telyt wrote:
One of the best features of the 280/4 APO is its tripod mount. One of the worst features of the 300/4 AFS is its tripod mount. Because of the tripod mounts it's much more likely you'd see the 100% performance of the 280/4 APO than the 90% performance of the 300/4 AFS.
Both Alex and I dream of one day owning the 280/4, and maybe we will, but for now, the Nikkor is a much more sane project. There appears to be some RRS replacement gear for this lens:
carstenw wrote:
Both Alex and I dream of one day owning the 280/4, and maybe we will, but for now, the Nikkor is a much more sane project. There appears to be some RRS replacement gear for this lens:
carstenw wrote:
Both Alex and I dream of one day owning the 280/4, and maybe we will, but for now, the Nikkor is a much more sane project. There appears to be some RRS replacement gear for this lens:
naturephoto1 wrote:
Looking at the lens that I have coming and those that have sold previously, I believe that the tape is covering the Leica logos a well as the 77mm engraving and is in the 2nd group of 500 made:
It might be so. I don't own an 11261 with either a serial number of 362**** or 365**** to compare with.
The ones I have are 11263 and 11360 with serial numbers of 374**** and 380****
It was just a surprise for me few yeasr ago to find out that different config of the APO 280/4 existed.
Frankly, it does not matter and not having an internal thread is just a nuisance, not so much to add a protection filter but when you want to use a CP.
The problem is finding an E55 CP - 13338 to go into the APO280/4 drawer!
It seems easier to find an APO280/4 than finding an E55 - 13338 to purchase. They are very scarce!
I already have a couple of E55- 13338 and just checked on the bay, the last one sold was for $400.
The last one I purchased was for $250 but not from Ebay.
Let's wait and see when you get in possession of the lens.
As I said before, it does not matter, it is a fantastic lens.....together with Lux 50 E60, the 90AA.....etc
Almass wrote:
It might be so. I don't own an 11261 with either a serial number of 362**** or 365**** to compare with.
The ones I have are 11263 and 11360 with serial numbers of 374**** and 380****
It was just a surprise for me few yeasr ago to find out that different config of the APO 280/4 existed.
Frankly, it does not matter and not having an internal thread is just a nuisance, not so much to add a protection filter but when you want to use a CP.
The problem is finding an E55 CP - 13338 to go into the APO280/4 drawer!
It seems easier to find an APO280/4 than finding an E55 - 13338 to purchase. They are very scarce!
I already have a couple of E55- 13338 and just checked on the bay, the last one sold was for $400.
The last one I purchased was for $250 but not from Ebay.
Let's wait and see when you get in possession of the lens.
As I said before, it does not matter, it is a fantastic lens.....together with Lux 50 E60, the 90AA.....etc...Show more →
Thanks very much.
With this it will bring me to a total of 15 Leica R lenses including the 280mm f2.8 Apo Telyt, the 180mm f3.4 Apo Telyt, 100mm f2.8 Macro Apo Elmarit, 60mm f2.8 Elmarit, the 28mm f2.8 PC Super Angulon, and the 3 Sumicrons.
naturephoto1 wrote:
With this it will bring me to a total of 15 Leica R lenses including the 280mm f2.8 Apo Telyt, the 180mm f3.4 Apo Telyt, 100mm f2.8 Macro Apo Elmarit, 60mm f2.8 Elmarit, the 28mm f2.8 PC Super Angulon, and the 3 Sumicrons.
I expect that once your 280/4 arrives and you start using it, you'll use the 280/2.8 only when you need f/2.8.
With this it will bring me to a total of 15 Leica R lenses including the 280mm f2.8 Apo Telyt, the 180mm f3.4 Apo Telyt, 100mm f2.8 Macro Apo Elmarit, 60mm f2.8 Elmarit, the 28mm f2.8 PC Super Angulon, and the 3 Sumicrons. naturephoto1 wrote:
Rich
I recently acquired an APO 280 / 4 which is series number 11261, sn 3621989. This makes it one of the earliest lenses from the first series. It does, however, have threads to receive the E77 filters. The original instruction booklet also states this being possible.
On another subject, how do you find the 28mm f2.8 PC Super Angulon? If it would come even close to matching the results from my EOS 24mm tilt shift ll lens I might be encouraged to shed some of my Canon equipment.
Some short impression about this 35cron. It is sharp on center but sweet point cycle is small.(similar to my 50lux R) the corner is SOFT even after f8. Not recommended for Landscape or use it wisely.
For portrait, it is very good lens, render is very nice in focus area and Bokeh is very beautiful like my ZF351.4. I like the lens very much. Handling is very good, solid but not heavy and big.
For compassion, I also dig my old 35f2 ZF.2 shots and feel Zeiss has more POP in color and contrast, feel more sharp, have bigger in focus cycle at f2. and doesn't have corner issue like this 35cron. Though I feel 35cron resolution in center might slightly better or even. I prefer its Bokeh over ZF.2 35f2 by fairly big margin. There were talk about 35cron M v4 is Bokeh King, I feel this should be the one
zhangyue -- Beautiful shots, and a beautiful daughter. She really is good at not being self-conscious about posing.
I don't think this will be a lens for me. I don't like so much curvature of field, even though it enhances bokeh. The coma is quite extreme for me too -- the moon and few lights are terribly arced and distorted.
As a specialty lens, I can see why people value it, especially for people shots. But as a "sharp" lens, it won't work for my types of subjects. For example, the Leica R 60 macro is about perfect for me, but it is one of the "odd" Leicas. At least at reasonable price.
Worldinlens wrote:
Great shots!!! The both 35 Leica-R one of the best lenses for bokeh. Love it
P.S. For landscapes without doubt R28/2.8 better
Thanks for kind comments. I’d interested to see more sample from 35cron R V1. And know the difference between two.
Gunzorro wrote:
zhangyue -- Beautiful shots, and a beautiful daughter. She really is good at not being self-conscious about posing.
I don't think this will be a lens for me. I don't like so much curvature of field, even though it enhances bokeh. The coma is quite extreme for me too -- the moon and few lights are terribly arced and distorted.
As a specialty lens, I can see why people value it, especially for people shots. But as a "sharp" lens, it won't work for my types of subjects. For example, the Leica R 60 macro is about perfect for me, but it is one of the "odd" Leicas. At least at reasonable price. ...Show more →
Thanks for your comments, I guess she has been used to his dad have camera point to her
I am more like an observer than disturber. I seldom call their attention to make shots unless it is candidate shots.
I fully understand your concern about this lens. It is definitely not for everyone. Thus, I choose the word very carefully in my short description. For 3D subject, FC most likely will not be a concern and it may give interesting results in terms of focus fade off. So far, my experience is that lens has well corrected optical performance usually don’t render OFC very well or as well. Like Zeiss two MP and 35f2. (MP is slightly different here as you can really close to your subject to have cream bokeh.) but I am not very impressed with their mid distance bokeh quality. Usually I feel the lens have strong character performance are also easily call viewer’s attention on the color and contrast and forget about subject sometime. Zeiss MP100 is classic example of it. It dominate the image and make people easily group images took from it together. It suit very well for some subject but not always a good thing TO ME.
Coma is not a concern for me at all for what I do. I rate handing and build highly in terms of usage of lens as a tool, thus choose ZF (now R) over Canikon. And I believe the shooting experience will give me different results. I bet Canikon will give me 90% performance I need but my pictures will be different if I have to use AF because of different way of shooting.
Out of whole ZF line, my favorite is 50P which is worst in terms of optical quality, but with best performance for me over handling, bokeh, color rendering.
sebboh wrote:
cool!
so other then the better bokeh, how does it compare to the m summicron IV?
Unfortunately, I don’t have ‘Bokeh king’, but from samples I see from internet. They are quite busy. Just like all M 35 lens I tried. I have 35cron v1 and had biogon Zeiss. Both seems have busy Bokeh at f2. VC35mm1.2 is better but that is a f1.2 lens. In terms of sharpness, My 35cron M v1 is sharp cross the frame at f8.(biogon at f5.6) And at f2, 35cron M is sharp at least half of the frame.
zhangyue wrote:
Unfortunately, I don’t have ‘Bokeh king’, but from samples I see from internet. They are quite busy. Just like all M 35 lens I tried.
The Summicron IV was called the king of bokeh by Mike Johnston at a time when he would never open it up wider than f/4. When he did that later, he was horrified. He posted a clarification of this recently, and retracted his king of boke title.
I had it for a brief time, along with the 35 Cron ASPH and 35 Lux ASPH I, and of the three, the IV was the one I liked least. Too much glow wide open, and not nearly as sharp, and both of the other lenses had better boke most of the time, IMO. Boke is of course very subjective, but in the end, I preferred the 35 Lux ASPH I, which although a complex lens to use, could really deliver when used right.
The 35 Lux R is also a fantastic lens, although not quite as perfect as the 35 Lux ASPH I. It is probably sharper in the centre wide open, but has more vignetting and less sharp corners wide open. Stopped down it is a straight razor. I am not sure which has more field curvature. The 35 Lux R is one of the most moody lenses I have ever used, just fantastic, and the only reason I am considering selling is it that the ZF.2 35/1.4 is more practical for me (EXIF, auto aperture, easier to focus, etc.), and matches my other Zeiss lenses better.
carstenw wrote:
....The 35 Lux R is one of the most moody lenses I have ever used, just fantastic, and the only reason I am considering selling is it that the ZF.2 35/1.4 is more practical for me (EXIF, auto aperture, easier to focus, etc.), and matches my other Zeiss lenses better.
zhangyue wrote:
Unfortunately, I don’t have ‘Bokeh king’, but from samples I see from internet. They are quite busy. Just like all M 35 lens I tried. I have 35cron v1 and had biogon Zeiss.
ah, thanks. for some reason i thought that m 35crons v1-v4 were all the same optically.
zhangyue wrote:
Thanks for kind comments. I’d interested to see more sample from 35cron R V1. And know the difference between two.
Thanks for your comments, I guess she has been used to his dad have camera point to her
I am more like an observer than disturber. I seldom call their attention to make shots unless it is candidate shots.
I fully understand your concern about this lens. It is definitely not for everyone. Thus, I choose the word very carefully in my short description. For 3D subject, FC most likely will not be a concern and it may give interesting results in terms of focus fade off. So far, my experience is that lens has well corrected optical performance usually don’t render OFC very well or as well. Like Zeiss two MP and 35f2. (MP is slightly different here as you can really close to your subject to have cream bokeh.) but I am not very impressed with their mid distance bokeh quality. Usually I feel the lens have strong character performance are also easily call viewer’s attention on the color and contrast and forget about subject sometime. Zeiss MP100 is classic example of it. It dominate the image and make people easily group images took from it together. It suit very well for some subject but not always a good thing TO ME.
Coma is not a concern for me at all for what I do. I rate handing and build highly in terms of usage of lens as a tool, thus choose ZF (now R) over Canikon. And I believe the shooting experience will give me different results. I bet Canikon will give me 90% performance I need but my pictures will be different if I have to use AF because of different way of shooting.
Out of whole ZF line, my favorite is 50P which is worst in terms of optical quality, but with best performance for me over handling, bokeh, color rendering.
Michael, excellent set of photos of your children! I fully agree with your comments regarding the 35cron R. One thing that I also noticed is that 35crom R has excellent close-up performance. Here is a film scanned image taken by 35crom R.
Michael, excellent set of photos of your children! I fully agree with your comments regarding the 35cron R. One thing that I also noticed is that 35crom R has excellent close-up performance. Here is a film scanned image taken by 35crom R.
It is. Following is a product shot by 35 Summicron E55 (V2) @ f16. I choose 35mm because I'd like some (not too much) geometric distortion on it.
the v125+apo2x my reality now 
