I have been admiring images taken with the Coastal Optics 60/4 UV-VIS-IR Macro during the spring. USD 4.500 is a lot of money, for me even a giant pile of money...
So, are there any reasonably good options?
I would like to have a lens in the normal range with as little CA as possible. No lateral and a minimum of longitudinal CA. I don't crave for good UV or IR performance but I would like a lens in this focal length capable of those nice clean colors and absence of CA causing blur when converting to B&W.
I, too, share the challenge of finding the almost as good, at less price, lens.
Part of the cost of the Coastal Optics 60/4 is the extended wavelength coverage. "APO" typically means there are 3 color (wavelength) crossings where there is null chromic aberrations. There are no "APO" labeled 50ish lenses that I am aware of, but the Leica M 50/1.4 ASPH has true floating elements, as does the M 75 Summicron ASPH, and represent the best in class, state of the art optics, in my opinion, but they won't fit a dSLR.
My thought is the Leica R 60/2.8 Macro, with the possible upcoming Zeiss ZE 50/2 Makro as a contender. The ZE, by the way, also has (if like the ZF version) a true floating element design.
Or Leica APO Macro Elmarit 100; it's a bit long for a "normal range" lens, but it's probably about the shortest extremely-well-Apo-corrected lens you can find short of highly exotic lenses like the Coastal Optics. I don't own a Leica 60 macro to compare to the 100, but judging from Leica's published MTFs, the 60mm may still have a bit of CA (and not nearly as good performance wide-open) compared to virtually none for the 100mm.
It seems as the Elmarit-R 60/2.8 Macro and the Zeiss ZF 50/2 Macro could be possible options.
The images I have seen from the ZF50/2 have been OK and so are the Elmarit images. I saw some longitudinal CA in the ZF images (at Photozone) while the small images available at pBase didn't show this for the Elmarit. Do you think I got the right impression or am I just lured by the small and low contrast images at pBase?
The Coastal Optics 60/4 UV-VIS-IR Macro sounds like the ultimate lens for sharpness and color quality in it's given focal range. It seems on paper anyway to be even better corrected for color error than the extraordinary Zeiss Superachromat lenses. The magnificent but now defunct Alpa 35mm cameras had a 50mm Macro Switer 1.8 and 1.9 lens that was apochromatic and had this extraordinary color richness and 3d quality in the images lensed with them, particularly when used in conjunction with a tripod and Kodachrome 25. Never to be rivalled in my opinion.
dave chilvers wrote:
I have a 50 f2 summi, superb lens but from your post I gather you want some closefocus?
I also have a Voigtlander 40 f2 ultron, a great lens and very small,(...)
Thank you Dave. I don't like the Voigtländer ver much. It's an aspherical thing witch often renders OOF backgrounds not at all to my taste.
The Summicron. Hmm. Maybe. I have one in a drawer where it has been sleeping since I had this idea about "fast and wide open" for some time. I'll exercise it a little and see what I think.
knodl wrote:
(...) now defunct Alpa 35mm cameras had a 50mm Macro Switer 1.8 and 1.9 lens that was apochromatic and had this extraordinary color richness and 3d quality in the images lensed with them,(...)
The Switar lenses are very nice and the build quality is like... well, Swiss made. I have a small cine lens, Kern Switar 26/1.1 macro. Beautiful rendering.
I think I'll have a look at those 50mm Macro Switars. Expensive stuff I guess.
jjlphoto wrote:
Those Alpa bodies had an extremely short flange to film distance, shortest of any 35mm SLR. Will be next to impossible to mount on a modern SLR. (...)
Thank you for the heads up.
I did some research on the Alpa stuff and the short register distance doesn't prohibit impressive prices. I found a couple of lenses converted to M-mount which would make them suitable for my G1 (if not for my wallet).
I also vaguely remember something about a faster version in C-mount. Gotta love those Switar DOF-scales... I'll see what I can found. For a DSLR camera maybe the Leica Elmarit-R 60/2.8 Macro still is a good option, for a long-term stop-gap at least.
Jonas B wrote:
I would like to have a lens in the normal range with as little CA as possible. No lateral and a minimum of longitudinal CA. I don't crave for good UV or IR performance but I would like a lens in this focal length capable of those nice clean colors and absence of CA causing blur when converting to B&W.
The Zeiss 50/2 makro ZF fits your description rather perfectly.There's basically zero distortion. It's also one of the sharpest lenses, corner-to-corner, ever made. The bokeh is good, though not incredible.
I don't think it's an APO, and have no idea about color accuracy, but I see no appreciable CA in even the worst conditions. (judging by eye, and not lab specs. I haven't done any B&W conversion with this lens so....)
I'm using one on my 5D, and find it hard to take it off. I have no desire for the ZE, when it comes out, as I'm a "fully manual" kind of guy, esp at 50mm.
I have a feeling the above test was done with a bad copy. Other, dependable sites show the Zeiss to be nearly perfect. Mine certainly is (I have a nice collection of bricks shots )
Cableaddict wrote:
The Zeiss 50/2 makro ZF fits your description rather perfectly. (...)
I don't think it's an APO, and have no idea about color accuracy, but I see no appreciable CA in even the worst conditions. (judging by eye, and not lab specs. I haven't done any B&W conversion with this lens so....)
From what I saw at Photozone it looks good. Do you have any experience from the Elmarit 60/2.8? The price difference is around €600-800 as the Elmarit can be found used without problems.
Cableaddict wrote:
I have a feeling the above test was done with a bad copy. Other, dependable sites show the Zeiss to be nearly perfect. Mine certainly is (I have a nice collection of bricks shots )
The MTF curves were obtained directly from the Zeiss and Leica websites. No reason to believe they are anything less than accurate. Hard to believe there are sites more dependable than the Zeiss and Leica sites.