inglis wrote:
briantho,
Nice Contax 100-300 examples.. Was the second Contax 100-300 shot at 300? Was it hand held and if so did you use focus peaking?
Thanks. Yes the shots are 100mm and 300mm handheld using peaking, but it was cold, snowing and boring light. Will try to take better pics and post later. Common cheap chineese adaprer was used.
briantho, do you mind if I ask how much you paid for the Contax 100-300 (via PM) ?
I've been on the lookout for that one but have no idea what a reasonable price for this lens is apart from some inflated buy-it-now prices on the bay.
I woke up to an amazing frozen landscape this morning, lit by the low sun. Had time to snap a few quick shots on my way to work. All handheld.
The last image in this series is shot at 300mm. It seems a little soft to me, but it could be because of misfocus or shake, but I suspect the lens doesn't resolve as well at its longest FL. Peaking is also pretty difficult at 300mm. I'll try to do some proper shooting using a tripod this weekend.
Edit: I found the below pic, also taken at 300mm, and it shows much better contrast and sharper detail, so I probobly didn't nail the focus on the 300mm shot above.
rioni wrote:
I thought I made up my mind to sell the G45 since I have a 35/2 ZM now. But the lens is beyond sharp and I'm thinking maybe I'll just keep them both
briantho wrote:
I woke up to an amazing frozen landscape this morning, lit by the low sun. Had time to snap a few quick shots on my way to work. All handheld.
The last image in this series is shot at 300mm. It seems a little soft to me, but it could be because of misfocus or shake, but I suspect the lens doesn't resolve as well at its longest FL. Peaking is also pretty difficult at 300mm. I'll try to do some proper shooting using a tripod this weekend.
briantho,
such snow shots, and the darker trees, splendid. Glad to see peaking often works
looks like good prices on the Contax 100-300 as compared with those recorded by http://jcolwell.ca/
or presently at KEH.com 849$-1169$, many prices are up over the last year or two
I should have mentioned that even with the ears trimmed there is significant degradation on the edges and corners of the image on the Nex7. If your intent is to see if trimming the ears will make it work, I would say don't do it as I'm pretty sure it will not help and you'll end up with a lens worth less due to the trimming.
On the Nex5n though it worked very well for me and with the ears trimmed I had it mounted on the adapter and ready to use without the fiddling of mounting the adapter first then the lens. If the convenience is what you are after then go for it but don't do it in hopes that the image will improve on the Nex7 as it won't improve enough if at all to make it worthwhile.
Hope this isn't too late.
Mike
Andrew Gough wrote:
Hi Mike,
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!
