sebboh wrote:
i've always thought this looked interesting, any idea how it compares to the pentax pancake 70/2.4?
Hi Derek,
As far as the Pentax 70, I have had both the 70/2.4 and 77/1.8 for several years and the two lenses rendering is as similar as two different lenses can be. I've decided to get a Pentax to NEX adapter so I can see how the 77 (which has an aperture ring) works as a portrait lens on the NEX. Here's an image from the 77 (but on my K5) taken under similar lighting as the CV 75/2.5 image I posted above. I'll post some 77 shots on my NEX soon after I get my adapter. This shot was taken at F 2.2
snapsy wrote:
haha, I was just on that hill last week. It's a hell of a climb up 17th and then those damn stairs! I almost couldn't find my way down it was so dark. Took some photos but didn't have my NEX with me.
ha, my apartment is actually up the hill from there so it's an easy walk for me. walking home from anyplace else in SF is a bit** though.
Jeff Kott wrote:
Hi Derek,
As far as the Pentax 70, I have had both the 70/2.4 and 77/1.8 for several years and the two lenses rendering is as similar as two different lenses can be. I've decided to get a Pentax to NEX adapter so I can see how the 77 (which has an aperture ring) works as a portrait lens on the NEX. Here's an image from the 77 (but on my K5) taken under similar lighting as the CV 75/2.5 image I posted above. I'll post some 77 shots on my NEX soon after I get my adapter. This shot was taken at F 2.2 ...Show more →
good to know, thanks! on paper the 77 looks like the best long portrait lens for me (well outside of the 75 lux or cron). my general feeling is that the pentax has more color pop and contrast than either of the voigtlanders though it may suffer a bit from loCA?
sebboh wrote:
Jacob – those last two are outstanding!
uhoh7 wrote:
@Jacob
that 21 is working very well for you--35 also
Thanks guys. I'm settling in with the CV 21 and 35, I really like everything about these lenses... except for a little color shift at the edges, but that's a small complaint.
The 90 is the newest for me, still getting to know it. I was initially interested in the 75/2.5... but the 90 takes 39mm filters just like the 21 and 35... so that made my decision for me. Here are my industrial images from yesterday.
Great portrait of Fred. I'm having a hard time seeing the difference between the two photos. Is the difference mainly contrast? It looks like you fixed up the CA on his whiskers too
Great portrait of Fred. I'm having a hard time seeing the difference between the two photos. Is the difference mainly contrast? It looks like you fixed up the CA on his whiskers too
Hello Jacob,
Thanks! Your spot on. I fixed up a tiny bit of CA on the second one and I introduced a little softness whilst maintaining enough sharpness.
I like the atmosphere in your images. How is your CV21 doing on the Nex? I have seen that the Zeiss ZM Biogon 21mm is only useable at f/8 on the Nex 5n. Otherwise really poor corner performance.
philber wrote:
Well, talk about humble pie... remember the guy who wrote that he'd sold his soul to Zeiss? I never thought I would find a Zeiss lens that I didn't like. Tried 7 ZE lenses, bought 7. Bought 3 Contax C/Y, and 4 Contax G. I really looked forward to the ZA 24mm f:1.8, which would be the stone that killed 3 birds: my favorite focal length, my fast lens for dark places, my AF lens for "social" occasions.
I did a non-scientific test (3 series of shots) with 5 lenses: kit zoom, ZA 24, C/Y 25, Contax G 28, Leica Elmarit 28mm pre-Asph
The results are the same across the 3 test shots, even though one is a very close up, one a semi-distant building and one stretching to infinty. And I didn't have to do wide open shots to check extreme corners, either.
The ZA is clearly the least good, to my taste, of all except the kit zoom, and closer to the kit zoom than to the 3 alt lenses. If I had to give an equivalent, I once tried a converted Contax N 24-85 plastic zoom, and I thought: nice colours, very pleasant to use, nothing wrong at all with the IQ, but I want more out of a lens than this. The ZA is the same to my eye, except for the nice colours. The fact that it underexposes compared to the others doesn't help. Overall, if I were really cheeky, I would borrow the Sony 30mm macro, which comfortably outperforms the kit zoom, and I am not sure the Zeiss would win the comparison.
After all it isn't exactly cheap, considering it is a prime for "only" APS-C... What can have gone through Zeiss' mind? I am in mourning....Show more →
Thanks for this report. Please update the thread as you continue to use the lens. It would also be nice to see some comparison shots as well.
I'm a newbie to NEX camera system and have been following this forum for quite a while now and have learned much about lens selections. I've been reading about the Zeiss 24 1.8 and was looking forward to getting this lens with my new NEX 7, but seeing the rating by you guys I might change my mind. Has anyone tried the Sony Zeiss Distagon T* 24mm f/2 ZA SSM lens using an LA-EA2 adapter? The reason for me doing this would be if I wanted to switch from Canon to Sony when they come out with their full frame camera I could use this lens on both systems. It seems to be highly rated by photozone. Are their inherent drawbacks other than size that I don't know about?
philber wrote:
Fabulous portrait from 2006, Jonas! The sort I would expect in a photgraphy magazine and/or in an art gallery!
Thank you Philippe. Elisabeth says you are a true gentleman.
Jacob D wrote:
@Jonas, that is a one of a kind portrait. Very nice.
So, today I have urban, abstract, and industrial... I guess I will start with the urban. All of these are from the 5N.
Thank you Jacob. I do what I can to please my better half- 2006 was some time ago now... Perhaps it's about time for another shot.
I like the aginst the light images. I should take up my experiments with such images (I did some a couple of years ago, trying to use shapes and lights for a dreamy yet descriptive look.
dennishh wrote:
I'm a newbie to NEX camera system and have been following this forum for quite a while now and have learned much about lens selections. (...) Has anyone tried the Sony Zeiss Distagon T* 24mm f/2 ZA SSM lens using an LA-EA2 adapter?(...) Are their inherent drawbacks other than size that I don't know about?
I don't think there are other drawbacks but size. I read somewhere the LA-EA2 allows for micro focusing adjustments and to me it would be important to have that confirmed if "going back" to a phase detect AF system.
Herb, the CV 21 is pretty good on the 5N. It has a little color shift at the edges but not nearly as bad as it did on the 5. For technical things, using it at 5.6 or 8 is probably best. In casual use I have no problem using it "wide open" at f4 It never does get critically sharp at the edges. For that, in a similar focal length, the ZM 18 looks like the ticket and of course comes with the Zeiss micro contrast but at the expense of size, weight, and quite a bit more money.
philber wrote:
...The ZA is the same to my eye, except for the nice colours. The fact that it underexposes compared to the others doesn't help...
Is the underexposure a metering/communication issue, or is this seen when shooting in manual with the same exposure settings (i.e. the lens is not a true f1.8) ? What was the difference in EV? I'm just curious.
Before I purchased my NEX I speculated that I would either get this lens or the ZM 18 depending on how the 24 turned out. I'm not planning on purchasing either at this point, but I'm still a little curious about the 24 since 35mm is my preferred FL and it would be nice to have one lens with AF.
Anyone knows anything about the differences between the CV 21/4 and CV 20/3.5? The latter is available for e.g. Canon 5D2. I saw some really nice images here by the CV 20, and since I also use Canon I thought I'd go for that on the wide side for the 5N too. Feels more justifiable, but is it as good - worse or better?
wfrank wrote:
Anyone knows anything about the differences between the CV 21/4 and CV 20/3.5? The latter is available for e.g. Canon 5D2. I saw some really nice images here by the CV 20, and since I also use Canon I thought I'd go for that on the wide side for the 5N too. Feels more justifiable, but is it as good - worse or better?
I don't know much about the SLR compatible 20. There was someone here (maybe this thread) who didn't like theirs'. Edit: Looking at some samples though... it looks pretty good on both FF and NEX.
Aside from that, huge difference in size. The M mount is tiny. It can semi-close focus too at about 18".
Jeff Kott wrote:
Jacob, very nice images. I especially like #1 - great rendering, light and colors.
+ 1 the 90 looks great
@philber hope you will give us some links at some point to your test shots I'd love to see a big nex 28/2.8 shootout including the leica-R v2, elmarit asph (which i'm suspicious about on nex) elmarit v4 (might be fantastic), contax G and zm28. The last two seem to really be shooting nicely on the 5n, and of course the Leica-R v2 is living up to it's rep as best DSLR 28 ever.
just causal shots @f/2 but you see the indoor/low light performqnce a bit. frightening to imagine what sebboh might do with one OOF always a matter of taste, but seems superb to me.
another for sale now at 2886--no relation to me, but so it's clear no one needs to pay 4k
wfrank wrote:
Anyone knows anything about the differences between the CV 21/4 and CV 20/3.5? The latter is available for e.g. Canon 5D2. I saw some really nice images here by the CV 20, and since I also use Canon I thought I'd go for that on the wide side for the 5N too. Feels more justifiable, but is it as good - worse or better?
I shot the 21/4 (LTM) on a friend's 5N......it seemed to me that it was more susceptible to flare and had some corner color shifting. Nice.....very tiny.
I continue to like the 20/3.5 SLii........it's double duty on two systems, has a closer MFD than its RF cousin, sharp into the corners. With the adapter (in my case the PK-NEX), it is a bit bigger than the 21/4 with LTM-NEX adapter.
walking home from anyplace else in SF is a bit** though.
