uhoh7 wrote:
Can't tell you guys how much I apreciate the comments and how much they help--this nex in response to Jacob D and wfrank:
I'm just feeling my way in B&W and here I think I have original frame- it's a different shot, but same subject. You guys tell me
looks a little overexposed in b&w, i might pull down exposure and maybe pull down the luminance in the blue channel as well to make the distant mountain stand out more.
frezeiss wrote:
Sebboh, lovely image..a bit OOT, my minolta 50 1.4 has arrived and now is undergoing surgery to F-mount
sweet, take a picture of it when it's done (with a nex of course). i'm curious to see how exactly they do it.
I was probably the source of what you heard. I had a 21 on my 5n that was showing magenta on one side. I don't know what caused it but I did trim the ears and the problem went away. However, I tried another 21 with the ears untrimmed and saw no problem so whatever it was was something to do with that particular instance. I don't know what it was, maybe mismounted lens.
However, that said the ears do impinge on the box around the sensor and if you take a magnifying glass and look I'm pretty sure you will see marks where the ears hit when the lens is mounted. I doubt that has much of an effect but it does impinge and could have an effect. If for some reason one ear was shorter than the other it could result in the lens being tilted.
A lot of people seemed to think I was suggesting the ears had an optical effect but I was suggesting a physical effect and anything that causes the lens to be less than perfectly distanced equally around the perimeter would have an effect.'
Hope this clears things up and please do look inside your sensor box or faint marks where the ears are hitting the box. I don't think it is harmful but it is there on all three of my nex cameras using three different 21s.
Mike
Andrew Gough wrote:
Thanks for the reply, I have experienced the same magenta cast as you with the 21mm. I read somewhere that trimming the blades reduces it, but I am very suspect of the comment, because it makes no sense...
Thanks for taking the time to reply. I can confirm that the 21mm will not fit the NEX7 with the ears in place, so it looks like they have to be trimmed. I wish that they were removable, like on the 35-70mm...
I am going to shoot the lens before and after trimming, so we'll see!
Uhoh, Great image! - as the colored one on previous page. I actually think that this particular mountain is begging for a widescreen:ish crop - it has an amazing shape, fitting both centered (like before) or like here; leftish. But back to the comp, if I place a paper over the bottom third I get what I think is a pleasing composition - and the dark stones in the bottom provides a natural vignette - a bonus!
I like your BW handling, but perhaps the sky have started to posterize just a tad, not sure. Probaly sebbohs fault ;-)
For me the faintness being far away just gives a good feel of depth.
TeamSK jay wrote:
I was really bummed to find all the sensor dust spots on this shot. I'm blaming it on the push pull CY35-70 I hadn't used for a long time that I had on the camera right before I stuck on my CV12:
great colors! If you use the autopano feature, your NEX sets a shutterspeed of 1/500sec and has to increase iso accordingly.
sebboh wrote:
at close distances the 28/2 bokeh is pretty funky (but still pretty good for 28/2), but at longer distances it is actually pretty smooth (i have the MD W version). my favorite closeup bokeh abstracts have been with it. it's very temperamental bokeh wise though.
i think i sold mine too fast, i did use it only once with not-so-great light, i might give it another chance if i stumble over a good deal.
my current priority-list looks like that:
1. CV15
2. C/Y 85/2.8
3. G28
frezeiss wrote:
Phillip, excellent shots with the 28! This might sound a little embarrassing, how do you put the exif and shooting data on the frame?
thanks :-).
i used to simply type it onto every frame, the camera doesn't know the lens or aperture so i had to do it manually anyway, recently i created a psd file with many layers for lens, iso, etc. so i activate the ones needed. You can download my psd-file here: click me
another question to everybody:
are my images too large? i recently increased them from 1024px+frame to 1280px+frame is the size or traffic increase a problem for anyone here?
There is too much winter in this thread for my taste, we need some summer! so something from the archives:
frezeiss wrote:
Wilhem, thanks.. in the first image WB was adjusted to actual condition while I leave as it is in the 2nd (cooler) image.
in your last image, was it a film set? a unique capture you have there and the detail in the small crop is lovely. Does the G 21 becomes problematic sharpness wise when you get to the corners?
...
Yes, some type of film/TV-type thing going on.
Yes, the G21 is nothing less than stellar in major part of the frame, but the corners are below average. I think I said it before, one can always use it as what could be the best 24:ish/2.8 ever made.
The center resolution is scary. Prior to the G21 the G28 held my (probably subjective) record, because it's scary too. And this on a high density sensor like the 5N. I understand people spending many 100's of euros rebuilding the G21 to Leicas.
Some theories say that current behaviour is because of the AA-filter. I dont know if it's true or not but I am definetly keeping it. The 5N behaves better with RF WA lenses than older cameras like the NEX 5, so I expect future cameras will be even better. In my fantasies, it will be the best lens that can be mounted on a future mirrorless FF cam (non Leica... ie FF cam made for the deadly). It's a keeper.
It will be interesting to see samples from the G21 on Fuji X. The Contax G lenses can still be bought pretty cheap, but I don't see that lasting for much longer. They really are superb lenses.
Yes for sure Briantho. I just saw a European G21 go for less than mine, in better condition too.
The G21 is the expensive one, 4-500 Euros, offerings on ebay for 6-700Euros wont get sold. The G28, G35, G45 and G90 can still be had for perhaps ~200Euros, maybe a little more for the 28. The G35-70 is a dark horse, expensive if you look on what's out on ebay now but I dont think they'll get that money. Then there's the super-unique G Hologon - prices I've seen for that are just crazy.
(US prices are probably lower - as always, but the scale should be the same)
But of course a G-fan have to live with the adapter-focusing-thingy. I dont mind that, but corresponding ZM's seem to perform (almost) as well. And for the inherent NEX-shortage of great WA's the ZM18 seem to stand in a class of it's own, albeit slow.
uhoh7 wrote:
Can't tell you guys how much I apreciate the comments and how much they help--this nex in response to Jacob D and wfrank: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7030/6844660955_0a9edc2acb_b.jpg
I'm just feeling my way in B&W and here I think I have original frame- it's a different shot, but same subject. You guys tell me
Hmmm... may I tinker with your original of that one?
I just love the way the NEX takes just about any lens ever made.
Had a great day today playing with two interesting lens/adapter combos.
First, I picked up an LA-EA2 alpha mount to NEX adapter without quite knowing what to do with it. Figured I would read up on Minolta and Sony lenses and find something fun to play with. So this morning I got a nice clean copy of the much loved/much maligned Minolta 70-210mm f4 "Beercan" off Craigslist. It was a blast using this lens all day with this great adapter, and the results are quite decent in my opinion.
Secondly, I'm an early adopter of the Metabones electronically coupled Canon EF->NEX adapter. I've been looking for good wide-angle lenses for my NEX and while I have and like the Voigtlander 15mm, the OM 18mm, a Nikon 20mm f2.8, the OM 21 f2, and a Contax G 21mm, the lens that's really been floating my boat is the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 on the Metabones adapter. This is a great lens, the adapter works great, and the 10mm-15mm range I haven't had access to before is turning out to be really useful.
The first batch of pictures comes from visiting the "Red Oak Liberty" - a 1944 transport ship built in the Richmond California shipyards for the war in the Pacific, and now on display in the shipyard where it was built.
After the liberty ship, we were exploring Berkeley and found a very narrow alley with big graffiti on the walls. Without the extra-wide 10-22mm most of these shots would have been impossible.
