nehemiahphoto
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
hiepphotog wrote:
Have you tried the Fringer? With fast native lenses are coming together with eye-focus and face-recognition, it's hard to make a case for these lenses. From the pictures you sent me, I really like the N 85 draw, the best I have seen at 85 really. But if I have to manual focus it then I would rather go with the CZ 135 or Zeiss 135 APO.The fringer video shows quite quick AF speed, so I'm hopeful.
Hey Hiep! Sorry for the slow response. Essentially, I haven't had the answer/experience I would like with the lens. After shooting it with the Kipon which constantly and randomly froze my a7, so I returned it to Adorama. I ordered the Fringer. The adapter is well made and worked well, except, at least on an a7, because of the AF system, the AF was unusable, even on high contrast static subjects at 1.4 and f2. Customer service was excellent, and I sent the adapter back for a full refund. If I had an A7rii, I think the lens would be spectacular. I read the AF is better the the Contax N50, which is pretty decent if you watch their promo video. I also read it's faster than the 85L II. I believe it--even though the AF couldn't lock on at all, the lens went from infinity to MFD quickly.
As for if it's justified, that really depends. Purely on price, I don't think, realistically, I can "justify" a lens like the Leica 80 R versus a Canon 85L FD at nearly treble the price. Same with the Contax 85N versus a Batis. And honestly, I would not opt to use the N85 as a general 85mm lens--it's very good, optically but an Otus, Batis, or ZA 85 1.4 is a technically better lens. Having said all that, if you want a true portrait lens (like me), I found the N85 and Leica 80R to be the best portrait lenses, the Contax 100 Sonnar , ZA 135 1.8, and Mino 58 1.2 a tier just below, and the 85L and ZA 85 1.4 below these.
I find the N85 to have tremendously rich colors, especially greens, without looking overly saturated or unbalanced. It has a marvelously smooth drawing with a perfect balance of sharpness. The lens has fabulous bokeh and unlike Ziess' other Sonnar--reminds more of a Biotar or the Contarex 80 f2 I owned. It has the perfect fall off in sharpness in the corners and vignetting. I feel the tonal range in shadows/darks of the lens are especially nuanced and really give photos a specific and gorgeous dimensionality. Overall, I was shocked by how good the lens actually is for portraiture--files are seriously gorgeous. It's very good as a general lens too. So, not sure where that leaves you. I am a bit of a fiend when it comes to these lenses, and even though I can't actually use the 85N currently. I'll be keeping it. It's the only lens I have I can't actively shoot  I have noticed because of focus transition, and bokeh, even WO, everything feels like it's in the same photo. With the Canon 85L or ZA, the WO rendering can feel like the subject was pasted on a plan of bokeh. One isn't better, but I found the N85 distinct in this sense. I have read the CY and ZF 35 1.4's parallel this relationship, despite being spec'ed the same.
I actually have an Leice 80 R on order, so I'll shoot these two head to head and keep only one. But if you're going to need AF, I don't think there's a lens as good as the N85, though others are cheaper/smaller/more practical. I like the Batis files I have seen, and overall it's a better corrected lens, like the ZA, but it's looks like it lacks the magic of the N85.
|
. I'm not after smooth blob (Minolta/Sony 135 STF) nor am I after the typical neutral/busy Zeiss bokeh. This Contax seems to be the best of both worlds. AF is still a big question though. Do let me know when you have a chance to try it on the A7RII.
