I really like this combo the Sony Nex-5 with the Nikon 50mm f1.4 Ai I picked up the lens off Cr. list for $60. and it was mint Shot this at the San Diego Air & Space museum Nex-5 iso 800 Nikon 50mm @ f1. 4http://gallery.me.com/dbiela/100006/Spitfire1/web.jpg
Another image captured with the Sony Nex-5 with the Nikon 50mm f1.4 - 800iso f1.4 @ 40th sec. The nearly forgotten German Horten 2-29 was the first jet powered flying wing. http://gallery.me.com/dbiela/100006/Hornet/web.jpg
Gary Clennan wrote:
You know it! It was certainly a highlight for me being a huge fan. I even got to chat with him and got a few pics with him and my kids. My son and his son are in the same class at school and we all got invited to the party. Good times.
Nice shot, Gary. I really love the atmosphere!
Sebboh, your 35 G seems very satisfying as well as your 45. Any thoughts when comparing the two? 21CV also seems to be a very enjoyable lens!
philber wrote:
Sebboh, your 35 G seems very satisfying as well as your 45. Any thoughts when comparing the two?
the 45mm blows the 35mm away image quality wise. the 45mm is sharper and contrastier across the frame with a better controlled bokeh. the only thing the 35/2 has going for it versus the 45/2 is that it is a bit smaller.
i'm trying to decide whether to sell my contax 35/2 or my pen f 38/1.8. both are functionally the same size on the NEX. the pen f is noticeably sharper across the frame at short and medium distances (haven't been able to test infinity performance yet). both have good contrast and can produce a 3D sort of look, the contax has slightly warmer cast, the pen can produce more pastelish colors. they each have their own brand of funky bokeh, which can look good in some situations and atrocious in others. the only thing that's making me tempted to keep the 35 instead of the 38 is that the focal length difference is noticeable and i have two lenses i'm definitely keeping that are closer to the 38mm focal length.
Hi folks. New here. Have the Nex 5, 16mm, kit and 18-200 lenses. I'll have a Contax 45mm f2 and adapter in my hands tomorrow (thanks mostly to Sebboh's images). I'm used to legacy manual lens work on Pentax DSLRs, but downsized to a Canon G11 before recently returning to APS-C in the Nex. As I've lived a sheltered life in the Pentax legacy lens world, I was wondering about other options for a particular need i have in mind. I'm looking for the usual creamy, transcendent bokeh option between 50mm (fullframe) into short telephoto for exterior close-up (not macro) work. Think flowers, silhouettes, geometric and light abstraction. I'm trying to keep the price under $400 as much as possible and have a number of f1.2/1.4 lenses in mind. I've also considered lenses like the Pentax 50mm f1.7s, which are certainly cheap enough. But getting a couple of extra aperture blades probably would help the cause. Sebboh, you've had experience with the Canon FL/FD 55mm f1.2 I believe. Would it be a good option in this regard for the price? I realize this is a big topic to bite on, but would anyone have suggestions please? I promise I'll make up for this by contributing pics from my 45mm as soon as possible. I live in Wisconsin, and we're finally seeing a bit of a thaw for a week, even if short-lived. Thanks and cheers....... Paul
Sebboh, your comment is interesting, because I started to think that my ZM 50 f2.0 was miles better than my 35 f2.8, and then I noticed pretty much the same with your Gs. Is there something about NEX and certain focal lengths?
warpedwoof wrote:
Hi folks. New here. Have the Nex 5, 16mm, kit and 18-200 lenses. I'll have a Contax 45mm f2 and adapter in my hands tomorrow (thanks mostly to Sebboh's images). I'm used to legacy manual lens work on Pentax DSLRs, but downsized to a Canon G11 before recently returning to APS-C in the Nex. As I've lived a sheltered life in the Pentax legacy lens world, I was wondering about other options for a particular need i have in mind. I'm looking for the usual creamy, transcendent bokeh option between 50mm (fullframe) into short telephoto for exterior close-up (not macro) work. Think flowers, silhouettes, geometric and light abstraction. I'm trying to keep the price under $400 as much as possible and have a number of f1.2/1.4 lenses in mind. I've also considered lenses like the Pentax 50mm f1.7s, which are certainly cheap enough. But getting a couple of extra aperture blades probably would help the cause. Sebboh, you've had experience with the Canon FL/FD 55mm f1.2 I believe. Would it be a good option in this regard for the price? I realize this is a big topic to bite on, but would anyone have suggestions please? I promise I'll make up for this by contributing pics from my 45mm as soon as possible. I live in Wisconsin, and we're finally seeing a bit of a thaw for a week, even if short-lived. Thanks and cheers....... Paul...Show more →
thanks for the great compliment!
i have a few suggestions for you, but you should look at pictures of each to decide for yourself. the current sigma 50/1.4 is supposed to have the smoothest wide open bokeh of any 50ish lenses past or present. the canon FL 55mm f/1.2 is an extremely sharp lens with very nice smooth bokeh at f/2 or smaller. at apertures larger than f/2 i find the bokeh to be rather busy and the colors nowhere near as good as they are stopped down. here's a bokeh test at f/1.2, f/2, and f/4 (on 4/3 not the NEX so bokeh aberrations will be magnified compared to on the NEX): http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2789/4500087882_c9a9ba7506_o.jpg http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4027/4499452993_3213de283f_o.jpg http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4017/4500088054_ae8e7209ce_o.jpg
another slight drawback of the canon is that its mfd is a bit longer than the usual 50mm (.55m rather than .45m).
my personal preference for nearly any shot involving lots of bokeh and short focus distance is nearly always a rokkor. i'm extremely happy with my rokkor MC 50mm f/1.4 (NOT the MD version with the 49mm filter thread) and my newly acquired 28mm f/2 in this regard. i much prefer the wide open bokeh (and color) of the rokkor 50 to the canon. stopped down past f/2 the canon wins (the rokkor gets ugly hexagons at f/2.8). wide open the rokkor is funky in a way i like and at f/2 it's smooth and well controlled. the rokkor 58mm f/1.2 looks even better, though i haven't used it personally, and has 8 aperture blades (like the canon) instead of 6, but is 10x as much as the 50/1.4 version ($50 vs $500). anyway, a few wide open samples from the rokkor 50/1.4 on the NEX: http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5286/5338037173_72bda905df_o.jpg http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4109/5083492249_e1d9c29ae6_b.jpg http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1133/5109080397_427ce6bf17_o.jpg
and one with a 100% crop overlay - it's not the sharpest wide open, but it's sharp enough. http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5283/5379231667_bd8ab04514_o.jpg
another option, if you're willing to deal with a longer focal length, the samyang 85/1.4 as an excellent smooth bokeh, but with a 1m mfd.
philber wrote:
Sebboh, your comment is interesting, because I started to think that my ZM 50 f2.0 was miles better than my 35 f2.8, and then I noticed pretty much the same with your Gs. Is there something about NEX and certain focal lengths?
love that second shot!
i don't think it is the focal length, since the olympus pen performs extremely well, but it could be a combination of the focal length and zeiss's use of more symmetrical designs - meaning off axis light hitting the sensor. i'm sure the ZF 35/2 would perform as well on the NEX as it does on say a D300.
How easy is the NEX sensor to clean? I only ask as your first two shots have some pretty significant sensor blobs (or maybe something's on the lens element?). I like the rendering and composition of the 2nd, but they are just so noticeable... I wonder what aperture you were shooting at...?
i don't think it is the focal length, since the olympus pen performs extremely well, but it could be a combination of the focal length and zeiss's use of more symmetrical designs - meaning off axis light hitting the sensor. i'm sure the ZF 35/2 would perform as well on the NEX as it does on say a D300.
Yeah, the G 35/2 design is essentially the same as the 45/2, but with an extra element stuck right in the middle. Although it is a Biogon design, the more modern and complex design of the ZM 35/2 seems to do a better job than the Contax G 35/2. I just use the Contax 35/2, because I don't want to use something longer, and it focuses nearly a foot closer than the ZM. I'm anxious to see how the new e-mount 24mm performs.
I'm not sure where the CV 21 and 35 skopar fit in design wise. The 35 skopar is quite sharp. The 21 f/4, which I got last week and like very much, is perhaps less so, but seems reasonable to me:
