Some random test shots with the 120A/4 macro. These are basically straight from the camera after a light capture sharpening and resizing...no color/saturation boosting:
David McCaugha wrote:
Jim, Thanks for sharing, I'm interested in your opinion of the 35mm, Did you correct any distortion in the red doors shot? How about some 100% crops, center and corners? Any expierience shifting with it?
Dave
Dave i did not do any distortion correction in the red doors shot.There is a little pin cushion distortion in the center.I just straightened the image and cropped for a clean image.All the PP was done in DPP.I have only had the lens for a few days,besides being only f3.5(does not bother me if you are using it mostly for landscapes, etc) it seems to be extremely sharp in the center and the edges seem to hold up well on my 5D.Maybe others could chime in on this, i have not done much 35mm shooting.
Here are a few samples of a courthouse.I am pretty sure it was @f11 iso 100 on my 5D Processed in DPP with 3 on the sharpening slider.No CA or distortion correction
-Jim
Jim, Thanks again for the great insight into this lens. I'm trying to decide between it and a Nikon 35PC. Looks very close, but I might just have to give it to the Nikon for convenience.
Dave
I've had a 645 for about 3 years
I have
120 f4 Micro A
35 f3,5 N -also marked with a C
80 f2.8 N
110 2.8 N
150 3.5 N -also marked with a C
Extension tube set
I also have a Bronica SQai with another 4 lenses, bellows and extension tube.
That adapter is my next purchase
My 80/2.8N is also marked with a C. I thought that all of them are. On my 80/2.8N, the "C" is relatively dim, but it's certainly there, a double-space after "SEKOR". I don't have a 100/2.8N.
Jim.
P.S. lots of beautiful photos in this thread - keep 'em coming.
My 80/2.8N is also marked with a C. I thought that all of them are. On my 80/2.8N, the "C" is relatively dim, but it's certainly there, a double-space after "SEKOR". I don't have a 100/2.8N.
Jim.
P.S. lots of beautiful photos in this thread - keep 'em coming.
My 80mm f/2.8 also has the N and C.... Great pics guys.
Jim Schemel wrote:
Dave i did not do any distortion correction in the red doors shot.There is a little pin cushion distortion in the center.I just straightened the image and cropped for a clean image.All the PP was done in DPP.I have only had the lens for a few days,besides being only f3.5(does not bother me if you are using it mostly for landscapes, etc) it seems to be extremely sharp in the center and the edges seem to hold up well on my 5D.Maybe others could chime in on this, i have not done much 35mm shooting.
Here are a few samples of a courthouse.I am pretty sure it was @f11 iso 100 on my 5D Processed in DPP with 3 on the sharpening slider.No CA or distortion correction
-Jim
Yakim,
are you able to post some good examples of the affect that a Mirex adapter can produce.I have seen some shift shots but at times its hard to see the affect it produces
-Jim
buggz2k wrote:
Are these lenses better than any L glass?
A lot better, or slightly?
I just got a 5DMkII, and I want some really good glass.
No...Most medium format lenses tend to be a bit softer than their smaller format cousins but there are exceptions to the rule. The M645 45mm f2.8 N is noticably softer than any 35mm format 50mm lens I have tried but the M645 80mm f2.8 N is easily as sharp as my Zeiss 85mm f1.4 Planar T*, its smaller and lighter and can actually have nicer bokeh too because it focuses closer.
I have also tried the M645 150mm f3.5 N and the M645 210mm f4 N...Was'nt that impressed with either of them for what I paid for them so I sold them on. I also had a chance to try the M645 35mm f3.5 N and it was'nt bad but my Nikon 35mm f1.4 Ai-S leaves it for dead.
The M645 80mm f2.8 N was my first M645 lens and its now the only one I consider worth keeping. I really like all the shots in this thread taken with the
M645 200mm f4 APO though and I'd say that its probably a keeper too but of course it will be a lot more expensive than the 80/2.8 or the 80/1.9.
