So I was fully Nikon before the switch. I had a D800 (had, D4, D700, D300s, D90. Still have my film cameras FM2 and F100) Sold my 70-200VR2, 24-70G, Sigma 35mm1.4A, still trying to sell the 85mm 1.4G and Zeiss 21mm 2.8.
I had the original matching year 19mm V1 but hated the Halo flare it created so Im upgrading it to a 1990 V2.
I switched to the A7R2 and I have a Kinemini 4k camera as well. (I'll be upgrading that one to the Kinefinity Terra 5k this year) The switch to the Sony is a love hate thing. I hate the menus, the pop ups saying I cant do things in certain modes or with things on like silent shooting etc. Why cant I map the S35 mode to a button?? Things like that. The Nikons just shoot and get it done, the colors are beautiful but the Sonys take more work and are way more flexible. its not like a dumped Nikon but the Fmount.
Also I was looking for a matching set for awhile and always wanted Leica R lenses so I finally just did it. Im pairing these with Anamorphic lenses as well.
Because Im not looking for clinical lenses any more. I also have the 55mm 1.8 zeiss for autofocus and I'll end up with the 70-200 and 24-70 2.8s as well for on set work. but for primes I want a matching set of excellent lenses with character. Mainly for video. I'll end up with a 90s set as well. and I rent them out here in town.
teiki arii wrote:
But why did you switch from nikon lenses to Leica-R ones on sony? Leica-r lenses are old designed, aren't they?
You've answered your own question. Not everyone wants the sharpest corners, highest microcontrast etc. etc. Sometimes a lens has a character (read: aberrations) which adds to an image in a way that a modern, near perfect, lens can't. The R 1.4/80 is a great example with it's high WO central sharpness combined with a bit of SA and quite nice background bokeh (not harsh). I also have the Summilux-R 35 and find myself rarely using it, but I suspect this has more to do with the focal length which doesn't really suit me all that much.
I also have the Leica R 2.8/24 (this is the Minolta design, there is only one version) and the Leica R 2.8/28E55 (V2 or the expensive one). Whilst the 28 is a better lens in almost every way, I find I tend to use the 24 way, way more often. Mostly because I need a wider lens but also because I love the unique custom lens hood for it which almost entirely covers the lens, almost like a matt box for a cine camera. This allows me to shoot with a bit more freedom, concerns about flare are lessened, a bit of light drizzle won't land on the glass, and the image quality is more than acceptable for my needs (there is LaCA which can be bothersome but this is the worst I can say about the lens). If I need maximum sharpness into the corners then the 2.8/28E55 is certainly the better choice.
Some new lenses also have 'character' and I would place the Zony FE 1.8/55 in that category because of it's particularly smooth background bokeh combined with it's superb WO sharpness. I'm not saying I could recognise images shot with it but very often the images that catch my attention were shot with it (in the Sony FE Images thread).
I do have a question. Out of all the lenses I got the 28 is the only one that really has a star flare around light sources even wide open ie: street lamps. Is this the same for all 28 v1 lenses and is it better on the V2?
The v2 at f/2.8 is about the same as the v1 at f/5.6. And it gets better from then on. It's a superb lens.
That being said, the Contax C/Y Distagon 2.8/28 (aiming for a 90s one, so 8,xxx,xxx serial) is really close in performance to it, if you don't mind the corners taking an extra stop or two compared to the v2. If you're doing cinematography with it, then it's more tricky for trading and so forth, unless you make a awesome late-serialed Contax C/Y set...
Thank you for your interesting answers... About Leica Elmarit-R 28/2.8 E55, CA is better controled compared to Zeiss and others lenses of that time although I love Zeiss lenses... But what I like very much with this lens is a mix of sharpness and softness...
I had the Leica-R 24/2.8, a lens designed by Minolta with Leica touch, but actually it's not my focal length...
aesnakes wrote:
All the lenses are early 80s 1980-1983 except I sent the 19mm back cause I didnt like the halo that happened with it flared. So Ive exhanged it for a 1990 V2. I think i'll end up with a 1980s set and a 90s set in the end. Im very interested in the 28mm v2 as well. On the 50mm the front thread size is 55mm
Great set! You know how to shoot those Leica R. They are superb for cinema use too. Is there any chance that you could post a sample of the v1 19mm's flare?
The first 3 ar of the halo Im talking about that 19 V1 lenses can show if the light enters the lens just right. Also the one that has the heavy vignette is due to me being full frame with a speed booster.
The last one is the 28mm V1. Im wondering if anyone can confirm that their 28 v1 lenses do this as well and is it better on the v2. This was shot at F2.8 and shows sun stars
