Fred Miranda wrote:
@DavidBM@ and @jamato8@
Which Marumi did you guys use? I'm using the '200' 5+ diopter Achromat.
My Batis is very sharp even at MFD but with the 5+ diopter, things got very soft at 1:1 macro. It would be great if you guys could confirm this.
On the 65/2 APO, the Marumi 5+ did well even wide open. It's a cheap and light way to convert this lens to full macro. It looks like the lens hood.
I haven’t used the Marumi +5 on Batis (used it long ago on other lenses) and don’t have it any more. It was great on 50mm lenses.
What I have used is the much bigger 5 element 5 diopter Raynox on Batis, and 1:1 seemed very good.
Heartbreak. There seems to be some back-focus issues with my copy. At infinity, it's out of focus at wide apertures, and I have to focus a little bit closer to get the center in sharp focus (maybe a millimeter turn to the left?). After f2.8 it stops being an issue, by f4 and beyond the center is sharpest at infinity.
Initially I thought this would not be an issue because who does landscapes at f1.2? But during my last photowalk I repeatedly found myself focusing at infinity at wide apertures to create a blurry tunneling foreground. And since I cannot just hit the hard stop, I have to waste more time focusing.
Anybody else have this issue? Wondering if I should return it and try my luck again. Tomorrow I'll do more side by sides. I kind of of like it, even with the wonky focus
cdmihai wrote:
Heartbreak. There seems to be some back-focus issues with my copy. At infinity, it's out of focus at wide apertures, and I have to focus a little bit closer to get the center in sharp focus (maybe a millimeter turn to the left?). After f2.8 it stops being an issue, by f4 and beyond the center is sharpest at infinity.
Initially I thought this would not be an issue because who does landscapes at f1.2? But during my last photowalk I repeatedly found myself focusing at infinity at wide apertures to create a blurry tunneling foreground. And since I cannot just hit the hard stop, I have to waste more time focusing.
Anybody else have this issue? Wondering if I should return it and try my luck again. Tomorrow I'll do more side by sides. I kind of of like it, even with the wonky focus ...Show more →
I think it is common behavior with this lens that you need to focus a bit short of hard infinity especially at wider apertures, and when stopping the aperture down you may reach a point where hard infinity is actually optimal for across the frame infinity. Such behavior has been described by many others.
On my A9 with Nokton 40/1.2 (as well as with CV 65/2 and 35/1.4) hard infinity is never optimal infinity focus in the central zone even when stopping down to f8. I always need to pull back a little bit to get optimal sharpness especially in the central zone but even for best results across the frame.
It's pretty common with these native manual focus lenses (as well as with adapted manual lenses / adapters) that you can't trust hard infinity to be spot on, quite often you need to pull in a little to get optimal infinity focus. There is also some variation between different Sony e-mount bodies so if hard infinity was spot on with one camera, there might be a problem of not perfectly reaching infinity with another camera using the same lens. And there is some tolerance required for different temperature conditions etc.
So to make sure the lenses can reach infinity on all E-mount bodies in all conditions, lens manufacturers seem to have a tendency to design the lenses so that they can focus a bit "beyond infinity" at hard infinity point on average. Most manual lens adapters also seem to be designed to be a bit thinner than "spec" for similar reasons.
cdmihai wrote:
Heartbreak. There seems to be some back-focus issues with my copy. At infinity, it's out of focus at wide apertures, and I have to focus a little bit closer to get the center in sharp focus (maybe a millimeter turn to the left?). After f2.8 it stops being an issue, by f4 and beyond the center is sharpest at infinity.
Initially I thought this would not be an issue because who does landscapes at f1.2? But during my last photowalk I repeatedly found myself focusing at infinity at wide apertures to create a blurry tunneling foreground. And since I cannot just hit the hard stop, I have to waste more time focusing.
Anybody else have this issue? Wondering if I should return it and try my luck again. Tomorrow I'll do more side by sides. I kind of of like it, even with the wonky focus ...Show more →
The lens, like most very fast lenses has some focus shift.
You should focus at taking aperture down to about f4, and at f4 for smaller apertures.
Just about all lenses are variable about exactly where infinity is compared to the symbol, even if there’s no focus shift. . It much more visible with modern high resolution sensors. It varies from copy to copy quite often. You just need to find out under what conditions the infinity symbol gives accurate infinity focus with your copy, and use it then, and focus otherwise....
Juha Kannisto wrote:
It's pretty common with these native manual focus lenses (as well as with adapted manual lenses / adapters) that you can't trust hard infinity to be spot on, quite often you need to pull in a little to get optimal infinity focus. There is also some variation between different Sony e-mount bodies so if hard infinity was spot on with one camera, there might be a problem of not perfectly reaching infinity with another camera using the same lens. And there is some tolerance required for different temperature conditions etc.
Sony sensor distance to mount has huge tolerances. I checked in 2016 how my 4 cameras differ (I had then 2xA7, A7r and A7mkII), and end result was that both A7 did have same mount-sensor distance (because they are modified by KolariVision and adjusted in the process - before modified they had small difference). And A7r and A7mkII were different (but not same with each another). So it's next to impossible have lens, which infinity stop is perfect, as it would result lens to not reach infinity on camera where sensor-mount distance is on top of tolerance range.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Sony sensor distance to mount has huge tolerances. I checked in 2016 how my 4 cameras differ (I had then 2xA7, A7r and A7mkII), and end result was that both A7 did have same mount-sensor distance (because they are modified by KolariVision and adjusted in the process - before modified they had small difference). And A7r and A7mkII were different (but not same with each another). So it's next to impossible have lens, which infinity stop is perfect, as it would result lens to not reach infinity on camera where sensor-mount distance is on top of tolerance range.
Samuli
I also have an A7r, A7II and A9 (and a Nex-6) and I've noticed some differences on best settings for infinity focusing with a few of my lenses but I haven't done any careful investigation on it. I have some manual lenses that were pretty spot on with my Rayqual M-E adapter on one camera but not so on another camera. Actually that adapter is so close to spec that with some of my camera and M/LTM lens combinations I can't reach infinity with it perfectly (but I have other adapters to fall back on). Anyway, I fully agree.
cdmihai wrote:
Heartbreak. There seems to be some back-focus issues with my copy. At infinity, it's out of focus at wide apertures, and I have to focus a little bit closer to get the center in sharp focus (maybe a millimeter turn to the left?). After f2.8 it stops being an issue, by f4 and beyond the center is sharpest at infinity.
Initially I thought this would not be an issue because who does landscapes at f1.2? But during my last photowalk I repeatedly found myself focusing at infinity at wide apertures to create a blurry tunneling foreground. And since I cannot just hit the hard stop, I have to waste more time focusing.
Anybody else have this issue? Wondering if I should return it and try my luck again. Tomorrow I'll do more side by sides. I kind of of like it, even with the wonky focus ...Show more →
None of the Loxias or Voigtlander E-mount lenses have true infinity at the lens hard stop. My Zeiss ZM 85/4 is the only lens I own with infinity at the hard stop but that's likely variable depending on the adapter used.
Because of focus shift, stay at shooting aperture up until about f/4. At smaller apertures, with three copies I've tested, true infinity is at the hard stop but as mentioned here, there is mount to sensor variation and therefore the lens may perform a bit different depending on the body used.
DavidBM wrote:
I haven’t used the Marumi +5 on Batis (used it long ago on other lenses) and don’t have it any more. It was great on 50mm lenses.
What I have used is the much bigger 5 element 5 diopter Raynox on Batis, and 1:1 seemed very good.
I looked at wide open but only for bokeh ( often takes wide open frame to belnd into macro backgrounds), and then 4 and 5.6 (I never use 8 because diffraction is pretty bad at 1:1 I stack for DOF with macro)
I did notice some induced FC with the Raynox when I tested a planar target. I had to focus on the. intended area. But in real life there are no real planar targets in macro!
Fred Miranda wrote:
None of the Loxias or Voigtlander E-mount lenses have true infinity at the lens hard stop. My Zeiss ZM 85/4 is the only lens I own with infinity at the hard stop but that's likely variable depending on the adapter used.
Because of focus shift, stay at shooting aperture up until about f/4. At smaller apertures, with three copies I've tested, true infinity is at the hard stop but as mentioned here, there is mount to sensor variation and therefore the lens may perform a bit different depending on the body used. ...Show more →
OK, feeling more relieved
Besides the 40/1.2 my other lenses are Canon FDs (35/2.8, 50/1.4, and 135/2.8). The 35 and 135 don't exhibit this issue, and I don't remember about the 50. Maybe I got lucky with the mount adapter.
I just transitioned to mirrorless with the A7iii and this thread convinced me that I wanted this lens I was lucky enough to snag a copy (FE mount) from the recent batch! However, I ran into an issue with it: when I set the aperture ring to anything other than wide open, the aperture reading on the camera would rapidly jump around to different values. Does anyone know what could cause this?
I returned the lens to the vendor, thinking it a defect with the lens electronics, but they couldn't reproduce the issue. Could it be a defect in my body..? (I also have the FE 55/1.8, which seems to work perfectly.)
cdmihai wrote:
OK, feeling more relieved
Besides the 40/1.2 my other lenses are Canon FDs (35/2.8, 50/1.4, and 135/2.8). The 35 and 135 don't exhibit this issue, and I don't remember about the 50. Maybe I got lucky with the mount adapter.
Focus shift tends to happen with very fast lenses. The Canon 1.2/50 famously has a lot of it...I don’t think any of your lenses have much or any.
cloudrhythm wrote:
... when I set the aperture ring to anything other than wide open, the aperture reading on the camera would rapidly jump around to different values.
Mine did that yesterday. I cleaned the contacts on the lens and the body, and it seems to be fine now.
Makten wrote:
Mine did that yesterday. I cleaned the contacts on the lens and the body, and it seems to be fine now.
This's happened with my Loxia 35 'and' 50 and they were be sent to service. (There is a whole thread about it here)
The issue was an electronic malfunction and Zeiss at first could not replicate it either. Both lenses were replaced to new ones. I no longer own them as they were replaced by the 40/1.2.
I was lucky enough to snag a copy (FE mount) from the recent batch! However, I ran into an issue with it: when I set the aperture ring to anything other than wide open, the aperture reading on the camera would rapidly jump around to different values. Does anyone know what could cause this?