One from the weekend of my favorite tree in Maloja. There was a fence for a cross country ski race just before. Therefore I had to go closer than I would have done otherwise.
Chris Crevasse wrote:
Rob, thanks. I have no specific problem in mind, as I've never attempted to use a MF lens on my A7r2. It is more of a general concern that no one but I can really answer, namely: am I up to returning to MF? I used MF lenses from the mid-70s until the late 90s, when I was happy to adopt AF lenses as my eyes aged. I occasionally use MF with my RX1 and A7r2, but only in static situations where I can be very deliberate with my focusing. I would love a small yet fast 35-40mm lens to use on my A7r2, and the only options are MF lenses, thus my dilemma. ...Show more →
Hi Chris
I am 60 in June and also have failing eyesight and hands that are not as nimble as they were years ago. I learned to shoot in the 1970's with an old manual Fujica with no auto exposure or focus.
The Sony bodies have made MF relatively easy. On my old Canon 5D3 it was hopeless as I could not easily magnify or assist the shot in the optical viewfinder. Now we can. For very old lenses I have set C2 to focus assist and use the wheel and center button to move around and magnify. I've become very quick at this and do not need to take my eye from the EVF.
For less critical focusing I use the peaking and set it to medium and red.
75% of my photography is now MF
I am building two collections of lenses, AF for events and running dogs where speed is everything and MF for my pleasure.
AF - Sony 35/1.4 Distagon, Sony 55,1.8, Batis 85, Canon 135/2L, 200/2.8L and 400/5.6L.
MF - Many old lenses fro 28 thru 90mm, but now have the Cv 40/1.2 on order. I'll then add the CV 65 or 110 and either a 21 or 25 alongside the Laowa 15/2.
Hope this is useful
Rob
Mar 14, 2018 at 08:54 PM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Couple from today, f/1.7. Every time I think, "holy crap I can't believe I spent this much on a lens", I see what it could do and am secure that I could probably use only this lens for the rest of my life and be happy. So there's that.
imagesfromobjects wrote:
Couple from today, f/1.7. Every time I think, "holy crap I can't believe I spent this much on a lens", I see what it could do and am secure that I could probably use only this lens for the rest of my life and be happy. So there's that.
Yikes, these are good. The torture continues as i wait for Adorama to get new stock and ship my order. I think this is the beginning of a long relationship with CV lenses based on earlier and recent releases.
GMPhotography wrote: I knew by the time I posted the link it be gone and I agree Matt you may visit it again. Hey i think I've done this once before.
This would make an interesting survey . . . What lens have you bought and sold the most?
For me it goes back to my Canon days and the 135/2L. I think I owned this lens 4 times! I think the focal length is just something I used too little. Today, it keeps me from jumping on the Batis 135/2.8.
One off the top of my head the FE 35 1.4 that was 5
24-70 F4 than 4
Loxia 21 3
Cv 65 2
CV 35 1.7 3
CV 28 F2 3
This is a list that can go on a long time and its disturbing the money spent
Oh Tokina Firin 20 2 just got one yesterday.
Ive been sneaking in lenses I have not mentioned.
Right now
Laowa 15
Tokina Firin 20
Loxia 25 paid for and waiting
CV 40 1.2
Loxia 85
Batis 135
Sony 24-105
I may switch out the Firin for the AF model
the 24-105 maybe sold for the Tokina 28-70 2.8. Just have to see
I just bought the Nisi V5 100mm filter setup but the filters are from Breakthough Photography. The 100mm filters will handle up to 82mm. Folks should look into this setup . It very cool . The CPL is rotated with two gear knobs.
For me it’s actually the Nikon Series E 75-150. Still don’t use it often but it’s quite good and handy. Tied is the ZE/ZF 35/2 which is partly due to indecision over which mount. It’s likely to take the lead though as I want another ZE.
rji2goleez wrote:
This would make an interesting survey . . . What lens have you bought and sold the most?
For me it goes back to my Canon days and the 135/2L. I think I owned this lens 4 times! I think the focal length is just something I used too little. Today, it keeps me from jumping on the Batis 135/2.8.
rji2goleez wrote:
This would make an interesting survey . . . What lens have you bought and sold the most?
For me it goes back to my Canon days and the 135/2L. I think I owned this lens 4 times! I think the focal length is just something I used too little. Today, it keeps me from jumping on the Batis 135/2.8.
For the 1100 folks are getting the Batis 135 on Greentoe its a bloody steal. Amazing lens
Hello all, this is my first post here after reading on this site for some time with great pleasure.
Sorry if my English isn't 100%, i'm Dutch.
A little background to introduce myself: although i earn my money with photography i'm not half als technical as most people here (never looked that much into specific lens errors). I work with DSLR (Canon 5d3) for an advertisement bureau, very versatile no specialities, although i prefer making editorial portraits.
At the moment i'm planning to buy a Sony 37III for my travel photography (no work). A bit lighter than the SLR, but i also like to buy some new gear (some good primes, fun to work with) after many years, and see how it works and maybe use it for work later as well.
Together with this Sony a7II i think i want to buy:
*Laowa 15mm F2 FE
*ZEISS Batis 25mm f/2
*Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton Aspherical
The two wide angles for land/city scapes, the 40mm as an ideal walk around lens more reportage style (mainly city life).
My question is..
Although i red about the several problems using it wide open (coma, sharpness in midfield and edges, spherical aberration, chromatic Aberration).. will it still suit as a panorama lens for astrophotography?
I think for this stitching purpose most lenses are stopped down to 2.8? Is it fine, for this purpose, then?
And will i have problems focusing due to focus shift? Will it be difficult on the Sony a7III? Can't i mark the lens where infinity on 2.8 is (on mid frame?), or am i missing something?
An other option would be making pano's with the Batis 25mm, which seems more handy with it's angle, but i always hear about panorama's made with 50. Don't know if that's because of the lack of distortion or because of the image enlargement (and therefor smaller noise). You might have guessed by now: my next trip will be my first stept into astrophotography.
Off topic second question:
I know the Laowa also has coma problems at f2, but i heard it's fine at 2.8, and if you can use Samyang 2.8, why would 2.8 not be fast enough on other lenses (with the good high iso on the a7III)?
I prefer not to buy a second 50 mm just for astro for it will only be a small part of my photography.
That brings me to a last point; i also red this lens would not be ideal for landscape. Why wouldn't it when used at f5.6?
If someone can help me out: thanks!
FotograafNL wrote:
Hello all, this is my first post here after reading on this site for some time with great pleasure.
Sorry if my English isn't 100%, i'm Dutch.
A little background to introduce myself: although i earn my money with photography i'm not half als technical as most people here (never looked that much into specific lens errors). I work with DSLR (Canon 5d3) for an advertisement bureau, very versatile no specialities, although i prefer making editorial portraits.
At the moment i'm planning to buy a Sony 37III for my travel photography (no work). A bit lighter than the SLR, but i also like to buy some new gear (some good primes, fun to work with) after many years, and see how it works and maybe use it for work later as well.
Together with this Sony a7II i think i want to buy:
*Laowa 15mm F2 FE
*ZEISS Batis 25mm f/2
*Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton Aspherical
The two wide angles for land/city scapes, the 40mm as an ideal walk around lens more reportage style (mainly city life).
My question is..
Although i red about the several problems using it wide open (coma, sharpness in midfield and edges, spherical aberration, chromatic Aberration).. will it still suit as a panorama lens for astrophotography?
I think for this stitching purpose most lenses are stopped down to 2.8? Is it fine, for this purpose, then?
And will i have problems focusing due to focus shift? Will it be difficult on the Sony a7III? Can't i mark the lens where infinity on 2.8 is (on mid frame?), or am i missing something?
An other option would be making pano's with the Batis 25mm, which seems more handy with it's angle, but i always hear about panorama's made with 50. Don't know if that's because of the lack of distortion or because of the image enlargement (and therefor smaller noise). You might have guessed by now: my next trip will be my first stept into astrophotography.
Off topic second question:
I know the Laowa also has coma problems at f2, but i heard it's fine at 2.8, and if you can use Samyang 2.8, why would 2.8 not be fast enough on other lenses (with the good high iso on the a7III)?
I prefer not to buy a second 50 mm just for astro for it will only be a small part of my photography.
That brings me to a last point; i also red this lens would not be ideal for landscape. Why wouldn't it when used at f5.6?
If someone can help me out: thanks!
Leo (from The Netherlands)...Show more →
A lot of questions in different areas of expertise. You might want to start a new topic as it will be seen by more people and it would be out of a thread that is focussed on a single lens.
Thanks, but the reason why i posted in this topic is because is want to know specifically if this lens will do good at 2.8 for astrophotography.
And also if focusing at infinity is difficult in this situation with this lens. That's why i asked if marking an infinity point for 2.8 is a solution.
I think owners of this lens might know the answers best..
My infinity mark for this lens regardless of aperture is right at the symbol. So doing Astro just set to that mark. This lens cleans up very nicely at 2.8 from coma and other lens aberrations. I have not shot Astro with it myself.
GMPhotography wrote:
My infinity mark for this lens regardless of aperture is right at the symbol. So doing Astro just set to that mark. This lens cleans up very nicely at 2.8 from coma and other lens aberrations. I have not shot Astro with it myself.
So the mark is precise and reliable? That's great. But now i'm confused about the "focusing at infinity" and focus shift tests at the start of this topic.
I knew by the time I posted the link it be gone and I agree Matt you may visit it again. Hey i think I've done this once before. 
