philber wrote:
Well, live and learn! I now know that my lens can be sharp wide open. There are still some factors that I can't seem to understand just yet. There is massive focus shift when I adjust the FL. There seems to be significant focus shift when I stop down as well, and some colour shift between wide open and f:5.6. It also seems siginificantly less sharp than my ZEs at infinity for cityscape/landscape.
Philippe, I'm pretty sure that there is no focus shift on this lens (any modern lens slower than f/2.8 should not have - modern = made in past or current century, not earlier...).
And yes 35-70 is not parfocal, when you zoom you need to refocus. At times when people used to shoot for 15cm x 10cm (6"by4") many zooms were considered as parfocals... this far I have not seen ANY zoom lens being really parfocal with modern cameras and pixel peeping, no matter how much this feature has been advertised.
If your 35-70 is significantly less sharp than ZEs, I would suspect either:
- you did not focus but instead trusted the focus stop, on C/Y zooms it typically only works in long end of zoom (and maybe not even there, if you have typical too thick adapter it won't work even there)
- your 35-70 is somehow faulty
At infinity lanscape shooting stopped down to f/5.6-8 there is very little differences between good lenses in sharpness. There are some micro contrast differences (depends to which ZE you compare to). I have not directly compared to any of the ZE, but last summer I shoot C/Y 1.7/50 and 35-70 @ 50mm and results were pretty similar far objects (e.g. landscape), 35-70 being in some photos even slightly better looking (my subjective opinion). And the C/Y 1.7/50 seems to be almost as good as 1.4/50ZE as long as closed down to f/4 or more, major difference being the shape of aperture when both lenses closed down (yes, has nothing to do with sharpness).
Thank you for that information, Samuli.
At f5.6-f8 the 35-70 should be noticably (significantly) better than the much venerated CY 50mm f1.7 in the corners - one of the main reasons for purchase. The prime falls away fast in the key area of micro contrast (small detail rendition is my definition for this term - general but useful to me) once past the far edges.
There 'should' be very little MTF-influenced performance differences in these two lenses overall - the zoom will likely show better contour definition, which I think is a key factor in the 3D effect so obvious in images in this thread. Unlike most zooms, the 35-70 is fabulous at its far end, the corners just a little short of its 50mm performance - perhaps a characteristic of the unfashionable slow speed and 2x FL configuration.
I almost made the same mistake when searching for this lens. Yashica looks fairly similar, but the price tag should give you a clear indication of which lens you are truly looking at. I got the CY 35-70 this week, but sadly I'm still awaiting the adapter. I bought two adapters to try out, one from Fotodiox ($27) & the other a Kindai ($160). Hopefully one will work with the 5D without having to hack off part of the lens mount.
Found the lens mint at a WA camera store online named Kenmore. Super nice and accommodating CS, highly recommended. I may purchase the 5D from them as well. Pics from my 40D + 35ZE. Is it just me or is it really tough focusing indoors?
40D + 35-70 + indoors, I never tried the 3 factors together, but I would be surprised if one found focus other than challenging. Moving on to a 5D plus MF will really help IMHO
Actually, I was using the 40D + 35ZE. But I think the true issue is my focusing screen is not as effective in low lighting. I will probably go with an all Matte Screen for the 5D, and see how that goes.
I have the Split image, surrounded by a microsprism from Katz optics. I find the microprism part to be the best indication of focus. The problem with that it is only in a small part in the center spot.
This is an interesting lens. There was a bit of a learning curve when I started using it this afternoon. The manual came with the lens, but readings is no fun compared to trial & error. I started taking pictures about 17yrs ago with an old Konica and MF lens, and since then I've been a lazy AF Zoom user. It will probably be a while until I master MF, but I'm sure the journey will be fun getting there.
Received the Fotodiox Consumer adapter, and I think it might not be allowing me to reach infinity on my 40D. I hope it's just the adapter and not my lens. I'll report back after comparing it to the super deluxe Kindai adapter.
Wonderful shots rsolti. I can't wait to get a proper focusing screen so I can start shooting with this lens regularly. I'm guessing you used the macro fx in shot 3 & 5?
Anden wrote:
Alot of great shots in the thread. It is a great lens. Has a regular spot in my camera bag.
A
+1... My *only* gripe is that the barrel rotates, making filter usage a PITA. Otherwise, it is simply fantastic. A zoom with a great macro feature is very handy in a small bag.
I really like that last one - looks good vertical - I've gone back to that one a few times - height / depth perspective - shadow contrast - empty street - thanks for the history update - adds contrast!
