Jos Tesseract wrote:
Thrice: EXIF data says 2.8 for the first pic and 1.7 for the second.
:P
What lens?
Zeiss ZM C-Sonnar 50/1.5, the aperture is guessed as there is no electrical/mechanical linkage between aperture of the lens and the M9. It guesses using a sensor on the front of the body in combination with the light meter in the camera. Easily misread if you exposure lock/recompose or if you get fingerprints on the little sensor on the front etc.
Typically I prefer rough Zeiss bokeh but sometimes it gets too bad. It seems that Contax Makro-Planar T* 2.8/60 is one of the worst in this. This image was shoot at f/4:
This little lens combines the "Zeiss 3D look" with a very nice and smooth bokeh. In my opinion it's even better than the Distagon 35/2 (which I also own).
Makten wrote:
Zeiss Biogon-C 35/2.8 @ f/2.8 on M8...
...
This little lens combines the "Zeiss 3D look" with a very nice and smooth bokeh. In my opinion it's even better than the Distagon 35/2 (which I also own).
Have you also tried Biogon 35mm f2? I believe that Biogons are better then Distagons for SLR. I wonder though, how much better or how would you describe the advantage of one over the other.
Edgars Kalnins wrote:
Have you also tried Biogon 35mm f2? I believe that Biogons are better then Distagons for SLR. I wonder though, how much better or how would you describe the advantage of one over the other.
No, I haven't tried the Biogon 35/2. It's probably much like the 35/2.8.
What's better with the Biogon-C compared to the Distagon, is that it draws even more "3D" and gives a smoother bokeh. The transition behind the plane of sharpness is just phenomenal. The details just melts away in butter, while contrast is still high.
The Distagon is "truer" and punchier. But the bokeh is also harsher. I'll probably have to to an A/B test.
