I don’t really use the distance scale, so for me it’s a non-starter. I assume that no matter how I adjust these lenses, they will be misaligned on one or another mount adapter. I’m just trying to make sure I’m not losing IQ based on having the lens slightly sideways on the mount.
freaklikeme wrote:
Sure, but, if you have the option to put the distance scale in the right place, wouldn't you take it?
I don't know which adapter you purchased, but most cheap adapters have set screws for the m42 threaded section and once loosened you can rotate the threads and then tighten the set screws. Just make sure everything is flat and square. Most will feel better doing that with a cheap adapter than a more expensive lens.
cbass wrote:
I don't know which adapter you purchased, but most cheap adapters have set screws for the m42 threaded section and once loosened you can rotate the threads and then tighten the set screws. Just make sure everything is flat and square. Most will feel better doing that with a cheap adapter than a more expensive lens.
Alan Parker wrote:
I use the Urth M42 -> E adapter.
That one appears to use a set screw or screws. I only see one from the marketing image but there can be more. It is on the side of adapter, Back those out (no reason to remove them) and you can turn the M42 threaded part to whatever position you want then tighten again. Just make sure that everything ends up nice and flat and not tilted when you do.
cbass wrote:
That one appears to use a set screw or screws.
Yeah that was my point, I had to line up the screws of the adapter with the screws on the lens, since out of the box they didn't match.
Anyway, it's all resolved now. No problems.
Alan Parker wrote:
Yeah that was my point, I had to line up the screws of the adapter with the screws on the lens, since out of the box they didn't match.
Anyway, it's all resolved now. No problems.
Sorry I was confused because there are two ways you can make the adjustment, and you said torx screws, so I assumed you adjusted the lens mount not the adapter. Per TTArtisan website:
This lens is designed with an adjustable M42 Screw Mount for alignment. If the centerline of the lens does not align with the centerline of the camera, you can use a T5 Torx screwdriver to loosen the screws, adjust the lens body to align the centerline and then tighten the screws.
I was saying some people get nervous about adjusting the mount on a more expensive lens over a cheap adapter. If that is the case, then you can loosen the set screws on the adapter instead and adjust that way. On my adapters those have been allen screws.
As mentioned earlier am going to post a few examples, by way of comparison of a 1941 Zeiss 75/1.5 Biotar and the new TT Artisan 75/1.5 lens. These are by no means perfect, but do think they are representative. The example of the early lens used here does have some notable coating damage/loss to both the front and rear elements, but seems otherwise clear and "okay'. It has not had a CLA, because I can't find anyone who has done one, or a youtube video or anything else which would enable me to do one myself. So, this is not a perfect, as new, example. The obvious tendency to flare of the earlier example will be evident to varying degrees depending on the strength of the sun and nearness to the frame. There are several examples where I tried to show flare on both lenses in different situations. I used a hood on both lenses, at all times, except for two instances when that is plainly labeled. The TT Artisan does not come with a hood, and the front element is not shielded, as is, by much of anything, so I used the only 58mm hood I had here, which was quite large. The Biotar also used the only 58mm hood I had, though small.
Most of these examples were done with a tripod, as simultaneously as possible. Ones done without a tripod will be noticeable from the framing. As soft as both these lenses are, and the shutter speeds used, I doubt the tripod made any noticeable difference to the results at these resolutions.
Images shot with lenses adapted to Nikon Z 7, imported to Lightroom, with no corrections (one exception) applied. LR applies contrast corrections, and I zeroed these out for both lenses, so the contrast you see would be the contrast the lenses provide. On a very small number of the files I did apply 0.15 to 0.25 stops of adjustment to the exposure just so they would appear as similar as possible, because the camera was set to Aperture priority and the exposures are not always identical. But, pretty much what you see is what you'd get, though all these files could be significantly improved with LR auto correct.
That is all I have got, unlikely to do any more as it is probably enough or more than enough to see how they perform in most of the settings that people might use these for. My personal conclusions would be that:
1.The Biotar always needs a hood, and, if you have a lot of direct sun, or even indirect sun, it's not enough unless you just like veiling flare. The TT Artisan also benefits from a hood, significantly in drastic situations like the last comparison, and slightly in other situations.
2. The TT Artisan is in any case sharper, more resolving, contrastier, and more saturated than the copy of the Biotar used here, but the contrast and saturation differences diminish if the Biotar is kept away from backlit conditions. Neither lens is particularly sharp.
3. The TT Artisan bokeh is noticeably janglier and busier than the Biotar bokeh, and this can't be solely put down to contrast differences. I don't think. The Biotar backgrounds are more unfocused generally, but not always, as it does depend on distance differences between camera, central subject, and background. At least that is the way I see it.
I will probably keep both, because WTH, and those are my tendencies. The Biotar is capable of producing image pairs here, occasionally if there is no possibility of flare, that I prefer to the TT Artisan, though the TT Artisan is a "better lens". I'd get a CLA done on the Biotar if I could find someone who has done some, is good at it, and would agree to turn it around quickly enough I wouldn't die before I got it back, but don't know of anyone as the usual suspects seem unexcited about the prospect.
Thanks for watching to anyone interested enough to get this far, and apologies to those who were not, as I completely understand.
