@ sebboh, thank you. I find the tilt to be quite an interesting tool; besides the obvious narrowing of the DOF, the "layering" of the focus does some interesting things with translucent or see through surfaces like the wire fence. My interest here started after seeing Uhoh7's posts.
KatieInTexas wrote:
Hi ... I'm Katie and I just wanted to say that I LOVE this thread. I read it religiously and have just ordered my NEX5 (with 16 2.8) and a Rokkor 50 1.2 (and an adaptor through Rainbow). I am so excited - just had to share!!
dasrocket wrote:
@ sebboh, thank you. I find the tilt to be quite an interesting tool; besides the obvious narrowing of the DOF, the "layering" of the focus does some interesting things with translucent or see through surfaces like the wire fence. My interest here started after seeing Uhoh7's posts.
Uhoh7, thank you.
TY, sir. I imagine there are a few who feel I should be quiet and stop driving up the prices of lenses. Obviously all my opinions should be taken with a grain of salt. Luckily there are a number of patient folks who keep me straight when I go totally off course.
Sebboh-- attempted to do a genuine comparison of canon FL vs nokty, but found it not easy, even with tripod. Touchy focus combined with 50 vs 55 is thwarting me. The canon is not far off if at all--could even be sharper.
I may have gone overboard with the nokton. It does handle better than the canon, but in reading 50 1.2 reviews and discussions--saw you in some here--could not help but notice both nFD @ 315 grams, and nFD L at 380 grams, latter with floating elements.
If you see or know any reference which shows the sharpness and OOF rendering of these two, please point me there. The plain nFD version sells all the time for under 300, and it's lightness attracts me.
I saw the OM is also that light. What are your thoughts on the lightest 1.2s, besides your wonderful little Pen?
also what do we think of the FD 55 1.2 SSC ashperical?
uhoh7 wrote:
Sebboh-- attempted to do a genuine comparison of canon FL vs nokty, but found it not easy, even with tripod. Touchy focus combined with 50 vs 55 is thwarting me. The canon is not far off if at all--could even be sharper.
I may have gone overboard with the nokton. It does handle better than the canon, but in reading 50 1.2 reviews and discussions--saw you in some here--could not help but notice both nFD @ 315 grams, and nFD L at 380 grams, latter with floating elements.
If you see or know any reference which shows the sharpness and OOF rendering of these two, please point me there. The plain nFD version sells all the time for under 300, and it's lightness attracts me.
I saw the OM is also that light. What are your thoughts on the lightest 1.2s, besides your wonderful little Pen?
also what do we think of the FD 55 1.2 SSC ashperical?
In some quick research, it seems the nFD 50 1.2 L could be the sharpest of all, with pretty good OOF also....Show more →
identical framing is very difficult with different focal lengths unless you have a planar subject.
i'm afraid i can't say much about the various canon f/1.2's since the FL 55mm is the only one i have personal experience with. i'm pretty sure all the other canon 55/1.2's share the same optical design with the exception of the SSC aspherical. don't know much about the plain 50/1.2. the 55mm aspherical was a very expensive lens to build and was probably built to a higher standard in terms of quality control and variation (just conjecture). from the design perspective, the nFD L should be sharper with less SA and better closeup performance. from the sample images i'm seen i'm not sure about the sharper point but SA certainly seems improved.
as far as bokeh goes, i'm not particularly enamored with what i've seen from any of them wide open. i would certainly choose the rokkor 58/1.2 or probably your nokton over them for wide open oof rendering. i do quite like the FL at mfd and f/2 or smaller though, just not wide open further away than mfd.
the zuiko 50/1.2 wins the prize for smallest slr 1.2 lens and seems to have pretty good SA control and is probably as sharp as the rokkors (but not as sharp as the canons). bokeh is subjective, the zuiko definitely has it's own character. some people really like it others not so much. i only like it in certain situations, but might prefer it to the canon. the bokeh doesn't seem to improve on stopping down the way the canons do though.
others - i've heard of a couple different tests where the pentax 50/1.2 is shown to be sharper than any of the others, but i haven't seen enough pictures with the lens to judge how true that is or how the bokeh is. the konica hexanon 57/1.2 is also brought up often as superior in sharpness and bokeh to the usual suspects, but from the samples i've seen that doesn't appear to be true on either count. the nikkor 50/1.2 AIS seems to me from all the pictures i've seen to draw very similarly to the FL 55/1.2 that i have, but have worse loCA and sharpness wide open (bear in mind that i could have an exceptional copy of the FL 55/1.2). the zuiko 55/1.2 and nikkor 55/1.2 are both soft wide open with extremely funky bokeh, definitely character lenses. the noctinikkor and various noktiluxes are way out of my price range so i haven't looked into them much.
disclaimer: i'm basing almost all of this off my viewing of other peoples pictures, tests, and 100% crops, so it's entirely possible i don't know what i'm talking about. the only f/1.2 lenses i've owned are the rokkor 50/1.2, the canon FL 55/1.2, and the pen f 42/1.2. also bear in mind when reading peoples accounts of the various lenses that most people only shoot one brand and they've probably dropped a fair chunk of change for their super fast lens, both these are bound to create a bias.
My two cents on the Canon 1.2 discussion, I owned the FL 58 1.2 and it exhibited a lot of halo when focused, wide open. I also noticed that with my copy of the pentax smc 50 1.4 but not the nikons.
sebboh wrote:
douglas: why would the cemented doublet hurt performance at infinity? my understanding is that the reason other producers moved away from that design was because of the expense it adds to production, not because performance improved without it.
uhoh: i had not heard that smc-m was the sharpest, i had always heard that it was the least sharp while smc-a was the sharpest but with worse build quality. to be honest i never really paid much attention to those claims one way or another since it is the same optical design by the same company. i suspect the differences people see are most likely due to sample variation. it's certainly possible they tweaked things for different optimal distances or something though, and i'm sure the coatings improved with time. ...Show more →
ah, according to mike johnston, the spherical cemented doublet does hurt performance at infinity. was this your source for that douglas?
he also says, the designs were tweaked here and there between different versions of the lens.
I think this is a promising lens, the MD Rokkor-x 45mm f2. Does anyone else have this lens?
it looks to be decently sharp at f2, and very sharp from f/2.8 on. I will test it more once it gets light out again! http://www.msuracing.com/pics/nexrokkor.jpg
spada wrote:
I think this is a promising lens, the MD Rokkor-x 45mm f2. Does anyone else have this lens?
it looks to be decently sharp at f2, and very sharp from f/2.8 on. I will test it more once it gets light out again!
yup, it's a very nice lens and a great size and weight for the NEX. not as sharp in the corners as the rokkor 50/1.4 but very competitive with the 50/1.7 and quite sharp in the center with pretty nice bokeh and color. absolutely can't beat it in terms of bang for your buck. the biggest weakness with it is the long mfd. i have one but don't use it much because i also have the contax g 45/2 which is smaller with the adapter (though heavier).
Hi again
So I got the nex5 and a 28mm zeiss and 45mm also zeiss and adapter
how do I tell the camera to magnified the image in order for me to focus
thanks
r.gil wrote:
Hi again
So I got the nex5 and a 28mm zeiss and 45mm also zeiss and adapter
how do I tell the camera to magnified the image in order for me to focus
thanks
First you set up the camera to shoot even when it has no lens it can recognize. then for magnification you press the button that is on the bottom right, next to the corner of LCD screen. (that is where it is on nex-3, should be the same on nex-5).
good luck, fine lenses you have selected!
Hi,
I have been interested in making a system around the NEX for my action sports use . (I am also hoping that the next model will have a remote cable port or a built-in intervalometer).
But anyway, the lenses that I am interested are ZM C Biogon 21mm 4.5, Voigtländer 15mm M and the recently announced Samyang 8mm fisheye for E-mount.
I have been reading in this thread that the ZM 25 and Contax G Biogon 21mm has some corner color issues.
I have seen reviews on both the C Biogon 21mm 4.5 and the Voigtländer 15mm M on M8. Though the sample pictures look some what soft, I was thinking that was due to lack of live view magnification on M8. I was also assuming that if they both work on the bigger APS-H sensor, the use on the NEX should be just fine. However, I read it somewhere that the M8 is equipped with lens correction algorithms for the Leica lenses and if the off brand lenses without the 6 bit code has similar aberrations, they can be corrected with the correction feature manually inputted. The reviewer might have done that. I don't know.
So I am not so sure that the ZM21 4.5 and CV 15 will work on Sony without the color issues. I am starting to think that it is not to simple.
Does anyone know if ZM 21 4.5 will work on the NEX? I am not 100% sure, but I think I remember seeing the pictures with the CV15. I cannot find them anymore. Could have been CV12.
from what I vaguely remember, the cv15 was not bad, but 21/4.5 may have issues due to its design, more so than 21/2.8 ZM. I have not used them myself though.
douglasf13 wrote:
AFAIK, both the 15mm and 12mm Voigtlander exhibit color issues on NEX. I use a bunch of alt glass, but I stick with the Sony 16mm for wide angle.
from what i've seen and heard the 12mm is not near as bad as the 15mm for color shift, just has heavy vignetting. i'm actually thinking of getting that one.
