p.5 #1 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Sonnar-7 wrote:
Thanks for all these! That 36/1.3 looks always so good, they should mass produce it or make a dozen more. It seems to show more glow then a voigtlander classic 35mm 1.4 and a bit of something more organic. Do you feel it’s a big improvement to the Ms-Optics 35/1.3 that you own?
Thanks! 35/1.3 has much more field curvature impact on bokeh, i.e. corners tend to get a lot sharper in bokeh shots and it can be distracting depending on the scene. 36/1.3 can also focus much closer natively (~0.3m vs. ~0.6m) which I think is a big benefit as I prefer to use these on my non-helicoid Rayqual adapter most of the time. Overall 36/1.3 is perhaps my top favorite MS-Optics lens (out of the 15 that I have).
p.5 #2 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Juha Kannisto wrote:
Thanks! 35/1.3 has much more field curvature impact on bokeh, i.e. corners tend to get a lot sharper in bokeh shots and it can be distracting depending on the scene. 36/1.3 can also focus much closer natively (~0.3m vs. ~0.6m) which I think is a big benefit as I prefer to use these on my non-helicoid Rayqual adapter most of the time. Overall 36/1.3 is perhaps my top favorite MS-Optics lens (out of the 15 that I have).
I wonder whether these idiosyncratic optics are just generally best used on an EVF-enabled camera than a rangefinder.
p.5 #3 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
I am not a M user. In my experience, wide end pancake lenses are best with Techart af adapter and even on apsc sensor to get rid of corner issues like harsh vignetting... The lenses are so light that it works great with Techart and you don't have to change much on the small lenses except aperture.
j.liam wrote:
I wonder whether these idiosyncratic optics are just generally best used on an EVF-enabled camera than a rangefinder.
p.5 #4 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
j.liam wrote:
I wonder whether these idiosyncratic optics are just generally best used on an EVF-enabled camera than a rangefinder.
I personally think that they may work better on EVF-enabled mirrorless cameras since rangefinder accuracy seems to be a common problem with them when used on Leica M. I only use them on Sony mirrorless and occasionally on Sigma fp myself, although I also have Fuji X mirrorless. I just prefer to keep the original field of view and therefore like to adapt to FF. I have avoided the widest angle MS-Optics lenses as I think wider ones than 28mm or 24mm may not be optimal across the frame and with wide angle lenses I appreciate corner-to-corner sharpness more than unique rendering characteristics.
It also has appeared from various tests / samples that MS-Optics lenses are generally working quite well on mirrorless and there might not be very noticeable IQ benefits from using them on digital M (except perhaps with the widest angle lenses).
p.5 #5 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I personally think that they may work better on EVF-enabled mirrorless cameras since rangefinder accuracy seems to be a common problem with them when used on Leica M.
It's true, although I'm not sure all of them have problems with focus shift. It happens that the two I own (28/2 Apoqualia and 73/1.5 Sonnetar) have strong focus shift. I haven't even bothered to try my 73/1.5 Sonnetar on my Leica M2-R film camera although I'll experiment with it eventually. For my Apoqualia 28/2 I either use it wide open at f2 or else stop down to f8 or f11, where it becomes a nice sharp lens for landscapes.
p.5 #6 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
I have LM-EA7 but I basically gave up using it a few years ago due to all the quirks I experienced with that adapter and I never bought the newer LM-EA9 (which seems to be fairly easy to break according to reports). I got frustrated by the quirks (such as the adapter losing connection and causing the camera to restart randomly etc.), so after a while I went back to full-time MF use of my adapted MF lenses. With MS-Optics lenses I just avoided getting the widest ones like 17mm, 19mm, 21mm and currently I also have no 24mm (I once had the original 24/4). With 28mm and longer I prefer to use them on FF to enjoy the original rendering as-is including the peripheral area, as when I tried them on my Fuji X they felt like ordinary lenses losing some of the original charm and didn't inspire me to shoot as much.
serhan_ wrote:
I am not a M user. In my experience, wide end pancake lenses are best with Techart af adapter and even on apsc sensor to get rid of corner issues like harsh vignetting... The lenses are so light that it works great with Techart and you don't have to change much on the small lenses except aperture.
And this one was shot wide open at f2; I like the vignetting and field curvature on shots like this, it adds to the mood, but it's nice to know I have the option of stopping down (when light permits) for a more corrected look as well.
p.5 #8 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Experimenting with a Ms-Optics lens for the first time, it’s thrilling and so hardcore to manage, I thought the Heliar was difficult, how little I knew.
You get the Ms-Optics you find not the one you want.
p.5 #11 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
I begin to like it more, I’m not familiar with the notion of decentered lens, I read a bit here about it but I wondered if this one was, the smear effect seems to go further toward the center from the right then from the left.
p.5 #12 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Sonnar-7 wrote:
I begin to like it more, I’m not familiar with the notion of decentered lens, I read a bit here about it but I wondered if this one was, the smear effect seems to go further toward the center from the right then from the left.
Well, it’s all quirks.
MS-Optics Apoqualia 35mm 1.3 II Slim & Nikon Zf
How does it look if you shoot at f8 and try to maximize corner-to-corner sharpness on some cityscape shots? I think it would be easier to judge decentering based on such stopped down shots, checking if edge and corner sharpness is consistently worse on one side or the other. Wide open the lens is not going to be very sharp across most of the frame and it could be harder to judge centering from such shots.
I like to use this lens wide open for very close range (also utilizing helicoid adapter to get closer than 0.6m) but for longer distance I use it mostly stopped down.
I've enjoyed the lens quite a bit and I still keep it but later when I got Apollon 36/1.3 I liked it's bokeh rendering and ability to focus very close even more so I didn't use 35/1.3 as much afterwards. I should take it out for a spin over the New Year holidays again.
p.5 #13 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
Juha Kannisto wrote:
How does it look if you shoot at f8 and try to maximize corner-to-corner sharpness on some cityscape shots? I think it would be easier to judge decentering based on such stopped down shots, checking if edge and corner sharpness is consistently worse on one side or the other. Wide open the lens is not going to be very sharp across most of the frame and it could be harder to judge centering from such shots.
I like to use this lens wide open for very close range (also utilizing helicoid adapter to get closer than 0.6m) but for longer distance I use it mostly stopped down.
I've enjoyed the lens quite a bit and I still keep it but later when I got Apollon 36/1.3 I liked it's bokeh rendering and ability to focus very close even more so I didn't use 35/1.3 as much afterwards. I should take it out for a spin over the New Year holidays again....Show more →
Thank you for those advices, I will try what you suggested in the upcoming days.
I bought the lens because it was available and there and it was a MS-Optics with some nice specs though, but that aside, I was not very drawn to it, the design of it, the fact that it looked so tiny and fragile. The few reviews were horrendous too.
But when I received it, I fell in love with it, it’s quite well made, the design is more ergonomic and pretty than it looks on paper and the rendering tends to be to my liking(well almost to a fault).
You really got to try a lens to have a feel of it, reviews and opinions can be so misleading sometimes.
I feel that the 36mm 1.3 is a better lens indeed but I got that one.
I will give it a go at f8 to see if there is a problem with it.
I use it with my TTArtisan 6bit adapter but it gives me some false readings, I don’t think it impacts the metering of the camera and it still gives me the green focus confirmation of the Zf.
I tried the lens on my Voigtlander close focus adapter but I have no infinity and worse, I have a lot of issues with that adapter, even with native Voigtlander lenses.
p.5 #14 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
I took my MS-Optics Apoqualia 35/1.3 Slim II on an afternoon walk with my A7CII today (enjoying New Year holidays at home) and visited Kyu Asakura House at Daikanyama:
I also think this lens can be quite lovely to shoot with even though it's one of the more challenging ones from the MS-Optics line Usability is not bad at all if one has slim enough fingers to reach the aperture control. I also like the results most of the time.
I mainly used f8, f1.3 and f4 on this outing and relied on my CV VM-E close focus adapter II for getting closer than 0.6m on some of the shots.
p.5 #15 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
A few weeks ago I purchased a used copy of MS-Optical Super-Triplet Perar 28/4 (#420 in beautiful condition) that showed up at Map Camera. My original #419 was my very first MS-Optical / MS-Optics lens (bought back in 2014) and it's not in good condition anymore, aperture blades that are exposed and in front of the glass are stuck wide open etc. Therefore I had not used my original in ages. I figured it was a good chance to get a properly working copy of this lens again and the serial number being so close to my original was intriguing.
All shots were taken at f8 or wide open at f4. I used CV VM-E close focus adapter II to get closer focusing than the native 0.8m.
The lens vignettes quite a lot, I didn't compensate for it at all in these samples. They were all exported through C1 Pro with a mild filmic preset applied that adds a bit of color enhancement (Fuji Astia simulation). I like it although I think my top favorite from all MS-Optics 28mm options is still 28/2 version II.
p.5 #19 · MS-Optics lenses Image and Discussion Thread
tommmi wrote:
Thanks for the pictures Sonnar-7 !
I really like the smearing and soft look of that lens. It gives a nice character, far different from super-sharp and super-clinical "modern" look.
Thank you! Yeah that lens won’t win any brick wall contest, but I’m quite fond of it. I’m surely biased since I like character lenses, although I don’t like much the fact that it is categorized that way, I believe some traits of those lenses should be legitimate in wannabe modern lenses, some things that are considered optical perfection I would question twice.
But back to the lens, it’s quite a Swiss army knife of optical effects, it’s a good tool in that regard, bubble bokeh, outlines, swirl, flares of all kinds( but the good ones, not the cast or veils ones), smears, and some decent center sharpness if your subject is not moving too fast.
I didn’t think I would like such a tiny lens, I like weight in gear, I don’t like things feeling light in hands but even compared to a small lens that one is even smaller and it changes the way you can carry your camera and the way you can be unobtrusive.
Just a fun package overall.
Hey Voigtlander, make some 50 like that and bring back single coated options.
Usability is not bad at all if one has slim enough fingers to reach the aperture control. I also like the results most of the time.
