markky99 wrote:
I bought one in the Uk from bay seller camspluz last week, arrived earlier this week - fast turn-round and good comms in English.
.
Asked for an "fe-plus/fullframe" version. No indication on barrel, box or literature as to which version it actually is, but it does have an aperture click at f11 (reported earlier in this thread/Bastian's review?).
My copy dosn't get as sharp in the corners as Bastian's (tho this might be subjective). Good at f8, may not be noticeable at f5.6, but softer rapidly as I get wider from that point.
I would normally take landscapes at f8 anyway, so not a big isue but might look at the PCX filter down the line.
No sign of mid-field softness. I'm using it on an A7Riii.
Mark...Show more →
If there is no mark on the bayonet and no "E" Sticker on the box I doubt it is the FE-Plus version
Hi Bastian. As you have also reviewed the Loxia 25 2.4, I would like to know your opinion on how does this 7Artisans 28 1.4 compare to the Loxia. Both lenses are manual, the Loxia is quite a 26 mm. and the 7Artisans 28 may be seen as a 2.0 lens (guy's opinion)... Thanks.
Steve Spencer wrote:
The Leica M 28 lux was a wonderful all around lens with a few quirks and weaknesses and perhaps while it may not be exemplary at anything, it was good enough at pretty much everything. I would still have this lens and happily use it if it were not stolen. It is also a lens that works almost as well on a Sony A7 series body as it does on the Leica M10.
Thanks for the summary Steve. Great info and I agree about the corner bokeh rendering of the ZM35/1.4. I think it's likely partially due to mechanical vignetting. Also, the point above I have to somewhat disagree with... I just recently came across an infinity comparison I shot with the 28 Lux on an a7RII and the M240. From wide open the 28 Lux was sharp into the corners (sharp for f/1.4) on the M240, whereas on the Sony it needed past f/5.6 to get rid of the nervous looking edge smearing. IMO it wasn't even close at wider apertures.
NRKStudio wrote:
I looked at Bastians pics and his wide open shots do have some smooth bokeh as he notes. I always thought the 28 Lux had smooth bokeh, but the 7A 28 definitely competes or betters it. Who knows if it touches the sharpness stopped down though, like you said it does not do so wide open and especially up close.
Looks like 7A came out swinging here. Can’t wait for the 75/1.25, it’s news of its release definitely put my search of a Leica 75 Summilux on permanent hold.
I also got the impression from Bastian's 7A review that in some situations it has better/smoother background rendering than the Lux. It also seems to resist purple fringing better than the Lux, which can be a real headache in high contrast transitions at wide apertures. I've never thought the 28 Lux bokeh was amazing, rather it was a fast lens useful for low-light situations on a high ISO limited camera (M9, M240 to a degree). Owning a few Luxes, where it impressed me was wide open sharpness and relatively little mid zone dip compared to the 50 Lux ASPH and 21 Lux. Again, these are my impression on a Leica M body. Things will likely be different on a Sony.
It is the FE+ marked on the lens and with an e sticker on the box.
Centre sharpness is impressive. At 2.8 even comparable to Loxia 21. But sadly the lens is quite heavy decentered. So for landscapes not realy usable even at f5.6. Has anybody experiences with returns to 7artisans and repair?
Mine, an early ring flare version, is a superb sample though not an FE+ version. I decided not to return for replacement though 7A have been very friendly in accepting and accommodating.
It is the FE+ marked on the lens and with an e sticker on the box.
Centre sharpness is impressive. At 2.8 even comparable to Loxia 21. But sadly the lens is quite heavy decentered. So for landscapes not realy usable even at f5.6. Has anybody experiences with returns to 7artisans and repair?
Enri wrote:
Hi Bastian. As you have also reviewed the Loxia 25 2.4, I would like to know your opinion on how does this 7Artisans 28 1.4 compare to the Loxia. Both lenses are manual, the Loxia is quite a 26 mm. and the 7Artisans 28 may be seen as a 2.0 lens (guy's opinion)... Thanks.
Loxia 25mm 2.4:
Flatter field at wider apertures
Higher contrast and resolution, mainly off center
Better flare resistance
10 straight aperture blades
7a 28mm 1.4 FE+:
Significantly faster
Significantly less loCA/purple fringing
Much cheaper
13 rounded aperture blades
As you can see from my sample images I am mostly using the 7a 28mm at f/1.4, this is what I bought the lens for.
The Loxia I cannot use at f/1.4. If you don't care about a maximum aperture of f/1.4 the Loxia is the better lens for stopped down shooting.
It is the FE+ marked on the lens and with an e sticker on the box.
Centre sharpness is impressive. At 2.8 even comparable to Loxia 21. But sadly the lens is quite heavy decentered. So for landscapes not realy usable even at f5.6. Has anybody experiences with returns to 7artisans and repair?
I hope we won't be seeing many decentered lenses in the near future, that would make the lens significantly harder to recommend.
Apr 29, 2019 at 05:17 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
rscheffler wrote:
Thanks for the summary Steve. Great info and I agree about the corner bokeh rendering of the ZM35/1.4. I think it's likely partially due to mechanical vignetting. Also, the point above I have to somewhat disagree with... I just recently came across an infinity comparison I shot with the 28 Lux on an a7RII and the M240. From wide open the 28 Lux was sharp into the corners (sharp for f/1.4) on the M240, whereas on the Sony it needed past f/5.6 to get rid of the nervous looking edge smearing. IMO it wasn't even close at wider apertures.
I also got the impression from Bastian's 7A review that in some situations it has better/smoother background rendering than the Lux. It also seems to resist purple fringing better than the Lux, which can be a real headache in high contrast transitions at wide apertures. I've never thought the 28 Lux bokeh was amazing, rather it was a fast lens useful for low-light situations on a high ISO limited camera (M9, M240 to a degree). Owning a few Luxes, where it impressed me was wide open sharpness and relatively little mid zone dip compared to the 50 Lux ASPH and 21 Lux. Again, these are my impression on a Leica M body. Things will likely be different on a Sony. ...Show more →
I actually think we are in more agreement on the 28 Lux than it may have seemed from my post. When taking infinity shots with the lens on either the Sony A7r II or the M10 I would have been using it at f/5.6 to f/8 and I think at those apertures the lens is likely to perform similarly on the two cameras. I am sure you are right that at wider apertures the lens does better at infinity on the M10--I just never saw that because I never used the lens that way. At closer in shots and wider apertures the lens in my experience does perform pretty similarly on the two cameras. I don't doubt there are some situations in which it differs, however.
Hi Steve, thanks for clarifying. I agree that past f/5.6 there was very little difference from the Lux, if any, on a Sony vs. Leica M. Unfortunately I did not test at nearer, more typical 'people photos' distances, but also agree edge problems here are likely to be less of a concern. Where I'm unsure is how wider aperture astigmatic edge smearing might affect rendering.
rscheffler wrote:
Where I'm unsure is how wider aperture astigmatic edge smearing might affect rendering.
With the ZM 35mm 1.4 very significantly so.
The very high actual vignetting of these lenses further adds to that.
Here’s a quick bokeh comparo of the Q2, 28 Art E Mount (A7r3), 28 Lux, 35/1.4 ZM (both on m10-p). Note: I used the 35 lux camera setting for the D35 as Leica doesn’t have 3rd party camera codes.
All of them are wide open and iso 800, Aperture Priority. Still had to add .50 exposure in LR CCC.
Images cropped to top left quarter of frame (see final image).
NRKStudio wrote:
Here’s a quick bokeh comparo of the Q2, 28 Art E Mount (A7r3), 28 Lux, 35/1.4 ZM (both on m10-p). Note: I used the 35 lux camera setting for the D35 as Leica doesn’t have 3rd party camera codes.
All of them are wide open and iso 800, Aperture Priority. Still had to add .50 exposure in LR CCC.
Images cropped to top left quarter of frame (see final image).
Significant color differences with the Q and Sigma appearing more neutral and the others with a green tint (assuming I am interpreting the real life colors correctly).
Apr 29, 2019 at 10:40 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
BastianK wrote:
With the ZM 35mm 1.4 very significantly so.
The very high actual vignetting of these lenses further adds to that.
Yes, and that is part of the reason I found I never liked the rendering of the ZM 35 f/1.4 for portraits on the Sony. I found the 28 lux much better, for two reasons. First, I do think the edge smearing close up is less pronounced and less problematic than the ZM 35 f/1.4, and second, with a 28mm I found that if I crop to 4 X 5 as I almost always do for portraits that it cut out all the smearing, but such crops were not enough for the ZM 35.
It is the FE+ marked on the lens and with an e sticker on the box.
Centre sharpness is impressive. At 2.8 even comparable to Loxia 21. But sadly the lens is quite heavy decentered. So for landscapes not realy usable even at f5.6. Has anybody experiences with returns to 7artisans and repair?
I have reported a badly decentered lens. Not good, but these things happen even with much more expansive lenses. So customer service comes into play and I have to say that I´m more than happy with what I have experiencend with 7artisans:
I complained to the customer service about the lens. They immidiatly (a matter of minutes) asked for pictures to demonstrate the issue. Then they sent payed labels for return with DHL express and replaced the lens with a copy I am happy with. The whole procedure took 6 weeks, partly due to delays on my side and german customs.
So in the end I can say that I have got confidence in 7artisans customer service whenever help should be needed again.
