Got the Elpro 4 and took some quick up-close snaps with it. Uncontrolled, but there seems to be no obvious image degradation and the sharpness seems to be somewhat improved, but it's a little too close for my general purposes. It is indeed for some reason single coated . . .
The Elpro 4 also adds considerable length to the 40/1.2, which is not the greatest attribute of this setup.
The cheap macro set that I'll cannibalize to re-mount the f=2m Proxar comes tomorrow. There appears to be no way to non-destructively remove the Proxar element from the weird Bay 60 mount ring, so out will come some tools to cut a few slots to allow my lens wrench to grab onto the retaining ring. Can't even use a rubber retaining ring removal tool since the retaining ring is also an odd size. It was only $35 or so for the Proxar, which won't make a big loss if it doesn't work out.
jhinkey wrote:
Got the Elpro 4 and took some quick up-close snaps with it. Uncontrolled, but there seems to be no obvious image degradation and the sharpness seems to be somewhat improved, but it's a little too close for my general purposes. It is indeed for some reason single coated . . .
The Elpro 4 also adds considerable length to the 40/1.2, which is not the greatest attribute of this setup.
The cheap macro set that I'll cannibalize to re-mount the f=2m Proxar comes tomorrow. There appears to be no way to non-destructively remove the Proxar element from the weird Bay 60 mount ring, so out will come some tools to cut a few slots to allow my lens wrench to grab onto the retaining ring. Can't even use a rubber retaining ring removal tool since the retaining ring is also an odd size. It was only $35 or so for the Proxar, which won't make a big loss if it doesn't work out....Show more →
There is a noticeable resolution/contrast gain with the Elpro4 up to 1m. After that, the lens starts to look better and the difference is smaller. The biggest difference is with the Elpro3 but I think the lens infinity is around 0.75m so it's only usable for close-up shots.
That's why I had the feeling the the Proxar 2m may not work that well. One, because it's not an achromat and second, because at the 1.3-2m range, the lens is already great.
I'm curious about your comparison though.
Feb 06, 2018 at 11:05 AM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Fred Miranda wrote:
+1 with the dremel. I did that for a proxar lens once. Just move the dremel slowly until it almost reaches the lens and the assembly will come off.
Dremel, no, jewelers file yes. Far more controlled and all I need are to slots in the retaining ring and it will (should) screw off.
Here are images of the A7RIII+40/1.2 CV naked, with the Elpro 4 adapted via 58-55mm step down, and with the f=2m Proxar adapted via 58-67mm step up ring + mounted in a sacraficial 67mm macro lens ring. Turns out the retaining ring from the macro lens is just about right to hold the Proxar in place.
I've taken a look through the viewfinder for each and it's not obvious any IQ difference between the Elpro 4 and f=2m Proxar. I do see that I don't quite have the Proxar exactly centered in the jerry rigged macro ring, which I'll have to fix before any test shots are taken.
Anyways, you can get the feel for the looks, diameter, and length changes for each setup.
I don't like the added length of the Elpro 4 and the Proxar is just the same diameter as the CV with a little extra length, so not too bad.
Elpro 4 clearly has just a single coating.
A7RIII+40/1.2 CV
A7RIII+40/1.2 CV + Elpro 4
A7RIII+40/1.2 CV + f=2m Proxar
Diameters - Elpro 4, f=2m Proxar, and 58mm clear filter
Just noticed on BH that there is an M mount version coming out. Anyone have any thoughts on running the native version versus the M mount adapted via TAP for AF?
JohnDizzo15 wrote:
Just noticed on BH that there is an M mount version coming out. Anyone have any thoughts on running the native version versus the M mount adapted via TAP for AF?
It also appears to be 200 bucks cheaper.
See the M-mount 40/1.2 thread - I believe there is lots of discussion on this topic.
jhinkey wrote:
Here are images of the A7RIII+40/1.2 CV naked, with the Elpro 4 adapted via 58-55mm step down, and with the f=2m Proxar adapted via 58-67mm step up ring + mounted in a sacraficial 67mm macro lens ring. Turns out the retaining ring from the macro lens is just about right to hold the Proxar in place.
I've taken a look through the viewfinder for each and it's not obvious any IQ difference between the Elpro 4 and f=2m Proxar. I do see that I don't quite have the Proxar exactly centered in the jerry rigged macro ring, which I'll have to fix before any test shots are taken.
Anyways, you can get the feel for the looks, diameter, and length changes for each setup.
I don't like the added length of the Elpro 4 and the Proxar is just the same diameter as the CV with a little extra length, so not too bad.
Elpro 4 clearly has just a single coating....Show more →
Post some IQ comparisons John. I'm very curious. Which cheap close-up assembly did you use?
Just bought a cheap Vivitar 67mm macro set - usually the rings, etc. have extra depth and coverage to grab on to the thick macro lenses. The cheap models also have screw-in retaining rings as opposed to many of the higher end filters which have them glued in.
If the Proxar works out I'll likely put a 67-58mm step down ring on the front to get back to using the 58mm lens cap.
The Elpro 4 solution is a bit troublesome because of the 55mm front thread, which can be stepped up to 58mm, but that will make it even longer when mounted.
jhinkey wrote:
Just bought a cheap Vivitar 67mm macro set - usually the rings, etc. have extra depth and coverage to grab on to the thick macro lenses. The cheap models also have screw-in retaining rings as opposed to many of the higher end filters which have them glued in.
If the Proxar works out I'll likely put a 67-58mm step down ring on the front to get back to using the 58mm lens cap.
The Elpro 4 solution is a bit troublesome because of the 55mm front thread, which can be stepped up to 58mm, but that will make it even longer when mounted....Show more →
A7R3 and 40/1.2 @ f/1.2, playing around shooting in and around my house. I'm surprised at how nice it is at f/1.2 in early testing... nice large area of sharpness around center, no funky color or contrast stuff like the VC 35/1.2 II (thought that was pretty useless at f/1.2).
