I was on a walk to try out my manual focus capabilities with my new view finder magnifier from Pentax on my Canon 5DMKII.
Pictures of Poppies are trivial but nonetheless, I liked how the Vario-Sonnar 100-300 handled the red colors on my Canon camera.
rico wrote:
Looks like fine results from the T45, but if you give up, let me know! I need the 100 Jahre to mate with my Contax S2.
I am not a quitter..
I find it quite nice at infinity stopped down or close up wide open. In between at about 4-7m focus it is easy to miss for me personally. This lens is somewhat unforgiving of incorrect focus in my opinion - results end up on the uglier side of soft...
Bought a 5D from another FMer, coming from a APSC format, shooting with a full frame camera is refreshingly different, plus all the lenses in my collection have new characteristics.
This was one of my first shots on the new-to-me camera, testing the body with my 50/1.4 MMJ wide open. have a few CY lenses already, I wonder if it is worthwhile to go down the ZE/ZF route for other focal lengths or stay with CY glass.
If you need the semi-automatic features (electronic aperture & exif data) then you may want to go with the ZE's or the fully automatic Contax "N"s - if you're comfortable using manual aperture along with manual focus then many of the C/Y Contax lenses are a great choice. Unfortunately the prices on those have gone way up in recent years.
Does your 5D have a matte EE-s focus screen? - if not you may want install one - makes manual focus a lot easier.
Jabberwockt wrote:
have a few CY lenses already, I wonder if it is worthwhile to go down the ZE/ZF route for other focal lengths or stay with CY glass.
Congrats with your 5D -- it's the most affordable camera that does justice to Contax lenses. About Z* lenses: a couple of them overlap with the Contax line and with them there still are some small opticall differences. Perhaps the differences are the smallest in the 21/2.8 and that's probably why the C/Y version of that lens on the used market is as expensive or even more expensive than the ZE/ZF version. Overall there are more affordable models in the C/Y line (28/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.7, 50/1.4, 85/2.8, 100/3.5, 100/2.8, 35-70/3.4, 28-85/3.3-5.6, 80-200/4 I have all seen for good prices). The Z* line has mostly consists of the premium models, the 50/1.4 and 25/2.8 being the only exceptions and the 35/2 and 28/2 being in between perhaps.
FWIW, I find the ergonomics of C/Y lenses nicer than ZF (smoother and easier to use aperture ring, more pleasant focus ring that turns in the right direction).
lenticular11 wrote:
Three more from the last two weekends, all T* 50/1.4 on 5D Mk III
I have to learn sharpening better. Using Phillip Reeve's script but often that over-sharpens what I want. When I reduce the sharpening I get some aliasing...
Nice shots, like #1. Really like that lens rendering.
I've played with a couple of step size reduction scripts (/actions). I think it's really difficult to find the balance, and probably fall over the edge plenty. One good trick (if you dont already) is to add a duplicate layer before the last 1-2 sharpening/downsizing commands. Then you can either use transparency to let the lesser sharpened lower layer weigh more - or simply delete the top layer and use transparency on the lower ones.
@lenticular11: There is a dedicated Contax N thread where you can post your shots. This thread is dedicated to Contax/Yashica (manual) lenses -- i.e. a different system.
Regarding the treatment of oversharpening artifacts in PS: you can also use the history brush for that.
Wish me luck!!
