The latest samples I've posted here were with the Leica M though. I went through all images I took yesterday and I don't see any magenta in the sky corners. I guess I will test the Sony + E-mount, Sony + M-mount and Leica + M-mount. (with and without the filter)
Here is one showing a bit of the sky at about 6m. The foreground rendering is very pleasant.
Beautiful pictures so far. Thank you, Fred.
Very convincing.
Unfortunately more pleasant to my eyes than the first GM Images. Actuallay wanted to keep the Voigtlander 40mm 1,2 as my small travel/manual lens in this range and get the GM instead of the Sigma 35mmm 1,2...
Only 40 photos so far on the M10-P? Once you start shooting it, you'll think about your other gear but won't go back to it as much. My R5 stays in the bag these days unless I need the reach of the 100-500.
Do you have the Visoflex for yours yet? I waited until just recently to get one, but it's really, really handy for low-angle shots since it tilts. That's one thing that actually makes using the M easier than the Q for me. Just buy several extra batteries because you'll need them
Thanks Fred. Doesn't really look any (or maybe much) worse than the 50. That's good news.
Talking specifically about the E mount version. Although I suspect the M mount version would act similarly adapted to Sony. And as I sort of expected, the M mount version on Leica looks fine without the filter.
tsdevine wrote:
Thanks Fred. Doesn't really look any (or maybe much) worse than the 50. That's good news.
Talking specifically about the E mount version. Although I suspect the M mount version would act similarly adapted to Sony. And as I sort of expected, the M mount version on Leica looks fine without the filter.
-Tim
Yes, I didn't post the M on Sony because it looks the same as the E on Sony.
1) Sony A7R IV with 35mm f/2 APO E-mount: (f/5.6)
TOP with Zeiss filter
BOTTOM without filter(...)
So, with the E-mount version on Sony we do, again, get the magenta cast towards the corners? I wonder what the right way to handle this is. Is it to always have the UV-filter mounted? What happens with flare resistance then? Or should one only mount the filter when in situations where nasty color casts can be expected?
I'm asking since I'm intended to buy the CV35APO. It will take some time until it is available here but I want to be prepared.
I don't shoot much with the sun in the frame (nor just off frame), so I can't give you much input on flare. I just leave it on my CV 50 APO and Tamron 35 (which has similar issues.) I haven't noticed any negatives that warrant trying to guess when to use it vs. not. I would just experiment, as in many situations it may not show up much and/or it may not be enough to bother you. I know several people posted that it wasn't something that bothered them when I posted samples of the 50.
Although hard to find, as it has been discontinued, the Kenko Zeta L41 UV filter works really well too. It can often be found cheaper than the Zeiss and seems similarly high quality. They also make a magnetic mount version, which I guess could be considered if you want to take it on and off regularly. Not sure if they make it in all sizes though.
Thank you Tim!
I'll look around for the Kenko filter. If it is nowhere to be found I'll be the Zeiss. There is some magenta shift in the corners in freds image taken with the Zeiss filter but it is clearly better than the image without filter.
Hi Vivek!
Yes. A filter, in my experience always causes some reflections. The question is how bad it is with the CV35APO in different situations. I guess that is to be tried and found out. When you write L41 - do you have any particular brand in mind or is it the Kenko mentioned by Tim?
Jonas B wrote:
Thank you Tim!
I'll look around for the Kenko filter. If it is nowhere to be found I'll be the Zeiss. There is some magenta shift in the corners in freds image taken with the Zeiss filter but it is clearly better than the image without filter.
Hi Vivek!
Yes. A filter, in my experience always causes some reflections. The question is how bad it is with the CV35APO in different situations. I guess that is to be tried and found out. When you write L41 - do you have any particular brand in mind or is it the Kenko mentioned by Tim?...Show more →
Yes, Kenko L41 (I showed an absorption spectrum earlier in this thread). The Kenko comes with a ZR (“Zero Reflection”) designation. Still, having a flat filter over the negative curvature front element will have its own impact.
