The 50/2 APO has such high microcontrast (actually high spatial frequencies) that many surfaces in closeups take on a depth, more what we expect with macros. The lens contrast is so high you can do different things with it, same for ultra low field curvature. Watch the highlights though. Like few others, it's a breakthrough lens that encourages experimentation - to see what it can't do.
Hard to say it's the lens, or the camera, or a little bit of both. I's usually subtle, but enough that sometimes it makes it hard to color balance a shot. Processed via LR, picked daylight white balance.
LBJ2 wrote:
Hello Tim. I don't own the 50/2 APO so I can't check for myself. Also, are you able to post a 50/2 APO color drift example if its not too much trouble or send something to me via PM? Thanks in advance and certainly no worries if not convenient. Just curious as I have been looking for good examples of color drifts for reference.
Hard to say it's the lens, or the camera, or a little bit of both. I's usually subtle, but enough that sometimes it makes it hard to color balance a shot. Processed via LR, picked daylight white balance.
Thank you. Hmmm I am not sure what I am looking at. Without being told color drift, I would have thought some form of vignette. But I don’t think I understand “drift” even though I’ve heard people talk about it. This might be a good lesson for me.
I'm probably not using the right term, as I think color drift is normally associated to sensors. I honestly don't know what to call it.
In terms of what you are looking at, it's just a photo of the sky. The first has a faint magenta cast towards the corners. The second is with a Zeiss UV filter.
-Tim
LBJ2 wrote:
Thank you. Hmmm I am not sure what I am looking at. Without being told color drift, I would have thought some form of vignette. But I don’t think I understand “drift” even though I’ve heard people talk about it. This might be a good lesson for me.
tsdevine wrote:
I'm probably not using the right term, as I think color drift is normally associated to sensors. I honestly don't know what to call it.
In terms of what you are looking at, it's just a photo of the sky. The first has a faint magenta cast towards the corners. The second is with a Zeiss UV filter.
-Tim
I can see the difference (although I don't have an official name for it either). Are other brands of UV filters similarly efficient at reducing the purple cast in the corners? Like B+W or other serious brands that are also publishing their transmission curves? Then we could compare the diagrams and try to understand what's going on.
philip_pj wrote:
The 50/2 APO has such high microcontrast (actually high spatial frequencies) that many surfaces in closeups take on a depth, more what we expect with macros. The lens contrast is so high you can do different things with it, same for ultra low field curvature. Watch the highlights though. Like few others, it's a breakthrough lens that encourages experimentation - to see what it can't do.
Yes. Wish the MFD was a little smaller; would make a great "macro" like the Zeiss 50 Makro-Planer.
I had seen the Zeiss datasheet, it looked pretty close to the Lensrentals test I posted earlier. I haven't searched much for manufacturer published transmission curves though. I can tell you Breakthrough's don't seem to knock down what I see on my combo.
I can see the difference (although I don't have an official name for it either). Are other brands of UV filters similarly efficient at reducing the purple cast in the corners? Like B+W or other serious brands that are also publishing their transmission curves? Then we could compare the diagrams and try to understand what's going on.
tsdevine wrote:
I'm probably not using the right term, as I think color drift is normally associated to sensors. I honestly don't know what to call it.
In terms of what you are looking at, it's just a photo of the sky. The first has a faint magenta cast towards the corners. The second is with a Zeiss UV filter.
-Tim
I definitely see something in what you posted and the filter does seem to help.
tsdevine wrote:
I notice some color drift towards magenta with the corners on my a7R III (vignetting correction off) with this lens. I notice this behavior on a couple of my other lenses as well, so I guess it could be my camera. I had created cornerfix profile to remove it, but I stumbled on another solution, at least it seems. Zeiss UV filters have a pretty hard cut at 410nm, and it seems to remove the drift I was seeing. Still have to do a little more shooting, but it may be worth considering if anyone else notices this behavior with their camera/lens combo.
While arguably there may be some impact to using the filter, it seems so far to be a fair tradeoff.
I had the same issue with my CV 50/2 APO, on two different cameras. I heard about the UV filter fix somewhere else and tried it. Perhaps the UV filter didn't have the right cut-off, but I wasn't thrilled with the overall color response. I never nailed it down, but I much prefer the color from some of my other lenses, like the CV 40/1.2
If you look at the Lensrentals test I posted a link to, and the Zeiss datasheet, you can see it is pretty aggressive with cutoff. It puts up a pretty hard wall right around 410nm. I think there are very few multicoated UV filters that are that aggressive.
I'm happy with the resulting color now, and it really seems to resolve the only thing that I found about the lens that bothered me.
Doesn't seem like a huge problem though, as there hasn't been tons of comments on what I was seeing.
-Tim
pdmphoto wrote:
I had the same issue with my CV 50/2 APO, on two different cameras. I heard about the UV filter fix somewhere else and tried it. Perhaps the UV filter didn't have the right cut-off, but I wasn't thrilled with the overall color response. I never nailed it down, but I much prefer the color from some of my other lenses, like the CV 40/1.2
Here are two RAW files, both shot with my CV 50/2 on my Sony a7R III. One has the Zeiss UV filter mounted, the other doesn't. Just in case anyone wants to play around.
tsdevine wrote:
Here are two RAW files, both shot with my CV 50/2 on my Sony a7R III. One has the Zeiss UV filter mounted, the other doesn't. Just in case anyone wants to play around.
Won't tell you which is which......but unless I'm crazy, you should be able to figure it out.
-Tim
I looked at both of these files. They are essentially the same to me. If I set my imaginoscope at its highest setting, I think that file 6022 has the UV filter and 6012 does not. I think my color sensitivity is not very good. But I am glad you found a solution.
tsdevine wrote:
Here are two RAW files, both shot with my CV 50/2 on my Sony a7R III. One has the Zeiss UV filter mounted, the other doesn't. Just in case anyone wants to play around.
Actually the reverse, although I'm sort of sensitive to seeing it. For those that don't see it....no need to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
Bertrick wrote:
I looked at both of these files. They are essentially the same to me. If I set my imaginoscope at its highest setting, I think that file 6022 has the UV filter and 6012 does not. I think my color sensitivity is not very good. But I am glad you found a solution.
Sorry about that, most of the converters I use will accept DNGs and I don't often post true RAWs. But given the nature of these, no one is going to win an international photo contest based on these shots. I added the original RAWs (ARW) and I also put two more RAWs out there there are just blue sky RAWs (I posted processed versions earlier in this thread.)
You are correct, the 6012 has the Zeiss UV filter.
-Tim
vdo1 wrote:
Based on the previews in Dropbox, to me 6012 looks like having less purple in the upper corners. Didn't download the dng as I don't have lightroom.
tsdevine wrote:
Sorry about that, most of the converters I use will accept DNGs and I don't often post true RAWs. But given the nature of these, no one is going to win an international photo contest based on these shots. I added the original RAWs (ARW) and I also put two more RAWs out there there are just blue sky RAWs (I posted processed versions earlier in this thread.)
You are correct, the 6012 has the Zeiss UV filter.
-Tim
Sorry, I wasn't actually complaining about the DNG thing, I found that the difference was mostly visible at small image size (when occupying about 50% of the monitor screen)
Anyway, now we have proof that Zeiss UV filters, when used with certain lens and Sony sensors, can do some useful things beyond just protecting the front element from dirt and scratches.
I added the original RAWs (ARW) and I also put two more RAWs out there there are just blue sky RAWs (I posted processed versions earlier in this thread.)