reviews are so great that I assume it’s nota a soft in the corners on Nikon than on Sony. Anybody knows?
Frogoo wrote:
Thanks much! Meanwhile I recognized its a SLR lens ;-)
And no, I bought it cheaper and use it mainly for very close focus and on my tilt/shift adapter.
It is really sharp and nice but soft in the corners from 2.8 to somewhere for probably some other reason then.
It’s reviews are so great that I assume it’s nota a soft in the corners on Nikon than on Sony. Anybody knows?
I remember soft corners on the D700 when I had one. It's a special lens that is very good for closeups, but is not that sharp for landscapes and similar. IIRC it has floating elements, so if your adapter is too thin (very common), that could probably affect the performance on a Sony camera.
Thanks, in the meantime I brought my lens to Nikon support. It was misadjusted and gets repaired for small money, so let’s see how it performs then. I had good corners left and bad corners right.
When thread was active I collected everyone's test results to this page: https://vahonen.info/secure/wiki/index.php/Sony_A7_-_Thick_filter_stack_issues
Then archiving ruined all links, and I did no longer have motivation to update my wiki page. Also thread died around same time as archiving ruined it, so most likely nothing significant is missing.
Proxars have been tried and somehow working with ZM18, ZM25, ZM28. I did personally try both with ZM25 and plano convex is much better. I maybe tried ZM18 also with proxar, can't remember, but now I use it with Hoya close-up lens instead.
Proxars can be used with many lenses, but in the end plano convex lenses did provided better results with all lenses.
Any advise for the following lens using with Zeiss Proxar?
Contax G Biogon T* 2.8/21,
Carl Zeiss ZM Biogon T* 2.8/21 ,
Voigtländer Ultron 1.7/35 VM,
Carl Zeiss Biogon T* 2/35 ZM,
Carl Zeiss C Biogon T* 2,8/35 ZM
Thanks for replied Samuli
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
When thread was active I collected everyone's test results to this page: https://vahonen.info/secure/wiki/index.php/Sony_A7_-_Thick_filter_stack_issues
Then archiving ruined all links, and I did no longer have motivation to update my wiki page. Also thread died around same time as archiving ruined it, so most likely nothing significant is missing.
Proxars have been tried and somehow working with ZM18, ZM25, ZM28. I did personally try both with ZM25 and plano convex is much better. I maybe tried ZM18 also with proxar, can't remember, but now I use it with Hoya close-up lens instead.
Proxars can be used with many lenses, but in the end plano convex lenses did provided better results with all lenses.
If you already have the lenses and the proxars why not simply test them? If you do not have the proxars it has been shown numerous times that using a pcx is superior to a meniscus lens like the proxars.
Reviving the thread with a question: which PCX filter would be the right one for the Biogon 35 F2 ZM?
Looked on the web but found nothing, so difficult to understand if a 5m filter would do like it apparently does with all the other 35mm tested, or a thinner one would be better (as it is the case for the other Biogon design tested, i.e. the 25 and 28 F2.8).
Tirpitz666 wrote:
Reviving the thread with a question: which PCX filter would be the right one for the Biogon 35 F2 ZM?
Looked on the web but found nothing, so difficult to understand if a 5m filter would do like it apparently does with all the other 35mm tested, or a thinner one would be better (as it is the case for the other Biogon design tested, i.e. the 25 and 28 F2.8).
I take it you already have one?
Because if not, the Loxia 35 is basically the biogon ZM 2/35 with the field curvature reduced my a very small modification that n effect builds in the effect of a Pcx without increasing the element count...
No, i do not have one, but I find the ZM more enticing as I could use it with the TAP and get even AF as a bonus (and being so diminutive it's the perfect lens for TAP use in my opinion).
Therefore I was wondering if with a PCX filter it could become a "perfect substitute" of a Loxia 35 or at least really close to it
TAP and PCX - could have a problem with infinity focus... not sure, but I think I read about it as I was gathering info on pcx for my 35mm ultron...
cheers, A.
Tirpitz666 wrote:
No, i do not have one, but I find the ZM more enticing as I could use it with the TAP and get even AF as a bonus (and being so diminutive it's the perfect lens for TAP use in my opinion).
Therefore I was wondering if with a PCX filter it could become a "perfect substitute" of a Loxia 35 or at least really close to it
I'm not personally over familiar with shims adding/removal, but for example for what I know the ZM Distagon 35 and the Biogons 25 and 28 need some shims removal to achieve infinity focus even with some simple "dumb" adapters with a PCX filer mounted.
Not sure if it's the case even with the TAP, but my personal experience with various adapted vintage lenses that I've tried is that the only way to be sure to achieve infinity focus is to use AF-C, with AF-S I've regularly experienced soft focus at infinity on my A7III (not sure on what depends, seems that in AF-C makes some "microadjustements" before settling down, which doesn't do in AF-S).
Tirpitz666 wrote:
Reviving the thread with a question: which PCX filter would be the right one for the Biogon 35 F2 ZM?
Hi,
Like I reported in the thread the Haruhiko calculated value did not work. I have all the PCX lenses and none of them was good with standard super thick sensor. I finally got this lens working with 3000mm PCX and Kolari v2.
This lens is VERY demanding for the sensor cover glass. With Kolari v2 thin filter mod (without PCX) the corners are still super crappy, for example see this photo, corners focus way past the central image focus plane.
In my opinion this lens is excellent when one has film camera OR thin enough filter+PCX. I really like the rendering style. However keep in mind that this is not wide open lens, the excellent rendering happens starting from f/3.2 (not because of sensor cover glass, this lens just has crappy rendering wide open - about the same as Loxia 35).
Thank you very much for the hindsight, if it requires a PCX filter AND a Kolari mod, guess is a total no go for me, just do not want to go a permanent modification route just to use a single lens..
Seems that the best compact fast 35mm that can be PCXed and TAPed at the same time without requiring any filter stack modification remains the CV Ultron 1.7 at this point right?
It's more like 100-150 dollars used.