rji2goleez wrote:
Here's your example. The first image is a 50mm makro-planar (in keeping with this thread) on a NEX-7 so it's a 1.6x crop or 80mm equivalent. The second image is the 70-200/2.8 II with 1.4 extender on the OM-D for a 560mm equivalent. Critical focus is very thin and I probably could have done better but considering this is handheld, I was glad to get it this close!
thanks Bob, looks sharp to me! And the optical quality looks very good as far as I can tell from this small image. I want to use it for wildlife- even tougher to get focus... is that a bad idea? MF off course, that is what the Telyt is about. Wonder if the OM-D is "good" enough to deliver the lens's abilities, your image looks very promising.
freezeis: love the image of the woman in her wonderful orange dress/coat albeit the rough surrounding as a juxtaposition
gary: you really cought the intens colours of those sea creatures well!
cyra - Your issue will be the speed with which you can achieve sharp focus. The OM-D's tracking ability has been touted as one of it's weaknesses but for static subjects, it's fine. I don't know if I would use it for wildlife but if I did, I might try the native mount 100-300mm lens. With the crop factor, that's 600mm equivalent with AF.
Perfect Z as usual :-)
Great Shot Bob .. the question which of Olympus and nex7
do you like the most? Will you keep both?
frezeiss: Really nice as usual
zhangyue: love your pictures. .. good sharpness and fine clarity in your photos
Gary Clennan. Great colors
I thought about that too, but it is said to be just a soso lens (as most long lenses in the affordable range). The Telyt is a stellar lens and always will be MF no matter what I mount it on. I just compared it to a Nikon 80-200/2.8 on a video camera. A differnce like night and day! I can still get that AF lens on top though if I feell I really need AF, we'll see.
I think I need to microadjust my lens. I wasn't getting quite the focus results I wanted using the regular in-camera focus assist, but I'm now getting the right results after I began using LiveView to focus.
So I now have both the 50MP and planar. Went out with the planar for the first time today. I have mixed feelings about it so far. The main problem I have with it is that the bokeh can be so nervous and just ugly, not only at close distances. I feel both my 35/1.4 and 85P are better in this regard. When the background's right, it can give nice character to a photo though.
Might as well post a shot from the planar (child of a friend):
So I now have both the 50MP and planar. Went out with the planar for the first time today. I have mixed feelings about it so far. The main problem I have with it is that the bokeh can be so nervous and just ugly, not only at close distances. I feel both my 35/1.4 and 85P are better in this regard. When the background's right, it can give nice character to a photo though.
It's interesting to hear your perspective on the 50 Planar. I have the 50MP as well but looking for a lens with more character. I was tending toward the 85 Planar since I don't have anything in an 85mm but the 50mm focal length is more in line with my shooting.
In the meantime, I visited this area, new to me, along the Mississippi River south of the Twin Cities. I think I will explore it more this fall. The first with the 100MP, the others with the 21 Distagon.
rji2goleez wrote:
It's interesting to hear your perspective on the 50 Planar. I have the 50MP as well but looking for a lens with more character. I was tending toward the 85 Planar since I don't have anything in an 85mm but the 50mm focal length is more in line with my shooting.
Yes 50 and 85mm are quite different focal lengths. In terms of rendering I prefer the 85 planar so far.
The 50 planar is very different from the makro-planar. It has much thinner DOF at the same aperture, is soft closeup and gives me ugly bokeh more often than the MP. As a result of this the planar can also give you surprising results with a certain character which makes the MP look more 'clinical'.
Here's another shot with the 50P which would've looked very different if it was taken with the 50MP:
Jochenb wrote:
Yes 50 and 85mm are quite different focal lengths. In terms of rendering I prefer the 85 planar so far.
The 50 planar is very different from the makro-planar. It has much thinner DOF at the same aperture, is soft closeup and gives me ugly bokeh more often than the MP. As a result of this the planar can also give you surprising results with a certain character which makes the MP look more 'clinical'.
Here's another shot with the 50P which would've looked very different if it was taken with the 50MP:
great shot and comment!
i don't have 85P, so can't give any comment. but i have canon 85L and really like it. i don't see myself replacing the 85L to the zeiss counterpart, eventhough i'm familiar with zeiss colors and contrast. 85L is just good enough for me.
about 50P, i love how it renders bokeh while it may be considered ugly by other users.
you have to understand its characteristic to like it.because just like above comment, shots from 50P can be surprising.
First with ZF35 and other two with ZF21...
