Ok, something a bit different. All of these are panos shot with the Gigapan Epic Pro:
My thoughts on the Gigapan:
+Works flawlessly
+Great battery life (I emptied two 5DII batteries while it did not run out of juice).
+Easy to configure and use
-Big and heavy
-Primitive stitching software
-Difficult to compose images when you don't see the big picture
Ultimately what limits its usefulness is its size - it's nothing something you would bring along on a hike. It doesn't fit in a reasonably sized camera bag and it weighs over 3 kg.
LizzieShepherd wrote:
Thanks for your suggestions and help, Charles.
Unfortunately there's a problem with my webspace where I upload example images at present so I can't show the reference shots I took at 1.4, 1.8 and 2.2 but hoping they'll sort the problem before too long.
However, I did experiment a bit more and basically what I see in Liveview is exactly what I get in terms of image result and if you focus with the DOF button engaged, then you can see the image gradually sharpen as you close the lens down by each 1/3 stop - by 2.2 it's very sharp and more contrasty than it is wide open. To be fair, I think this is probably consistent with many of the comments and reviews I've seen on this site.
I've always been keen to try some Zeiss glass and you can't rent it here in the UK to the best of my knowledge, so the 50mm seemed the cheapest way in. I do buy and sell lenses a fair bit depending on my needs at the time and also because it does work out more economically than renting. I'd love to keep all of them but I have a rule that if I want to buy some new camera gear, the funding has to come from something related! ;-)
I may get shot down in flames for saying this on this forum ;-) but although the Zeiss 50 1.4 is a super lens, beautifully made and lovely to use - I'm not seeing that it's producing significantly different results from a friend's Canon 50 1.8 - even if it is the most horrid plastic lens to use, it is actually remarkably good optically - the bokeh is not as nice as the Zeiss but in a full DOF landscape situation I'm struggling to see a major difference.
The lens I was most keen to try out was the 35 f2 - and had thoughts I might do so depending how I got on with the 50. Now I'm a bit undecided. But I'm open to suggestions, thoughts, etc....Show more →
Interesting point. You are right if you don't nail the exact focus does not matter how brilliant the lens is, it will never compare to lets say the Canon 50/1.8. The Canon 50/1.8 is a very good lens, and if do have a good copy that nails the AF, it will produce great results.
Also the 50/1.4 is more difficult to get the exact focus with MF, as Adam is suggesting and you have eluded to. But when the focus point is accurate, you get some amazing results. I would compare it somewhat to the 50L, depending on the copy can a very difficult lens to get accurate focus also.
Your experience is very interesting, as we learn to use Z* 50/1.4 and 85/1.4. I use MF with Eg-S screen 99% of the time. My technique for low light shots with the 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 at f 1.4 is to find MF, and then focus marginally back and forth quickly to make sure what does and does not come in range trying to find the mid point.
Another quick note, is make sure you test the MF and see if it is accurate. There are number of people that have had to place shims on their focusing screen. This is not the norm though.
Adam's technique is very interesting also. Maybe the liveview does not work as well.
The 35/2 is an excellent lens. I find it to be one of the best travel lenses. I think if you read through the threads the best lenses to begin with are: 21/2.8 35/2 50MP and 100MP. Each of these lenses will focus easily and will produce outstanding results.
Amazing shots Philippe! Just love the rendering.
Congratulations Luka. We are looking forward to some amazing shots
Caught me out, while posting my reply, you slipped in some brilliant images!!! Really like the last one.
Back after a while. Too much chatter for me, and then I need some relief. So I went camping
I backpacked into the High Sierra Nevada mountains recently with my 1Ds3 and used the ZE35 for this image captured along the McGee Creek trail. Then a self portrait atop Paiute Pass, 11,200 feet elevation.
Thanks for the kind words, John, Luka, Adam, Charles, Lizzie. Much appreciated.
Lizzie, this is the Panthéon in Paris. The building was planned and construction started as a royal church, but it was finished as a revolutionary hall of fame, so to speak. It is where France buries its famous sons and daughters. Although history has a way of mocking the relevance of "fame" over time. Sure, Victor Hugo and Alexandre Dumas are there, but also some irrelevant folks, and a few whose main forte was in butchering French people...
Philber - thanks for the info on the Pantheon - I really must make it over to Paris one day!
Charles and Adam
Thanks for your various comments regarding focus with the 50 1.4. I can see why you have the special focusing screen but my concern is that for most of my photography I am better off with the one I have which is lovely and bright and also has a grid which is handy. The brightness of the 1DSiii viewfinder is one of the things I love and as a glasses wearer it makes life a lot easier for me. I had a brief stint with an Oly 35 2.8 shift lens and had no probs focusing that through the viewfinder wide open but I guess that's the difference between 1.4 and 2.8! ;-(
My webspace still playing up so I've put a couple of photos on flickr to illustrate the performance wide open. Excuse the mundane subject matter. First is the whole picture and the second has 100% crops at 1.4, 1.8 and 2.2 - I focused (LV 10x) just to the left of the remote control on the cushion. I also did a similar test on some text on boxes with similar results but I won't bore you with those examples as well! I looked on the slrlensreview site and their findings seemed consistent with mine I'd say. http://www.flickr.com/photos/lizzieshepherd/4863872820/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/lizzieshepherd/4863253945/
Those are increadibly 3D, Philber! I like that you haven't sharpened them to death, which I think many others here do. While sharpening is essential, overdoing it will make you see that the screen is built up with pixels. In your shots, I can't see the individual pixels of my screen, but the images are still sharp. Well done!
@Lizzie: I suggest you try it at longer focus distance outside and see how you like it at f/1.4. Some people in this thread (Makten notably) have shown it can be used to nice effect.
AhamB wrote:
@Lizzie: I suggest you try it at longer focus distance outside and see how you like it at f/1.4. Some people in this thread (Makten notably) have shown it can be used to nice effect.
I'd just cut the pixel peeping. The full image posted definitely has the "Zeiss look", that you wouldn't get from Canikon or other lenses.
For really good sharpness, the Planar must be stopped down to f/2.8, at any distance. But it's very much better a few meters away than close up.
I don't think I've showed this particular picture in this thread. This is at f/2.8.
Makten wrote:
I'd just cut the pixel peeping. The full image posted definitely has the "Zeiss look", that you wouldn't get from Canikon or other lenses.
[...]
I don't think I've showed this particular picture in this thread. This is at f/2.8.
Thanks for the feedback - and yes I can see Makten's 2.8 image has a lovely transition from the 'in focus' tree to the soft background.
My main concern is just to understand how the lens performs and to be sure there's nothing 'wrong' with it - more because, as per one of my previous posts, I don't always keep my lenses long term and the last thing I want to do is sell something on that is not right.
I recently sold my medium format film scanner so I have a little bit to spend on lenses and I wanted to try a few different things, particularly Zeiss lenses since so many people seem to love them. Perhaps not a very scientific approach but I'm lucky enough to have a few nice lenses already and I enjoy seeing what else is out there when funds permit.
Great shots Philippe. I like the last one the best. I am assuming that no one is allowed to use a tripod in there, right?
Lizzie,
I use a Contax N 50/1.4 converted by Conurus on my 1ds3 with no special focus screen and have no focusing problems.The contax N 50 gives you AF with special microadjust feature in lens firmware that allows you to dial in very accurate AF focus.It also has a nice MF ring which is better than Cannon's but not quite as nice as the ZE. The lens formula is very similar to the ZE/ZF 501/4.
Yes, the 50/1.4 is better at distance when wide-open. 50/2 MP is an excellent lens without focus shift. You might want to try that one too.
