michael49 wrote:
Out of curiosity, how difficult is it to remove and replace the mirror?
super easy, takes about a minute, there's youtube videos somewhere.
Peire wrote:
In poor,low lighting fine details becoming less visible due to low microcontrast of the lens.This is augmented by incereased noise of NEX7's sensor resulting in poor details rendition overall.
In harsh lighting the lens tends to flare and presents washed out colours in high contrast areas.
So far out of all lenses i got only Zeisses (C/Y,Z series) consistently deliver with the NEX7.Doesn't matter conditions.NEX5N is much more forgiving.
that has been my experience as well with the contax g 45/2 versus my MC PG 50/1.4 in general, haven't noticed any difference between my NEX-3 versus NEX-7 (in fact the rokkor seems more impressive on the 7). my other contax lenses the difference is much less noticeable. i generally prefer the rokkors look in many cases though (i love flare and low contrast for people), my g45 hasn't seen much use except for landscapes lately.
Despite all these relative shortcomings I will keep my Rokkors because I like them for the same reasons as you do sebboh.They are not for super sharpness allround but most of all for nice warm and delicate colours,buttery bokeh and subtle portraits.They are to create pleasant atmosphere of the picture.
On the other side of this I think NEX7 sensor needs to be improved in order to match overall IQ of the NEX5N.This means better corner sharpness with WA lenses,less colour shift with rangefinder lenses and less noise at lower ISO.I guess this will come soon with the NEX7N.Then we will see again better performance of the good old Rokkors.
I recently purchased the Rokkor 58/1.4 PF, chipped, canon converted from ebay. Is there a way to program the lens so I'd see the 58mm focal length and used aperture in the EXIF?
58 1.2, Haven't used this lens in ages so made a point of it, I might print one of these.
Forgotten the apertures but were between 1.2-2.8. The contrast increases massively and some of these look photoshopped (especially the last one) but apart from a bit of curves and exposure tweaks, are straight out of camera.
R.Young wrote:
lll58 1.2, Haven't used this lens in ages so made a point of it, I might print one of these.
Forgotten the apertures but were between 1.2-2.8. The contrast increases massively and some of these look photoshopped (especially the last one) but apart from a bit of curves and exposure tweaks, are straight out of camera.
I didnt know that hairy cows can be such interesting subject. Well apparently they can. Pretty amazing photos. Quite a bit of "large format" look in them.
Thanks everyone. It was one of those days where you try and try to take nice photos and they all look crap, then on the drive back to my girlfriends I spotted them by a quite country lane, parked up and shot as many as I could before the midges drove me crazy. You can see them in swarms by the cows, maybe their hair is a defence for both the midges and the cold winters? Anyway, I was really happy with how they turned out and it more than made up for the frustrating days shooting
