I have had my eye on this lens for a while. The MTF's were some of the best I had ever seen. So, I finally got one. Below are the MTF's and a couple of images, one macro one not. Both images were shot at f4 (I think ... could have bee 2.8 or 5.6). The wind was blowing so the macro shot has some movement blur. Both images processed just a tad in DPP.
Edited by jonboring on May 29, 2007 at 12:24 PM GMT
Jon, you really need to update your lens profile because this one is a keeper . It will not disappoint you too if you use it as portrait lens. The bokeh is smooth and beautiful, as you can see from the MTFs that how close those two lines are.
LeSong - I owe you to thanks for this lens! Son posted an email some time back about the lens and your experience with it so I checked out the MTF's and noticed they were extraordinary. And yes I was thinking it would be a great portrait lens to.
I had this lens left over from pre-digital. It sat in a cupboard for about 7 years while I was using Nikon. So it was one of the first lenses I used when I switched to 5D. I just couldn't believe what I was seeing. That's when I started selling my MF gear. I know my 5D/Makro-Planar combination will blow me away every time I use it. Fantastic portrait lens if you want to see the raw truth. Probably my second desert island lens after the CZ 35 F1.4.
jonboring wrote:
LeSong - I owe you to thanks for this lens! Son posted an email some time back about the lens and your experience with it so I checked out the MTF's and noticed they were extraordinary. And yes I was thinking it would be a great portrait lens to.
You are welcome, Jon. It is really a good time to pick one up considering the rock bottom price. I paid over $1000 for my first copy a couple of years back .
That's one of the ugliest most beautiful pictures I've ever seen, Richard. Nicely done! And if I might ask, what's a decent price for a C/Y 100/2.8 Makro? They run anywhere from $700 to $1000 in Korea, which is most likely a bit expensive.
Edit: Also, I've been thinking of picking up a macro lens recently for flowers and such. I've been looking at what Zeiss has to offer, but have found very few opinions on how the 60 makro, 60 makro-c, and 100 makro compare quality-wise. It's not absolutely necessary to go 1:1, but size is a factor; I'd like to have a macro as kind of a go everywhere lens and thus want it to be as unnoticeable as possible in the camera bag. I'm thinking the 60 makro is the one for me, but how does the compact version compare quality-wise?
Edited by StevenPA on May 30, 2007 at 07:23 PM GMT
Haha - lucky the sun was out because my hand was quaking in the presence of his majesty. Kind of him to give me 10 seconds of his valuable time ;) Actually he got quite friendly as I kept dropping cherry tomatos on the deck for him. He was a big fat bugger about 3 foot long with great pointy toes, but he moved fast for those tomatos. My beloved made the mistake of painting her toenails red and from then on he kept going for them and she would jump on a chair and squeal, to my great enjoyment. It was sort of him and me against her in the end. We had an understanding. But there's no question that we were there with his permission, not the other way round.
I bought my Makro-Planar new in the late 90's for a studio job. Paid full UK retail: £1100. I bought a used one for about £500-600 a year ago. Now you should do better.
Edited by brainiac on May 30, 2007 at 10:25 AM GMT
. It will not disappoint you too if you use it as portrait lens. The bokeh is smooth and beautiful, as you can see from the MTFs that how close those two lines are.
Nicely done! And if I might ask, what's a decent price for a C/Y 100/2.8 Makro? They run anywhere from $700 to $1000 in Korea, which is most likely a bit expensive.