simonedf wrote: AbramG wroteMy primaries are now the ZM28 and ZM50 Planar.How's the ZM28 on a digital Leica? Any issue?
I have it profiled as the 28 Elmarit Asph and I'm not seeing any issues with my M240 (and obviously none on my M-A). It vignettes a little wide open but I like the look. There's also a correction profile within Lightroom for the Zeiss ZM lenses as well.
Edward - your shots on the last page are excellent, especially the portrait
Over the past year or two I have primarily used my A7R II instead of the M240. My most used lenses were Loxia 21 and Batis 25. I have recently started using my 28 Cron again and am no longer in awe of that lens. The sharpness is way behind either and the bokeh isn't anywhere near as good as the Batis 25. However flawed the Cron is though, I find the look of it quite pleasing. I just recently got a Voigtlander 28 to try something different and I am shocked with this lens. It is sharper at all distances at all apertures throughout the image. I blindly compared each lens and I like the bokeh better on the 28 Ultron. The 28 Cron has far more vignetting. As far as how each one renders.....I do prefer the Cron ever so slightly but if I wasn't comparing side by side knowing which lens is which, I honestly wouldn't know the difference.
EDIT: My most memorable uses of the 28 Cron was with the M9, is there something that changed with the M240 that would change the character of the 28 Cron?
rsolti13 wrote:
Edward - your shots on the last page are excellent, especially the portrait
Over the past year or two I have primarily used my A7R II instead of the M240. My most used lenses were Loxia 21 and Batis 25. I have recently started using my 28 Cron again and am no longer in awe of that lens. The sharpness is way behind either and the bokeh isn't anywhere near as good as the Batis 25. However flawed the Cron is though, I find the look of it quite pleasing. I just recently got a Voigtlander 28 to try something different and I am shocked with this lens. It is sharper at all distances at all apertures throughout the image. I blindly compared each lens and I like the bokeh better on the 28 Ultron. The 28 Cron has far more vignetting. As far as how each one renders.....I do prefer the Cron ever so slightly but if I wasn't comparing side by side knowing which lens is which, I honestly wouldn't know the difference.
EDIT: My most memorable uses of the 28 Cron was with the M9, is there something that changed with the M240 that would change the character of the 28 Cron?
rsolti13 wrote:
EDIT: My most memorable uses of the 28 Cron was with the M9, is there something that changed with the M240 that would change the character of the 28 Cron?
I don't have any experience with the 28 Summicron on an M9, but I do have experience with one on an M240 and on film. I found that I quite liked the rendering on the M240, but I slightly preferred the presence of the lens' rendering on film. I have heard that the 28 Summicron matched particularly well with the M9 sensor and that some of the "magic" was lost in translation when the M240 CMOS came around. Speaking from experience I would say that I thought the rendering was absolutely fine on the M240 and definitely one of my favorite 28mm lenses I'd ever used.
That being said, I sold it due to build quality issues, though I definitely miss the aesthetic of the lens.
edwardkaraa wrote: Gary Clennan wroteWhat is this place, Gary? Beer brewery?
Nice shot!
You got it Edward! It's where I hang out with a bunch of film hipsters every other Thursday. Pretty fun event put on by The Camera Store. We start at one brewery for a beer and then photo walk on to one more place. The guy in the pic is one of the organizers and usually has an old M3 around his neck. This time he was trying out the GFX....