This picture was taken at f2 in Versailles after going to the open air market. One of the shopkeepers gave my wife this flower because it was Mother's Day in France.
Stargenx wrote:
Looking forward to finding out what the damage is on E-mount as a result of the lack of sensor stack corrections in the E-mount version. I'm curious how it compares to the Voigtländer which, while corrected for the stack differences, makes compromises on image quality to achieve a compact size.
I am too, and the samples in here look mostly brilliant and with the sale it's extremely tempting. I think it's all the e-mount version but I keep going back to Bastion's review and looking side by side at the images on Leica vs Sony at f5.6 mid-frame.
For 28mm people shots with background blur at these distances, this is the one, I think that's quite clear.
And for optimal landscapes maybe waiting for reviews of the APO e-mount if you like to zoom in.
But dual purpose (who wants to carry around two of the same focal length) does it still beat the Nokton E-mount on Sony... I don't know and it doesn't cost a whole lot to find out.
I think it's the lateral CA in bright light that's bugging me on the Nokton mostly, giving it a funky look (I think, I'm not knowledgeable enough to say) and this should have less of that (according to the reviews on VM anyway) and better bokeh.
Then it's just the mid-frame drop concern? For portraits, above looks good on the eye to me.
Only hickup is the VM version of the nokton also I think has a little less lateral... i think. So maybe it's the same with this.
Hanging around for hints but I think I'm going to bite. I'm sour about not optimising for the mount you're selling it for obviously, but let's see. It looks good in here.
-- mine is on the way for e-mount, poor self-control and who knows about stock etc.
Let's see how it holds up with CA on bright sunny days.
'I'm sour about not optimising for the mount you're selling it for obviously'
That's enough for me. It's time to leave this thread alone, the FE thread is where my images from this 'unoptimised' lens will go in future. kind regards and all the best for the future!
philip_pj wrote:
'I'm sour about not optimising for the mount you're selling it for obviously'
That's enough for me. It's time to leave this thread alone, the FE thread is where my images from this 'unoptimised' lens will go in future. kind regards and all the best for the future!
Sorry Philip, appreciate your photos, they're part of why I'm picking it up (and maybe the 75mm!).
It's not the same when I have the full res infront of me. Want to go in with proper expectations this time and have been warned enough. Would rather be positively surprised this time if it doesn't make all that much difference.
mudlake wrote:
Excellent! Your images are exactly where this lens excels. They are beautiful!
Thanks Mudlake! I literally had our 3 dogs and daughter with fading light. Not ideal, but I'll hopefully get some chances and possibly decent light this week/weekend.
For those curious, I tested the Simera 28/1.4 e-mount on a modded Sony (native Leica performance) and a stock Sony a7cII at 8 feet with a tripod, manual focus on the center, IBIS off on a tripod with a 2nd shutter delay, refocused at shooting aperture, RAW, imported to LR with no adjustments made.
Essentially, as suspected, the Simera e-mount performs better on a m-mount sensor stack thickness. We can indeed verify that the lens was not optimized for Sony when it was ported. We are loosing about 3 stops in the midzone if shooting on a stock Sony sensor. The midzone @ 2.8 on the stock Sony still looks worse than the midzone on the modded Sony @ 1.4.
Note that the a7rII files (despite being a higher magnification because we took the same 800x800 pixel crop from both cameras) actually look better than the a7cii. If comparing 2 cameras of the same resolution, one with a modded sensor and one with a stock Sony sensor, the difference would look worse.
Anyway, the midzone and outer midzone actually look really nice on the modded sensor at this very typical shooting distance for a portrait oriented 28mm. Honestly, even on a stock sensor, I've used many lenses that have worse Sensor stack degradation than this Simera 28/1.4. Perhaps that is why Samira did not tweak the optics?
But still, Simera really should have done right by photographers. As it is, I don't see a reason to buy an e-mount version. I'd rather have the option to use a close focus helicoid or Techart AF adpater, use the lens on film film or swap to other mirrorless mounts with an m-mount version.
I think the midzone is fine by 2.8 even on a stock sensor, so maybe not as a big of a deal for some. It's probably even-ish/close with a CV 28/1.5 e-mount Nokton I would guess. I'll shoot mine for the next bit in the real world and see how much I like the lens then decide my course of action.
Also for those curious, I did test, briefly, the highlight roll off between the Simera 28/1.4 and Sony GM 24/1.4. The Simera presented with a warmer, less sharp, less contrasty photo that did present with slightly less rush to blow highlight. I may test this more later.
Can't help but wonder about the cine version if nehemiahphoto found the 50mm to perform better on unmodified emount. You'd think the 28 would be similar... maybe not. From what I read the cine versions came out first for e-mount.
It doesn't look fun using the cine version for stills though maybe not all that bad. Would want further confirmation though.
Will wait for nehemiahphoto to buckle and order it before going that route
In the mean time I changed the order to the m mount version, just in case I cave and get a leica down the line, will be nice to have something for that mount lined up, and already had an adaptor.
TBH I think Sony is more likely to make something slimmer than the a7cii/r than leica is to slim down a little/shorten while also adding in more tech like IBIS so maybe not the best move from me ... but who knows and seemingly not giving up all that much for the flexibility. Neither scenario seems all that likely to be honest but who knows. The glass should last for a while right.
Do have my eye on the rest of the lineup for people shots but let's see what the 28 is like first, I am looking forward to it, was planning on experimenting with 28mm for people mostly after seeing so many good examples on this site recently. Nice change from 50mm.
35mm might be a little easier to use, though I don't know how different it would feel from the 50 in practice, whereas the 28 is quite clearly different and might be worth carrying both. Even if you end up cropping the 28mm sometimes.
Very nice of @nehemiahphoto to confirm that the lens was not modified.
One thing I'm still curious about is how the midzone and outer midzone fare on the two sensors when the lens is focused in those locations instead of the center. If the sharpness results are much closer, and it shows that the real problem is curvature of field, I'd actually be MORE interested in this lens. It might be an acquired taste but IMO the old Zeiss/Contax Hollywood and Classic 28/2's used field curvature to sometimes stunning effect in environmental portraits.
Sarpedon wrote:
Very nice of @nehemiahphoto@ to confirm that the lens was not modified.
One thing I'm still curious about is how the midzone and outer midzone fare on the two sensors when the lens is focused in those locations instead of the center. If the sharpness results are much closer, and it shows that the real problem is curvature of field, I'd actually be MORE interested in this lens. It might be an acquired taste but IMO the old Zeiss/Contax Hollywood and Classic 28/2's used field curvature to sometimes stunning effect in environmental portraits.
I loved my CY 28/2 MMJ. Fantastic image maker.
I had the same question on field curvature. I have checked this with multiple other rangefinder lenses. To be honest, I don’t enjoy testing lenses. I do it to dispel misinformation/gain knowledge. There are multiple other members who I’m sure could do this exercise pretty simple. Would be curious to see myself.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I loved my CY 28/2 MMJ. Fantastic image maker.
I had the same question on field curvature. I have checked this with multiple other rangefinder lenses. To be honest, I don’t enjoy testing lenses. I do it to dispel misinformation/gain knowledge. There are multiple other members who I’m sure could do this exercise pretty simple. Would be curious to see myself.
Oh, no worries! Didn't mean that to sound like a request.
Looked up Bastian's review on Phillipreeve and it has the relevant info:
Totally different price point
Imo too expensive for the 28 APO
And too clinical for my liking from what I’ve seen from the m-mount sample pics
Didn’t see one convincing picture wich “popped”
But have seen many pics that popped from the simera
goo0h wrote:
the competition is heating up with Cosina announcing the 28/2 apo for e-mount?
I'm curious how it compares to the Voigtländer which, while corrected for the stack differences, makes compromises on image quality to achieve a compact size.
