Well it makes a wonderful 35 f/2, but with some extras. Wide open mid distance is very nice if you clean up the CA in post. Below is an example of my some being the ring bearer at a wedding last night. I don't have too many shots yet, but I think it will be a wonderful landscape lens too. There are many example on this thread that attest to that. So, I see it as as the 35 f/2 I was wanted plus some very nice bonus uses. It does have issues at some distances and apertures, but really I think as I get to know the lens I can stay away from the gotchas and focus on the several things it does well.
Just playing around with my Marumi Achromat 5+ diopter close-up lens with the 40/1.2...I use this same close-up lens with my CV 65/2 APO, in order to get to 1:1 macro.
Adding the Marumi to the 40/1.2, yields sharp results at MFD...something is not possible with the bare lens.
MFD will be at the lens infinity mark with this close-up lens attached. (which is the lens's optimal distance)
Here is a couple samples: (At f/1.2 and MFD, DOF is super thin)
RobertHolloway wrote:
Sorry if this has been covered within the thousands of posts and 114 pages. My understanding is that the lens does not do well wide open at MFD. So is f2 curing this problem? Is there a filter that corrects the problem wide open? I'm sorry, but I cant face rereading this whole thread for about the 6th time
Yes, the lens loses sharpness wide open at MFD. It doesn't have a floating element which can help in this sort of situation. At f/2 the lens is very good even at MFD. A closeup filter can correct the problem quite well. Fred has some wonderful examples just above with a very strong close up filter. Weaker ones work well too, and allow a wider range of focussing.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Yes, the lens loses sharpness wide open at MFD. It doesn't have a floating element which can help in this sort of situation. At f/2 the lens is very good even at MFD. A closeup filter can correct the problem quite well. Fred has some wonderful examples just above with a very strong close up filter. Weaker ones work well too, and allow a wider range of focussing.
RobertHolloway wrote:
Thanks for this. Which filter does Fred use?
@Fred Miranda has been using the Leica ELPRO 4 (+0.75) for slightly longer distance images like enviro portraits, and the Marumi +5 for MFD work.
It's really not that much trouble, as I tend to know whether I am going to be using the lens at closer distances, or at 'naked' ones
I've been using the ELPRO and a range of others. Here's one with the Raynox +3 which is especially well corrected (being three elements, not two) and gives remarkable contrast at distances a little further than MFD.
Annie waits for her mum to take her into the forest
RobertHolloway wrote:
Sorry if this has been covered within the thousands of posts and 114 pages. My understanding is that the lens does not do well wide open at MFD. So is f2 curing this problem? Is there a filter that corrects the problem wide open? I'm sorry, but I cant face rereading this whole thread for about the 6th time
I'm finding it works quite well with Canon Close-Up Filters. I use both the 250 and the 500 to great effect.
tunisia wrote:
I'm finding it works quite well with Canon Close-Up Filters. I use both the 250 and the 500 to great effect.
There should be very little difference between the performance with quality two or more element achromats. It’s really about getting the strength that allows you to focus at the distance you want with the lens set between 3m and infinity.
