p.13 #1 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
foto16 wrote:
Do people feel that the sharpness results are way better than expected? The adapted VM version is expected to have poor off-center performance even at modest apertures due to the thick sensor filter on the E and Z cameras. But these tests show that the border sharpness is already fine at f2-2.8. It surprising since as far as I hear the Z mount version doesn't have any modifications compared to the VM version to address the thick filter problem. Should one expect that the sharpness of the E mount version will perform as well as in these tests?
I guess the only modification of the Z-mount version concerns the fine adjustment of the distance between the rear element and the sensor, according to the different thickness of the sensor stack.
BastianK wrote:
I got confirmation from the manufacturer today: the optics are the same as the M-mount version.
No adjustments have been made to account for the thicker filter stack of the other camera systems.
No adjustments have been made to the optical scheme. The same holds, e.g., for the CV 35/2 Apo-Lanthar: all versions share the same optics, independently of the mount.
p.13 #3 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
I got a copy of the M-mount 28/1.4 and took it out this morning for a few images with my M9 body (all images below are taken at f/1.4, first three at close distance < 1 meter and the last one is at further distance).
p.13 #4 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
DZO was established in 2013, at the dawn of Sony's mirrorless revolution.
DZO is the cine lens company that launched their sub-brand as 'Thypoch'. So, not really a fly by night outfit. These lenses emphasize image depth, close focus qualities (FLE), appealing focus fade, and often fine, low contrast smooth bokeh. Cine lens qualities, in other words.
Mid-aperture work benefits from the delivery system of the 14 aperture blades in each lens. Many of the things that stir photography reviewers to mark down lenses actually attract cine lens people, who are more tolerant of vignette, minor swirl, lemon bokeh ball shapes and a little CA. None of the Simera lenses uses more than one asph element, as with Zeiss (and older Leica) - so they were able to avoid the modern bland, sterile look.
We can also expect other stills lenses in time: a 75/1.4 and a 21/1.4 can be ported from the new sibling Simera-C range, which are effectively rehoused early stills Simeras with cine gearing, rearranged rings and 16 blade apertures.
The Simeras are also going to be available in all mounts: E-Z-X-RF.
'The Simera Z/E/X/RF mount series, compared to the Simera M mount series, eliminates the infinity lock design and includes a crescent-shaped focus tab, crafted from anodized aluminum alloy for seamless integration and tactile comfort.'
It's easy to understand why they first went to market with the M lens versions for these manual focus lenses. I doubt they expected the pasting they got in this thread, lol. I believe they will do much better with the more tolerant EVF camera users in time, assisted by Sony's cine presence..
..and the benefits of EVF composition for this genre of lens - TTL experimentation with variations of focus distance, compositions and apertures, in particular. DZO's other major cine lens ranges feature lenses at 100mm - a great focal length that is pushing the limits of RF cameras but is a perfect match for efficient EVF photography.
p.13 #5 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
philip_pj wrote:
The Simeras are also going to be available in all mounts: E-Z-X-RF.
The Z-mount Simera 28/1.4 seems promising.
According to the MTF plots published by Opticallimits, the lens is usable at f/1.4 if the main subject is near the image center. The corners are soft at this setting and the overall contrast is somewhat subdued. Stopping down the f/2 helps to boost the image contrast quite a bit. For good results, you should stop down to f/2.8, and it touches excellence around the f/5.6 mark.
This suggests that the lens should exhibit some "character" at the wider apertures, being sharp across the whole frame from f/5.6 onwards and therefore fully usable for landscapes. It costs one third of the (discontinued) Nikkor AF-S 28/1.4E, and is much smaller and lighter.
..the reviewer presents a set of very revealing images, comparing his pre-FLE 35/1.4 Summilux to the Simera 35/1.4.
Of these left-right slider images, which do you prefer and why? You will have an opinion here..
----------
His cons are also enlightening:
. Typeface…
. Aperture de-clicking system, nice at first but annoying in use as it disengages itself quite often.
. Hyperlocal (sic) dots system, nice at first but not very visible and practical on the field. Almost impossible to see in dim light.
. F- stops not equidistant, forces you to look at it during use to know where you are.
Not a word there about image quality, or build quality. Isn't that interesting. He is a self-proclaimed engineer. If DZO only knew all they needed was fancy type front and linear spacing of the aperture setting marks. But then people would simply move on to their tier two complaints.
..the reviewer presents a set of very revealing images, comparing his pre-FLE 35/1.4 Summilux to the Simera 35/1.4.
Of these left-right slider images, which do you prefer and why? You will have an opinion here..
----------
His cons are also enlightening:
. Typeface…
. Aperture de-clicking system, nice at first but annoying in use as it disengages itself quite often.
. Hyperlocal (sic) dots system, nice at first but not very visible and practical on the field. Almost impossible to see in dim light.
. F- stops not equidistant, forces you to look at it during use to know where you are.
Not a word there about image quality, or build quality. Isn't that interesting. He is a self-proclaimed engineer. If DZO only knew all they needed was fancy type front and linear spacing of the aperture setting marks. But then people would simply move on to their tier two complaints. ...Show more →
I prefer the right images, which I'm guessing is the pre-FLE summilux. The halation in the highlights on the Pre-FLE Summilux is very nice and is the left is just too modern, IMO. Makes me miss mine.. if I didn't use the close focus on my current Summilux so often, I'd probably go back to a pre-FLE version.
p.13 #8 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
philip_pj wrote:
Not a word there about image quality, or build quality. Isn't that interesting. He is a self-proclaimed engineer. If DZO only knew all they needed was fancy type front and linear spacing of the aperture setting marks. But then people would simply move on to their tier two complaints.
To quote the article just above the sample images:
35mmc.com:
To sum it up, I would say the Simera 35mm ASPH is not better or worse than the Summilux in these pictures. My observation are the following:
Better sharpness at close up distances.
A bit worse at longer distances in the center but a bit better in the corners.
More color saturation and micro contrast wide open.
Harsher bokeh globally with more outlining.
A bit more color fringing.
Closer focusing is a big bonus. Depending on your shooting style, you might prefer one lens or the other. In the end I will be leaning toward the Summilux for its smoother out of focus areas wide open, which to my eyes makes the look I am after. ...Show more →
I think this is useful information for those familiar with the lux pre-asph.
p.13 #9 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Reviewers are treading carefully. These lenses provide two very different rendering styles, for which we can be appreciative. Only one of them gives great depth and clarity. It's a preference of course, and much of that is governed by learned experience.
Another step in the game - if you dare - is to show the slider images to your significant other or friends and ask them which they prefer, and make a mental note of how long it takes them to decide. Add up the scores. No amount of forensics overcomes image impactfulness. It overcomes all else.
p.13 #10 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Hello everyone, I just find out that 28mm now comes in E mount too! Is the lens optimized for the thicker Sony sensor? It's good in E mount or it share the same problems with the other WA M mount adapted lenses?
p.13 #12 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
p.13 #11
Impressive fade quality going into the images - the MTF show this Zeiss-like steady drop clearly. Some reviews note the low lens contrast perhaps without knowing this is part of the design intent. DZO are not aiming for 35/1.4 Distagon contrast. The rate of fade is a point of substantive difference to Leica's 28/1.4.
Leica instills plenty of curvature and/or less optical attention to mid-fields in their fast M lenses to obtain their signature look (as shown in my 'game' post above). (and see here for a graphic display of the 35/1.4 SR curvature: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1779165/23)
Front bokeh of the S28 is also handled nicely, indicating balanced SA correction - necessary for bokeh highlight performance (neither excessive donut nor halo). The ball shapes change heading from centre to corners, very well managed.
There is plenty of contextual image content in these wide open images, indicating resolution is more than sufficient in the absence of high contrast. Distant tree cover and water rippling in image #1 is very sound in a f1.4 lens of this focal length.
Dustin Abbott found almost no LoCA and lateral CA either, on an a7r5 at 200%. CA is close to being a no-no in cine lenses; they know they cannot remove it entirely so mitigation is key in that environment. And ours.
Most boxes having been ticked off, I'm most interested in highlight handling and mid-small aperture retention of image information. Most reviews focus on street use, they are pretty much all M people so far, probably looking at at least a fair percentage of B&W, for the gritty urban look.
It will win over a lot of (impartial) people, and not just for reasons of affordability. What will the 21mm be like, when it arrives? Which it surely must because volumes in stills lenses dwarfs cine versions.
p.13 #13 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
philip_pj wrote:
p.13 #11
Impressive fade quality going into the images - the MTF show this Zeiss-like steady drop clearly. Some reviews note the low lens contrast perhaps without knowing this is part of the design intent. DZO are not aiming for 35/1.4 Distagon contrast. The rate of fade is a point of substantive difference to Leica's 28/1.4.
Leica instills plenty of curvature and/or less optical attention to mid-fields in their fast M lenses to obtain their signature look (as shown in my 'game' post above). (and see here for a graphic display of the 35/1.4 SR curvature: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1779165/23)
Front bokeh of the S28 is also handled nicely, indicating balanced SA correction - necessary for bokeh highlight performance (neither excessive donut nor halo). The ball shapes change heading from centre to corners, very well managed.
There is plenty of contextual image content in these wide open images, indicating resolution is more than sufficient in the absence of high contrast. Distant tree cover and water rippling in image #1 is very sound in a f1.4 lens of this focal length.
Dustin Abbott found almost no LoCA and lateral CA either, on an a7r5 at 200%. CA is close to being a no-no in cine lenses; they know they cannot remove it entirely so mitigation is key in that environment. And ours.
Most boxes having been ticked off, I'm most interested in highlight handling and mid-small aperture retention of image information. Most reviews focus on street use, they are pretty much all M people so far, probably looking at at least a fair percentage of B&W, for the gritty urban look.
It will win over a lot of (impartial) people, and not just for reasons of affordability. What will the 21mm be like, when it arrives? Which it surely must because volumes in stills lenses dwarfs cine versions. ...Show more →
Thank you for your detailed technical analysis. Many of your comments are fully in line with how I feel about this lens (S28/1.4 M-mount). So far I only took it out for two outings and I need use it a bit more. In my first outing with my Leica M9 body, I was a bit surprised by the fact that at close distance, the contrast is not very high compared with further/infinity distance at f/1.4, but the resolution is pretty good. In some ways, this lens reminds me of the Zeiss Otus 28/1,4.
p.13 #14 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
High praise indeed, but I can't say as I'm surprised. I just ordered one, after seeing the lovely set of images in Dustin Abbott's gallery shot in the frozen north:
A lucky deal too, and as I suspected, DZO are working to get the mirrorless mount users involved. The local dealer I found was selling the E-mount for $US240 less than the M-mount version. That's quite the incentive, but I would have paid the extra after doing the due diligence.
I want this one for all sorts of scenarios: streets and confined spaces, a sweet eye on landscapes, temples (f1.4, yes!), groups, interiors. These are places where medium contrast is welcome and depth is so important.
In moderate wides, I'm a 28mm person rather than 35mm, and it only took a decade to find what I want. Fate works in strange ways at times. thank you for your work, very impressive in the Nikon forum too.
p.13 #16 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Here are images from my new Simera 28 1.4. It includes an Astro shot at either 1.4 or F2.
also included shots with the sun in the frame to access flair, ghosts, shooting stars etc.
p.13 #17 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Looking ahead, it's very likely Thypoch will sell many more lenses to mirrorless users than M-mount users. Unlike Cosina, they sensibly offer the same lens body and physical designs across all mounts: E/Z/RF/X.
And apparently, no one gets a weight penalty beyond the mount apparatus. Filter size is common to all, at 49mm. Compared with the M 28/1.4, the extra weights for these other mount 28/1.4 lenses are as follows:
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.13 #18 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
philip_pj wrote:
Looking ahead, it's very likely Thypoch will sell many more lenses to mirrorless users than M-mount users. Unlike Cosina, they sensibly offer the same lens body and physical designs across all mounts: E/Z/RF/X.
And apparently, no one gets a weight penalty beyond the mount apparatus. Filter size is common to all, at 49mm. Compared with the M 28/1.4, the extra weights for these other mount 28/1.4 lenses are as follows:
We will see if having the same body design and just changing the mount is a good thing or not. Some of the comments they made to Bastian K suggest that they didn't adjust the optical formula for the thicker cover glass on any of the mirrorless cameras. If that is true, then the mirrorless mounts may not be quite as popular and personally I think that is a mistake. I would rather that the lenses varied more between mounts and were optimized to each mount. Especially the 28mm and 35mm (and perhaps most importantly the upcoming 21mm), but the proof will be in the pudding. Before long we will know if they are affected by the thicker cover glass on mirrorless cameras or not.
p.13 #19 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Also, none of them have electronic contacts and the Fuji X version is an FF lens but offered for an APS-C system so it's going to be unnecessarily big and heavy for that system compared to other native X-mount lenses.
CV has small and fully optimized lenses for Fuji X with electronic contacts, such as 23/1.2 at 214g and 27/2 at 120g and 35/1.2 at 196g. They are all at around 60K yen in Japan whereas the Simera's normal price is 113K in Japan (at Map Camera), currently on discount at 84K but discount seems valid until end of November.
I might personally go for the Thypoch 28/1.4 in Sony E-mount at some point in the future if/when it can be bought at similar price at Map Camera as currently (~84K yen), but I'm short on lens budget right now. It would be nicer if it was optimized for Sony sensor stack though, which it doesn't appear to be.
p.13 #20 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Bobby Tonelli spills the beans on Thypoch and their mismanaged market entry - he was not permitted to disclose the parent company at the time of this video, reviewing the Simera 28/1.4!
That's an extraordinary oversight, but it was a well known heritage inside the industry. I stumbled across it in an interview with a DZO spox at a trade show. Tonelli addresses some other common reasons for buyer reluctance, some of which we have seen in this forum. The comments are priceless.
I have posted a crop showing some the similarities to the lens style that inspired this fine new range. Looking at the Summilux here, I'd be unhappy with the lack of ring separation while wearing gloves, and the little white dot slows aperture recognition compared with the Thypoch's long straight index line. All the operations in the Leica lens must happen in the rear half of the lens. I'm not sure you need to be reminded of the lens title right there on the lens body either, a superfluous inclusion. A short article on the Alpa Kern Macro Switar AR 50mm f1.9 can be found here, for those interested:
