snowboarder wrote:
You're right, but my thinking was - as I like that focal length, it could give me another
option. I also own Contax 35 f1.4 - has anyone compared it to CV 35 f1.2 II?
ah, i never really liked that focal length. i only have the c/y 35/1.4, but it seems like the cv 35/1.2 could be sharper in the corners stopped down from the crops i've seen. it seems to have a very different look at wide apertures than the contax too.
Nice work with the 15, Paul. It's one of my favorites for general use. Does yours' focus past infinity? Mine is the screw mount, and it does. Neither of my M mount lenses seem to focus past infinity; I'm just curious.
Here are a couple of shots from recent visit to Costa Rica, both CV 15.
snowboarder wrote:
I feel like I need to get a new lens, do you guys know that feeling?
It's between Sony CZ 135, CV 35 f1.2 and CV 15 for me.
All so different, all in my B&H wishlist. I think I'll try the 135 out.
It would be a nice test - ZK 100MP, CV 125 and Sony CZ 135...
Andrew, given what it seems you like to shoot, and given that you don't care about AF, you should give the Sony Minolta 135 STF a look too.
alwang wrote:
Andrew, given what it seems you like to shoot, and given that you don't care about AF, you should give the Sony Minolta 135 STF a look too.
Thanks, I looked at it, but as I own CV 125, I think this lens won't impress me much...
CZ 135 f1.8 is faster than my CV 125, that's why I was hoping for the new look...
snowboarder wrote:
Thanks, I looked at it, but as I own CV 125, I think this lens won't impress me much...
CZ 135 f1.8 is faster than my CV 125, that's why I was hoping for the new look...
The Sony STF lens is totally different though.
But the Bokeh is so damn good it's boring and why I traded it for a ZA 85mm F1.4. The STF is such a good lens that it has almost no character beyond just totally dissolving the background perfectly. Hence why it's known as the "Bokeh King".
@Paul - So, I'm confused; do you need to focus past the infinity stop on your lens to get good focus at infinity? Or...? Why would you focus past infinity?
@Andrew - I didn't Cornerfix either of those, but I did desaturate the purple channel a bit. Neither of my shots had much noticeable color shift, on shots where it's worse I do Cornerfix them.
This one for example, was pretty bad. Even after Cornerfix some purple is still creeping in. I couldn't get a perfect result that didn't overly compromise the rest of the colors... although I'm not sure why I didn't desaturate that last bit of purple... lazy I guess
@inglis Thank you! I'll share more pictures of the G21 once I get time to photograph some interesting topic. You can consider that the pictures you saw are the first taken, since I bought the Nex-5N only a week ago.
@wfrank Picture very bright! I'd like to see more pictures of Gamla Stan and Stockholm, which I visited for the holidays about 18 years ago, during the Water Festival.
philber wrote:
Martin, I had a ZM 50 f:2.0 on my NEX 5, and it was a really impressive lens in all areas. One of the very best ZMs, to be sure!
It sure looks so from every single sample I've seen. But I still wonder if the Sonnar would suit me better since I really like the ZF Planar so much. I have yet to try it on the 5N, because I have no adapter for Nikon. But I think it'll be a tad too large.
By the way, any particular reason you've switched the ZM 35/2.8 for the 35/2?
-----------------
I'm at home with a flue, but took a very short walk yesterday evening just to get some fresh air. Summicron-M 28/2 @ f/2 on my tiny tripod...
The lens seems to outresolve the sensor (5N) wide open and the colors are so saturated that I have to pull them down in PP! The angle of view is very nice in my opinion, as it is a "true" normal lens on APS-C (~42 mm equivalent on FF).
The angle of view is very nice in my opinion, as it is a "true" normal lens on APS-C (~42 mm equivalent on FF).