This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010C/Y Zeiss Image Post
p.52 #1C/Y Zeiss Image Post
C/Y 2.8 28mm MMJ vs AEJ
Took some shots today to compare the C/Y 28mm f 2.8 AEJ and MMJ. The weather was not the best therefore only f2.8-f5.6.
1. MMJ @ f2.8
_DSC7490 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
2. AEJ @ f2.8
_DSC7494 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
3. MMJ @ f4
_DSC7491 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
4. AEJ @ f4
_DSC7495 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
5. MMJ @ f5.6
_DSC7492 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
6. AEJ @ f5.6
_DSC7496 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
Took some shots today to compare the C/Y 28mm f 2.8 AEJ and MMJ. The weather was not the best therefore only f2.8-f5.6.
1. MMJ @ f2.8
_DSC7490 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr2. AEJ @ f2.8
_DSC7494 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr3. MMJ @ f4
_DSC7491 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr4. AEJ @ f4
_DSC7495 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr5. MMJ @ f5.6
_DSC7492 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr6. AEJ @ f5.6
_DSC7496 by Karl Ludwig, auf FlickrMar 02, 2019 at 04:47 AM
p.52 #2C/Y Zeiss Image Post
I love my C/Y 28/2.8 MMJ!
I don't think you're going to see an optical difference between an MM and AE lens unless you are looking at bokeh balls with the lens stopped down 1-2 stops. (Most) AE's will form a "Ninja Star" pattern in the aperture when stopped down 1-2 stops, and that disappears when stopped further. This is really the only difference, aside from (maybe) slightly better coatings on some MM versions and the fact that (last time I looked) Zeiss will only service MM's now.
I don't think you're going to see an optical difference between an MM and AE lens unless you are looking at bokeh balls with the lens stopped down 1-2 stops. (Most) AE's will form a "Ninja Star" pattern in the aperture when stopped down 1-2 stops, and that disappears when stopped further. This is really the only difference, aside from (maybe) slightly better coatings on some MM versions and the fact that (last time I looked) Zeiss will only service MM's now.
Mar 03, 2019 at 08:55 AM
p.52 #3C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Surprisingly the MMJ not only performs better in the corners but also in the center! Check the clock in the tower. At the apertures f2.8, f4 and f5.6 the MMJ is sharper with more details in the center. Also in the corners The MMJ copy performs better than AEJ copy at those apertures. Check the pictures with zoom 200%-500%!
Mar 03, 2019 at 09:07 AM
p.52 #4C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Ha! Maybe, but honestly, I would put it down to sample variation or even a slightly different focus position (you are manually focusing, so even a tiny difference could affect the sharpness.)
I did a LOT of research (I mean a LOT) when I got interested in C/Y lenses a few years ago, and the general consensus is that there were no optical changes to the lenses when they went from AE to MM. A few lenses *may* have had some very small tweaks, but the main difference is the aperture blade movement and more mature T* coatings. (Which could contribute to the better performance in your 28/2.8 test!)
If you ever want to treat yourself, pick up a C/Y 100mm f/2 Planar. Probably the "best" lens I have ever owned. (And I've owned many.) Critically sharp from edge to edge even wide open at f/2, with very little CA or fringing (only visible in extreme conditions), and all that Zeiss micro contrast, color and pop. Even the Bokeh is smoother and more pleasing than most "Zeiss" designed lenses. It is arguably the crown jewel of the C/Y line.
I did a LOT of research (I mean a LOT) when I got interested in C/Y lenses a few years ago, and the general consensus is that there were no optical changes to the lenses when they went from AE to MM. A few lenses *may* have had some very small tweaks, but the main difference is the aperture blade movement and more mature T* coatings. (Which could contribute to the better performance in your 28/2.8 test!)
If you ever want to treat yourself, pick up a C/Y 100mm f/2 Planar. Probably the "best" lens I have ever owned. (And I've owned many.) Critically sharp from edge to edge even wide open at f/2, with very little CA or fringing (only visible in extreme conditions), and all that Zeiss micro contrast, color and pop. Even the Bokeh is smoother and more pleasing than most "Zeiss" designed lenses. It is arguably the crown jewel of the C/Y line.
Mar 04, 2019 at 08:54 AM
p.52 #5C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Activatedfx wrote:
Ha! Maybe, but honestly, I would put it down to sample variation or even a slightly different focus position (you are manually focusing, so even a tiny difference could affect the sharpness.)
...
It seems I have the same 'sample variation' as Chris9 as my AE and MM 28's perform like his!
Ha! Maybe, but honestly, I would put it down to sample variation or even a slightly different focus position (you are manually focusing, so even a tiny difference could affect the sharpness.)
...
It seems I have the same 'sample variation' as Chris9 as my AE and MM 28's perform like his!
Mar 04, 2019 at 03:39 PM
p.52 #6C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Interesting. Well, as I said, there may have been some slight tweaks to some of the MM's. I've only purchased MM's, so I never had the opportunity to do a test! Enjoy!
Mar 04, 2019 at 04:49 PM
p.52 #7C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Activatedfx wrote:
Interesting. Well, as I said, there may have been some slight tweaks to some of the MM's. I've only purchased MM's, so I never had the opportunity to do a test! Enjoy!
I suspect that any lens that was in production for a long time has had a variety of changes to it's design and/or components, maybe due to material availability or manufacturing practices changing, so has effectively changed considerably whilst still being considered 'the same optical design'. Lenses like the Zuiko 1.4/50 comes to mind but various others which started with radioactive lens elements and then changed to non-radioactive elements are still considered to be the same optical design yet how can they be? I think changes creep in for a variety of reasons and are never reported or considered as changes to the optical design per se.
Interesting. Well, as I said, there may have been some slight tweaks to some of the MM's. I've only purchased MM's, so I never had the opportunity to do a test! Enjoy!
I suspect that any lens that was in production for a long time has had a variety of changes to it's design and/or components, maybe due to material availability or manufacturing practices changing, so has effectively changed considerably whilst still being considered 'the same optical design'. Lenses like the Zuiko 1.4/50 comes to mind but various others which started with radioactive lens elements and then changed to non-radioactive elements are still considered to be the same optical design yet how can they be? I think changes creep in for a variety of reasons and are never reported or considered as changes to the optical design per se.
Mar 04, 2019 at 05:54 PM
p.52 #8C/Y Zeiss Image Post
According to this source http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?92044-Contax-Zeiss-Survival-Guide the C/Y MM 2.8 28mm was officially improved over the AE version. So was the 25mm 2.8, 135mm 2.8 and 135mm 2.0. I just wanted to test it myself to see how big the difference is. If the weather is better I will repeat the test and include f8 and f11 to see if the AEJ catches up. copy variance at the end cannot be excluded as I have only the two lenses. But anyway I dont care as I am only interested in which lens of the two is the keeper.
Mar 05, 2019 at 01:24 AM
p.52 #9C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Ah. Right. I knew there were a few lenses that were "officially" updated, but I didn't think it was the 28/2.8. It's been awhile since I've perused the RedUser thread. I officially stand corrected! haha
Mar 05, 2019 at 08:42 AM
p.52 #10C/Y Zeiss Image Post
chris9 wrote:
Surprisingly the MMJ not only performs better in the corners but also in the center! Check the clock in the tower. At the apertures f2.8, f4 and f5.6 the MMJ is sharper with more details in the center. Also in the corners The MMJ copy performs better than AEJ copy at those apertures. Check the pictures with zoom 200%-500%!
I came across the same process with Distagons 28/2.8 and 25/2.8 C/Y AE vs MM on the A7/A72.
The MMs were sharper in corners and have slightly less CA at wider apertures.
More - there were differences of the same type between older and newer AE Distagons.
Later AEs with SN of 63xxx-65xx were better than earlier ones - 58xx-59xx.Then again early 68-74xx MMs were better than later AEs.Late MMs like 84xx were then even slightly more punchier and contrastier than early MMs.
The most pronounced differences were between the early AEs and the late MMs.
Stopped to f11 however,lenses do not differ that much in the real life pictures.
Surprisingly the MMJ not only performs better in the corners but also in the center! Check the clock in the tower. At the apertures f2.8, f4 and f5.6 the MMJ is sharper with more details in the center. Also in the corners The MMJ copy performs better than AEJ copy at those apertures. Check the pictures with zoom 200%-500%!
I came across the same process with Distagons 28/2.8 and 25/2.8 C/Y AE vs MM on the A7/A72.
The MMs were sharper in corners and have slightly less CA at wider apertures.
More - there were differences of the same type between older and newer AE Distagons.
Later AEs with SN of 63xxx-65xx were better than earlier ones - 58xx-59xx.Then again early 68-74xx MMs were better than later AEs.Late MMs like 84xx were then even slightly more punchier and contrastier than early MMs.
The most pronounced differences were between the early AEs and the late MMs.
Stopped to f11 however,lenses do not differ that much in the real life pictures.
Mar 05, 2019 at 09:20 AM
p.52 #11C/Y Zeiss Image Post
I repeated the test above yesterday with sunny weather. I shot with all apertures between f2.8 and f11 twice with both lenses AEJ 6 1xx xxx and MMJ 8 1xx xxx C/Y 28mm/2.8 and compared the best results. The focus was on the clock.
And sorry for the last comparison you are right that the AE lens was not correctly focused!
The results now are pretty close for the AE and MM lenses on my A7I. Identical center sharpness. Both suffer from similar purple fringing near the corners. And only in the very extreme corners there seems to be an advantage of the MM. The rendering is also the same.
Here only the f4 and f8 results:
C/Y MMJ 28mm f2.8 @ f4
_DSC7646 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
C/Y AEJ 28mm f2.8 @ f4
_DSC7636 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
C/Y MMJ 28mm f2.8 @ f8
_DSC7648 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
C/Y AEJ 28mm f2.8 @ f8
_DSC7643 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
And sorry for the last comparison you are right that the AE lens was not correctly focused!
The results now are pretty close for the AE and MM lenses on my A7I. Identical center sharpness. Both suffer from similar purple fringing near the corners. And only in the very extreme corners there seems to be an advantage of the MM. The rendering is also the same.
Here only the f4 and f8 results:
C/Y MMJ 28mm f2.8 @ f4
_DSC7646 by Karl Ludwig, auf FlickrC/Y AEJ 28mm f2.8 @ f4
_DSC7636 by Karl Ludwig, auf FlickrC/Y MMJ 28mm f2.8 @ f8
_DSC7648 by Karl Ludwig, auf FlickrC/Y AEJ 28mm f2.8 @ f8
_DSC7643 by Karl Ludwig, auf FlickrMar 06, 2019 at 02:38 PM
p.52 #12C/Y Zeiss Image Post
C/Y 28mm f 2.8
_DSC7615 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
_DSC7615 by Karl Ludwig, auf FlickrMar 06, 2019 at 03:09 PM
p.52 #13C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Normally I don't post much outside of the huge Sony FE thread, but today I stumbled upon this one. I mostly use Voigtländer and speciality/creative effect lenses now, but still have a couple of C/Y lenses and take them out sometimes. Here are some older winter shots from C/Y 28mm/2.8:
Picturesque holiday cottage by Helena, on Flickr
Ice-skating at Theisendammen by Helena, on Flickr
Ice by Helena, on Flickr
Lake Lauglovatnet by Helena, on Flickr
Leksand by Helena, on Flickr
Bridge over Österdalälven by Helena, on Flickr
Picturesque holiday cottage by Helena, on Flickr
Ice-skating at Theisendammen by Helena, on Flickr
Ice by Helena, on Flickr
Lake Lauglovatnet by Helena, on Flickr
Leksand by Helena, on Flickr
Bridge over Österdalälven by Helena, on Flickr
Mar 13, 2019 at 04:23 AM
p.52 #14C/Y Zeiss Image Post
And some photos from C/Y 50mm/1.7:
Ringvebukta by Helena, on Flickr
Red berries by Helena, on Flickr
Old wooden posts by Helena, on Flickr
Golden fall by Helena, on Flickr
Little farm by Helena, on Flickr
Ilabekken by Helena, on Flickr
Cow and buttercups by Helena, on Flickr
Hepatica by Helena, on Flickr
Ringvebukta by Helena, on Flickr
Red berries by Helena, on Flickr
Old wooden posts by Helena, on Flickr
Golden fall by Helena, on Flickr
Little farm by Helena, on Flickr
Ilabekken by Helena, on Flickr
Cow and buttercups by Helena, on Flickr
Hepatica by Helena, on Flickr
Mar 13, 2019 at 04:26 AM
p.52 #15C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Beautiful sets as usual, Helena! I particularly like "Little farm" which puts the fog to good use. If you post in the C/Y Image thread, your work won't scroll off to Page 4 in the first six hours!
Mar 14, 2019 at 10:09 AM
p.52 #16C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Three from a recent trip around France, using Vario-Sonnar 35-70 on A7R III.
Returning home by David M, on Flickr
Barrel and shadows by David M, on Flickr[url=https://flic.kr/p/2faVFzg]
[/url]Mediaeval city walls at dusk by David M, on Flickr
Edited on Mar 18, 2019 at 09:56 PM · View previous versions
Returning home by David M, on FlickrBarrel and shadows by David M, on Flickr[url=https://flic.kr/p/2faVFzg][/url]Mediaeval city walls at dusk by David M, on FlickrEdited on Mar 18, 2019 at 09:56 PM · View previous versions
Mar 18, 2019 at 05:55 AM
p.52 #18C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Two more for now:
C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70 on A7R III. C1 Pro post-processing.
The Pay Basque region of France with the Pyrenees border with Spain.
In Bayonne, also in the Pays Basque.
Edited on Mar 20, 2019 at 08:48 PM · View previous versions
C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70 on A7R III. C1 Pro post-processing.
 |
||
 |
||
|
The Pay Basque region of France with the Pyrenees border with Spain.
|
||
 |
||
|
In Bayonne, also in the Pays Basque.
Edited on Mar 20, 2019 at 08:48 PM · View previous versions
Mar 20, 2019 at 06:16 AM
p.52 #19C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Just got a CY Zeiss 35-70 from FM member Matt Payne. WOW...
This is at f/5.6 and full crop is below... incredible! No sharpening, clarity, dehaze - just colors to preference.
This is at f/5.6 and full crop is below... incredible! No sharpening, clarity, dehaze - just colors to preference.
Mar 20, 2019 at 08:01 PM
p.52 #20C/Y Zeiss Image Post
C/Y 2.8 28mm
_DSC7617 by Karl Ludwig, auf Flickr
_DSC7617 by Karl Ludwig, auf FlickrApr 04, 2019 at 09:50 PM