cogitech wrote:
The CV 125/2.5 doesn't have an AF confirm chip, it has a full implementation of the Canon EF mount, with full auto aperture, EXIF, perfect metering, (and yes, AF confirm works just like every other Canon EF lens).
that was what i was trying to say, but i guess you're the expert here
AhamB wrote:
I haven't seen any mention either that these lenses will have an electric aperture and all that (support for shutter priority, etc.). If they won't, it will be positive in the sense that we won't have to pay a big premium for the EF mount, but of course it will offer few advantages then (only no adapter issues, basically).
if there is no EF chip, then adapting the nikon ai-s mount will be the easiest way to get AF confirm, no?
But the more I think about it, the more it doesn't make any sense for them to release these lenses in "dumb" EF mount.
I'm 99% sure they will have full auto aperture, EXIF, etc. just like the 125/2.5 and all the ZEs (which they also make).
I agree with you, Paul - it wouldn't make any sense to release a "dumb" EF mount. I wouldn't bother buying the dumb EF version when I already have the Nikon mount and I think they would lose out on others in the same situation I am in. Now, if I can get the real deal EF mount without having to pay much more than the Nikon then I will be swapping out
Here are a couple of random samples from my SL 20mm f3.5 on the D700.
These were just snapshots taken with the D700 handheld while walking around town. Can't say I am complaining about image quality and am very satisfied with the performance of the Skopar.
I have not had the chance to post process them - just marked up and cropped to show center/corner performance. The full size image was resized for the web.
The CV SL/40 certainly offers very good image quality, but I'm not so keen on the ergonomics and think the Oly 40 is probably better in that regard.
The aperture ring on the CV always seems awkwardly close to the body and with too little profle to easily get a purchase. It would be much better if it had a higher serrated profile or if it had a tab or a raised section like the Rokkor 40/2 M (I'm even thinking of a Heath Robinson solution). While there is no problem shifting it, it is not as comfortable or as easy to turn as the front mounted aperture ring on Olympus and Leica and CV M lenses.
wolfloid wrote:
The CV SL/40 certainly offers very good image quality, but I'm not so keen on the ergonomics and think the Oly 40 is probably better in that regard.
The aperture ring on the CV always seems awkwardly close to the body and with too little profle to easily get a purchase. It would be much better if it had a higher serrated profile or if it had a tab or a raised section like the Rokkor 40/2 M (I'm even thinking of a Heath Robinson solution). While there is no problem shifting it, it is not as comfortable or as easy to turn as the front mounted aperture ring on Olympus and Leica and CV M lenses. ...Show more →
None of that will be an issue with electronic aperture control.
pascal03 wrote:
Here are a couple of random samples from my SL 20mm f3.5 on the D700.
These were just snapshots taken with the D700 handheld while walking around town. Can't say I am complaining about image quality and am very satisfied with the performance of the Skopar.
I have not had the chance to post process them - just marked up and cropped to show center/corner performance. The full size image was resized for the web.
weekh wrote:
woow, that's very good and totallly different from what I get from my adapted copy shooting on the 5D2. What's your aperture?
The first one may have been f3.5 or close to it and the other two were at f8.0.
Wide open, this lens performs quite well especially on the D700 where high ISO really is quite good.
Those results equal what I am getting from my lens, but I had to shim the adapter to optimize it for the lens. I suspect many of the problems are in fact, related to poorly made adapters. The EF lens will be very good, I suspect that it will be better than the Olympus...
rachp wrote:
Oh no... What body are you using it on? I don't seem to have any handling problems
with mine.
I`m using it on the 5d2/1dsmk3. The aperture ring is fairly tight and same size as the main tube plus close to the body. Not very well designed at all really.
The focussing is superb with a really great feel and feedback. Maybe I`ll try a heafty rubber band around the ring, just anything to give me something to actually grab hold of and let me know I`m on the ring.
A pancake lens would be great for travel and pocketing. Now, if Canon would only build a RF style body to compete with the EP-1 and GF-1. Think about it, APS-C, EF mount, and a real view finder! That would be awesome!
Makten wrote:
Drill a hole on the aperture ring and attach a tab.
Like the Leica M series have?
Anyway, I`ve discovered why the aperture ring was a touch tight, it was the adapter! stuck the adapter off of my Nikon 55 2.8 micro on it and the ring is a lot sweeter. The lugs on the back of the lens was rubbing hard on the adapter but the second one is fine. So! I sorted out a rubber band ( from the many that come with our post) and it really does make a huge difference and luckily our sorting office use red bands so it doesn`t look that out of place.What makes the Ultron so nice on my cameras is that I have the Eg-s screen in the 5d2 and the split image screen in my mk3 that darken the viewfinder so f2 does make a difference over my contax 35 2.8 lens.
A thing I`ve always noticed is that the 40 ultron has always focussed beyond infinity which doesn`t bother me because I usually use live view, however the AF confirm adapter I`m using is very close to live view anyway.
Am I right in thinking that if a lens focusses past infinity the only draw back can be that it wont focus quite as close as one that nails infinity at the stop?
please share.