I took a few into the sun with tree when the clouds cleared today, maybe I`m doing something wrong but I`m seeing just what I would expect wide open with the sun in the frame.
you2 wrote:
So the question is how does this lens compare to the 35f2 ze
I have both, I really like my Zeiss but it is the ZF version not ZE. With my copies the Zeiss has a little bit more vignetting at F2 than the Voigtlander. The Voigtlander appears to me a tad sharper at F2. After that I find no noticable differences. Though the Zeiss gives a 3D look.
The difference for me comes in the FOV 35-40 isn't much but for landscape I prefer the Zeiss and people the Voigtlander.
I think that there was such wide dynamic range in my shot that it really showed the phenomenon as much as possible.
Who knows what it would be called, it looks like coma to me because of the way the light bleeds unevenly, rather than just veiling. It almost looks serrated..
Ok I just looked at mine again and I am SURE it is coma.
Looking at the point lights between a few of the flowers and the fork between two branches I can clearly see the 'boomerang' shape of coma around the point.
The best place to see it is at the point where two larger branches cross over roughly located at the top right 3rds intersection. Right in the outer crux there is a strong point with the dark branches on either side which shows the coma wings.
As for the odd effect, it must be caused by flowers further out of focus and blown out causing coma to overlap on the visible branches and flowers.
Empire wrote:
Ok I just looked at mine again and I am SURE it is coma.
Looking at the point lights between a few of the flowers and the fork between two branches I can clearly see the 'boomerang' shape of coma around the point.
The best place to see it is at the point where two larger branches cross over roughly located at the top right 3rds intersection. Right in the outer crux there is a strong point with the dark branches on either side which shows the coma wings.
As for the odd effect, it must be caused by flowers further out of focus and blown out causing coma to overlap on the visible branches and flowers.
Certainly an unusual effect, I`m not so up on all the technical terms for lens aberrations but I would want to shoot some other stuff to confirm what was happening. That shot of mine that you posted here was quite impressive flare wise when you consider the sun was directly in the frame. I know a lot of you guys and girls like to shoot wide open and it`s not a thing I usually do so haven`t gotten into the problems that occur.
jcolwell wrote:
Dave, my Ultron goes well past infinity on my 5D as well. I'm using a relatively new style of adapter for the Ultron that doesn't have the little square tab to lift the lock pin that older generic ones have, rather it has a lever-spring lock pin mechanism. I just tried the Ultron with the old square-tab adapter, and it gets infinity at infinity. Here's shots of the two adapter styles: the new one at left and in the second photo, and old one on the right and in the last photo. Please ignore the IQ, as I cranked the levels to show detail in the lever-spring mechanism. I'll keep the old adapter on the Ultron from now on. Jim. ...Show more →
Jim
Put me right please? if the lens focusses past infinity is the adapter too thin or too thick?
I'm pretty effin impressed by the ultron's flare performance. Its probably has the best flare performance of any lens I've ever had the pleasure of pointing at the sun
I cut off the first 4.8 mm one. I joined two 142mm x 2.5mm ties, tightened them up gradually ( unevenly)whilst positioning the two nodules just where I wanted them. I already knew where I wanted the top one from before and positioned the bottom one so that I can A. use the top one to push and stop down after focussing and the bottom one to push to open up when needed. In that position I find that when I turn the camera vertical my fingers drop on at least one of the nodules for aperture control. The 2.5 mm ties are not quite as secure as the 4.8 mm one but Heck this is not a hammer but a camera lens and the smaller ties certainly are more in keeping with a camera than the larger 4.8 one.
When I look at the camera with the lens facing me and at F2 the nodules are at 2 o`clock and 8 o`clock.
Some ties are made 203mm x 2.5 and are not long enough so using the two x142mm not only gave me the length I needed but also the two positions that you were talking about.
I got my ties from e bay in the UK so no doubt they will be easy for you to get hold of but if for any reason you did have a problem then just pm me your address in the States and I`ll post a few over.
dave chilvers wrote:
Just out of interest the Nikon HN-3 hood looks like it might fit the bill and available from China for a few dollars post free.
Dave
The Nikon metal lens hood arrived from heavystar in the US (HN-3) and it fits the bill a treat. It also came with a lens cap that goes on the end of the hood. I did order a Standard metal hood @ 52mm from them and that also works, has a smaller footprint obviously but because it`s more or less the same size as the barrel it doesn`t look quite as nice as the Nikon hood which is more in line with what you would expect with a slight angle outwards.
The happypage v5 adapter arrived today and infinity is at infinity and with the micro adjust set central it appears to very close to the live view in focus. Nice to have the correct exif data as well.
Dave, thanks for the info! looks like I will have to fork out for better adapters
Not for some time though, I kind of lost my source of income at a kind of very bad time
On a posi note, I got a HN-3 as well and it is a nice size on the 40
I hope that your transaction with Heavystar went smoothly... They sold me a Rokkor described as pretty much mint which turned out to be full of fungus and, as I found out last week when I opened it up for a clean, there is haze BETWEEN the glued front doublet... Grrr. And they also would not refund me more than 20% of the price or pay for return shipping. Pretty un-impressed to say the least!!
I had a go at getting more out of them through erghbay and the end result was about $45 out of the $190 I paid. I thought I could fix it pretty easily and it was WAY sharper than my old copy so I was pretty adamant about getting a 50% refund and ending up with a reasonable bargain.
Unfortunately as I said that turned out to be the wrong choice!
What I have now is a very sharp lens with muddy contrast that just can't be PP'd out.
The worst part was that they completely denied it even after seeing photos and were pretty nasty about the whole affair. I guess that's ebay!
Incidentally I also just got a 'Mint' canon 28-70/3.5-4.5 II with unmentioned oily blades
and with the micro adjust set central it appears to very close to the live view in focus. Nice to have the correct exif data as well.