p.28 #1 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Fred Miranda wrote:
Beautiful samples! I can't wait to get my copy. From what I've been able to find about the MS Optics 50/1.5 Vario-Prasma, the P6 setting seems to be the closest to the original Kino-Plasmat, and your second image really show that well.
According to MS Optics, P6 has a similar SA bulge to the Kino but improved by about 30% due to the use of special glass, and contrast is also improved with modern multi-coating. The other settings, from P5 down to P2, move the SA curve to the other side of the axis, making it positive but increasing the overall SA (so more under-correction), which leads to a more hazy, glowy rendering.
Would you be able to post a sequence showing the bokeh balls, specular highlights, from P6 down to P2 while focusing with the LCD or EVF? I’d be curious to see which setting shows more outlining in the bokeh balls....Show more →
I can't post links yet, but I can say in my testing the outlining of the bokeh balls gets more subtle as the setting decreases. The stronger effect is in the distortion/squishing of the bokeh balls further from the center as the SA setting decreases. I'll see if I can post a link to some casual test photos I've taken on my M10 Monochrom later this week.
Edit: I also just wanted to say thanks so much to everyone who has posted sample images in this thread, this has been super helpful as I've been evaluating which MS Optics lenses to look for.
p.28 #2 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
OK I took a few test pictures with an MP Typ 240 while walking the dog, all set to focus on the same object in liveview (same distance). Right click and open in new tab to see full resolution image.
Setting 6
Setting 5
Setting 4
Setting 3
Setting 2
Setting "1"
Another question though - as anyone compared the VarioPetz to the Varioprasma? I find my VarioPetz is much more "bitey" than my Varioprasma but I don't see any haze or anything in the Varioprasma so I'm not sure if this is normal. These are teaser images from the M10-M.
VarioPetz at f2 (setting 3)
Varioprasma at F4 (setting 5)
And sorry for the thumbnail size; I'm still figuring out a digital workflow to get the hosted.
p.28 #3 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Fred Miranda wrote:
The 73/1.5 Sonnetar is a lens many people have had issues with when it comes to RF focusing. Even if it's accurate at certain distances, it often isn't consistent across the range. Mine had the RF cam adjusted so it stays consistent from close focus to infinity.
Yes, I remember this. Even on my M240, I could only get it to accurately focus from about 4 till 12 feet WO and then it just wouldn’t. I don’t understand the mechanics of how range finders work like you do, but I am happy mine works at least at 2.8 across the range on my film camera so it’s usable.
p.28 #4 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Kaie123 wrote:
I can't post links yet, but I can say in my testing the outlining of the bokeh balls gets more subtle as the setting decreases. The stronger effect is in the distortion/squishing of the bokeh balls further from the center as the SA setting decreases. I'll see if I can post a link to some casual test photos I've taken on my M10 Monochrom later this week.
Edit: I also just wanted to say thanks so much to everyone who has posted sample images in this thread, this has been super helpful as I've been evaluating which MS Optics lenses to look for. ...Show more →
p.28 #5 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
I find Vario Petz to be a much more normal lens than Vario Prasma (which I no longer have). At least in my experience, Vario Prasma couldn't really produce sharp shots across the frame, edges and corners were always quite mushy and for me the lens was kind of limited to some bokeh experiment shooting and too specialized to be used much after initial phase.
With Vario Petz I can get both interesting bokeh shots and corner-to-corner sharpness depending on settings. The control at the mount area is a bit troublesome with Vario Petz though since it can only be changed when lens is unmounted and it's best to use a toothpick or something to change that setting. I prefer the normal setting in the middle and the overcorrected settings that allow reaching infinity. The undercorrected settings limit the available focus range too much...
I could enjoy Vario Petz much more for my type of shooting and I think it's also a lot sharper lens even at center on most settings whereas Prasma is always more of a soft focus lens. Or it could be that my Prasma wasn't a good copy.
I find CV Portrait Heliar 75/1.8 to have a lot of similarities to how Vario Petz feels, but with much better control scheme and more range of control and without any major focus range limitations. It's a much bigger lens though and 75mm.
p.28 #6 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I find Vario Petz to be a much more normal lens than Vario Prasma (which I no longer have). At least in my experience, Vario Prasma couldn't really produce sharp shots across the frame, edges and corners were always quite mushy and for me the lens was kind of limited to some bokeh experiment shooting and too specialized to be used much after initial phase.
With Vario Petz I can get both interesting bokeh shots and corner-to-corner sharpness depending on settings. The control at the mount area is a bit troublesome with Vario Petz though since it can only be changed when lens is unmounted and it's best to use a toothpick or something to change that setting. I prefer the normal setting in the middle and the overcorrected settings that allow reaching infinity. The undercorrected settings limit the available focus range too much...
I could enjoy Vario Petz much more for my type of shooting and I think it's also a lot sharper lens even at center on most settings whereas Prasma is always more of a soft focus lens. Or it could be that my Prasma wasn't a good copy.
I find CV Portrait Heliar 75/1.8 to have a lot of similarities to how Vario Petz feels, but with much better control scheme and more range of control and without any major focus range limitations. It's a much bigger lens though and 75mm....Show more →
I ordered the Vario Prasma, but the seller (Japan Exposures) mistakenly listed it as in stock. So I probably won't get a chance to try one. That said, I am very happy with the CV 75/1.8 "SA ring" especially since this kind of spherical aberration control really only works with LV anyway.
p.28 #7 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I find Vario Petz to be a much more normal lens than Vario Prasma (which I no longer have). At least in my experience, Vario Prasma couldn't really produce sharp shots across the frame, edges and corners were always quite mushy and for me the lens was kind of limited to some bokeh experiment shooting and too specialized to be used much after initial phase.
With Vario Petz I can get both interesting bokeh shots and corner-to-corner sharpness depending on settings. The control at the mount area is a bit troublesome with Vario Petz though since it can only be changed when lens is unmounted and it's best to use a toothpick or something to change that setting. I prefer the normal setting in the middle and the overcorrected settings that allow reaching infinity. The undercorrected settings limit the available focus range too much...
I could enjoy Vario Petz much more for my type of shooting and I think it's also a lot sharper lens even at center on most settings whereas Prasma is always more of a soft focus lens. Or it could be that my Prasma wasn't a good copy.
I find CV Portrait Heliar 75/1.8 to have a lot of similarities to how Vario Petz feels, but with much better control scheme and more range of control and without any major focus range limitations. It's a much bigger lens though and 75mm....Show more →
Fred Miranda wrote:
I ordered the Vario Prasma, but the seller (Japan Exposures) mistakenly listed it as in stock. So I probably won't get a chance to try one. That said, I am very happy with the CV 75/1.8 "SA ring" especially since this kind of spherical aberration control really only works with LV anyway.
I meant to ask both of you what were your thoughts on the new Voigtlander Heliar 75mm 1.8, I went back to Sony recently and the FE version is quite appealing.
I wonder how it can differ from the MS-Optics 73mm 1.5, if it’s redundant or different enough.
I didn’t get a sense of how the CV flares also and if the settings impact that aspect of the lens. How lenses handle flares is quite important to me, I use it a lot when I can.
Well, how do you like it, and is it worth it when you own the Sonnetar? I didn’t mention the LLL 75mm that just appeared and complicate things also.
p.28 #8 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Sonnar-7 wrote:
I meant to ask both of you what were your thoughts on the new Voigtlander Heliar 75mm 1.8, I went back to Sony recently and the FE version is quite appealing.
I wonder how it can differ from the MS-Optics 73mm 1.5, if it’s redundant or different enough.
I didn’t get a sense of how the CV flares also and if the settings impact that aspect of the lens. How lenses handle flares is quite important to me, I use it a lot when I can.
I'm curious about flare as well with the Heliar. I'm unhappy with just two things about the Sonnetar:
1) The clickless aperture, which leads to aperture creep over time while you're using it. When I'm shooting concerts I like to set the aperture around f1.7 (just between 1.5 and 2), but after 30 minutes of shooting I'll look down and see that the dial has moved up to 2.8 or higher, all on its own; and
2) Flares: the Sonnetar has a sort of "turkey tail" flare that I don't find very attractive. I enjoy ring flares and some ghosting flares on other lenses, but the Sonnetar's flares don't usually please me (sometimes I don't mind them but I never love them).
p.28 #9 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
bjhurley wrote:
I'm curious about flare as well with the Heliar. I'm unhappy with just two things about the Sonnetar:
1) The clickless aperture, which leads to aperture creep over time while you're using it. When I'm shooting concerts I like to set the aperture around f1.7 (just between 1.5 and 2), but after 30 minutes of shooting I'll look down and see that the dial has moved up to 2.8 or higher, all on its own; and
2) Flares: the Sonnetar has a sort of "turkey tail" flare that I don't find very attractive. I enjoy ring flares and some ghosting flares on other lenses, but the Sonnetar's flares don't usually please me (sometimes I don't mind them but I never love them)....Show more →
My aperture ring does like to travel too indeed.
Regarding the flares, I may do some experiments, I was sometimes under the impression that my copy did flare a bit differently than what I observed from other samples but I’m not sure, it needs some tests.
p.28 #10 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Sonnar-7 wrote:
Regarding the flares, I may do some experiments, I was sometimes under the impression that my copy did flare a bit differently than what I observed from other samples but I’m not sure, it needs some tests.
This is the "turkey tail" flare that I see on mine (sorry for the out-of-focus shots):
p.28 #11 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Is it silver or black? I have a theory that they flare quite differently and I'm planning to test it head-to-head soon. My silver one flares quite dramatically and can pull bright spashes of pink from sunlight.
p.28 #12 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Kaie123 wrote:
Is it silver or black? I have a theory that they flare quite differently and I'm planning to test it head-to-head soon. My silver one flares quite dramatically and can pull bright spashes of pink from sunlight.
p.28 #13 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Sonnar-7 wrote:
I meant to ask both of you what were your thoughts on the new Voigtlander Heliar 75mm 1.8, I went back to Sony recently and the FE version is quite appealing.
I wonder how it can differ from the MS-Optics 73mm 1.5, if it’s redundant or different enough.
I didn’t get a sense of how the CV flares also and if the settings impact that aspect of the lens. How lenses handle flares is quite important to me, I use it a lot when I can.
Well, how do you like it, and is it worth it when you own the Sonnetar? I didn’t mention the LLL 75mm that just appeared and complicate things also.
I don't see the CV Heliar 75/1.8 as a competitor to Sonnetar 73/1.5 because the lenses are so different in size and weight. CV is 560g and Sonnetar is 197g. I do love both lenses and I think the unique appeal of Sonnetar is that it's a very small and light lens with that FL and such a fast aperture. I also like the versatile nature of it, I often shoot it wide open for the bokeh which I like, but it can also do corner-to-corner sharpness when stopped down sufficiently.
Portrait Heliar can do all kinds of rendering. The standard setting produces quite normal photos with a light touch of classic rendering, but the large range of under-correction and over-correction options can bring out a lot of different rendering styles. I usually like to use it at standard setting and only at the mildest under-correction settings but for some flower shots and other close-ups, the overcorrected settings can produce quite nice results and I can go to the max on that side and still enjoy the results. There is a lot of room for experimentation by changing both the under/over -correction setting and aperture together (best to keep aperture between f1.8 and f2.8 when experimenting with the correction settings for more interesting results).
I usually use my Sonnetar either at wide open or at f8, not much in-between. I like both lenses very much but for different reasons. CV doesn't flare much, it can be used against strong light sources without too much flaring at all. My Sonnetar (Silver #36 if I remember the nuimber right) does flare dramatically when shot against strong light sources and I usually don't shoot it against light that much.
My Sonnetar has a relatively tight aperture ring that doesn't travel on its own, it needs a bit more torgue than most aperture rings to move. I guess it's a copy specific thing...
p.28 #15 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Look for the 24/2 and 35/1.4
Good tip! This would have been useful like 10 lenses ago haha. No regrets though.
Related to this, is the BastianK on here the same from the PhillipReeve? I can't send him a PM as I have less than 25 posts so I can't send a PM but I have a couple of the MS Optics lenses he has yet to review and am based in Europe.
p.28 #16 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Kaie123 wrote:
Good tip! This would have been useful like 10 lenses ago haha. No regrets though.
Related to this, is the BastianK on here the same from the PhillipReeve? I can't send him a PM as I have less than 25 posts so I can't send a PM but I have a couple of the MS Optics lenses he has yet to review and am based in Europe.
