Lotusm50 wrote:
Maybe that will help me to keep from hitting the movie button inadvertently...
That was my reasoning, too. My thumb kept wanting to rest in that area, but I'd hit the movie button all of the time, so the camera leather gives my thumb a place to rest without moving around. I wish we could reprogram the movie button, since I rarely use it.
dasrocket wrote:
UHOH, how do you like the CV 21 on the NEX? Do you find PP necessary?
Large color shifts which you see especially against blue or white, which should be dealt with NP with cornerfix, but I don't have a good profile yet. Otherwise it's great.
Camera settings: iso auto, P mode ex comp -2.0 (only because I'd been shooting the dog and fooling around)
Under those parameters the camera decided to use iso 200. Had I been thinking I would have changed it up, but I saw them on the way to a friend's, and quickly decided to pull over and shoot. It was about 9pm
The exposure does come up pretty good when you start with iso 200, though.
I was very curious how the lens would do at infinity wide open---far from sharp, but better than I expected really.
They've had a long hard winter. Idaho elk populations have crashed in the last few years, mostly because of the wolves coming back.
Ok, new to this thread and actually to the alt lenses forum as well, though I've been more active on the Canon forums in past years. After hearing David McLain talk about his Sony NEX-5 at WPPI this year and seeing my friend's NEX-5 with some alt lenses I got the bug. I'd been shooting all Canon lenses for a while now, though I dabbled a bit more when I shot 4x5 a while back. Yesterday, I finally picked up my NEX-5 with the 16mm and the wide angle adapter used off of CraigsList. It's a great little camera, perfect for a small grab and go solution. I'd been planning this move for a while but since my tax refund came in before the weekend I started looking in earnest. A few weeks ago I came across this thread and have been reading through it and finally finished a few minutes ago. Great info.
A few questions for you NEX pros here. What kind of adapters are good, high quality adapters that will focus to infinity? I've seen a ton on eBay and the Fotodiox ones but I'm just not sure which ones are good. I'd like to get one without having to pay a ton of $$ too if there is such a product.
I've picked up a Contax C/Y 50mm f/1.7 and was thinking that it would be great with this little camera. Anyone try one of these? Any other small/fast/reasonably priced/sharp options in the 35mm range?
Nearly all adapters I've seen focus past infinity. I prefer the Voigtlander M adapters, due to their integrated lens release tab that stays out of the way of your grip-side fingers (I also own metabones and a cheapie eBay version.)
There are tons of small 35mm, rangefinder options. I own the C-Biogon 35/2.8, Contax G 35/2 and Nokton 35/1.4. The C-Biogon is by far my favorite. The Contax G is pretty good and is like a contrasty Summicron IV. The Nokton is fast and vibey, but has more aberrations, so it depends what you're after.
Thanks Douglas! I'm looking primarily for a lens that's fast, sharp and has smooth background bokeh. Cheap helps too, but I realize that you get what you pay for.
The Voigtlander adapters are only for M to NEX mount correct? I need a C/Y to NEX at the moment and then others depending on what glass I wind up with.
has anyone had both the contax g 45/2 and the pen f 40/1.4 that they have used on the nex? how do they compare. what is the closest focusing distance on the contax?
akivisuals wrote:
Thanks Douglas! I'm looking primarily for a lens that's fast, sharp and has smooth background bokeh. Cheap helps too, but I realize that you get what you pay for.
The Voigtlander adapters are only for M to NEX mount correct? I need a C/Y to NEX at the moment and then others depending on what glass I wind up with.
voigtlander makes a number of other adapters for slr lenses as well as the nikon s-mount rangefinders. they can be found for sale in the US on the cameraquest website. they seem much to expensive to pay for an adapter that still won't hit infinity. rj camera on ebay makes solid adapters (though not as precisely constructed) for considerably cheaper and offers expedited shipping so you don't have to wait 2 months for items from china. rainbow imaging on ebay seems to stock adapters from a bunch of different producers (mostly the cheaper ones) in NY so you can order them and receive them in a couple of days. fotodiox adapters are generally pretty good. honestly, unless you're using an ultrawide lens the adapter doesn't make much difference (even then it won't in most cases), they're all just metal tubes.
kahren wrote:
has anyone had both the contax g 45/2 and the pen f 40/1.4 that they have used on the nex? how do they compare. what is the closest focusing distance on the contax?
the close focus distance on the contax appears to be about 16 inches. i've had the contax 45/2, the pen f 42/1.2, the pen f 38/1.8, but no pen f 40/1.4. i think i can extrapolate for familial traits though - the contax will have better contrast, much better flair resistance, less distortion, less field curvature, and be a bit sharper stopped down (almost certainly at f/2 as well). the pen f will have a much better focusing experience (very nice focus ring vs on adapter focus ring), also be very sharp, but suffer from some field curvature, focus an inch or two closer, be a stop faster, and have more interesting bokeh. the contax's bokeh can be described as average - what you'd expect from a very well corrected lens. the pen f's will be more funky - much worse in some situations, but truly awesome in a select few.
Yeah, I was really only referring to Voigtlander M adapters. Not sure about the others. As I mentioned, since I use the adapter everyday, the slim profile lens release tab that doesn't impede the fingers is worth it to me (I actually even ended up buying a second one,) but YMMV.
I've had really good luck with the Fotodiox pro line of adapters. They are every bit as good as a Voigtlander or similar higher priced brands for about half the price. I would suggest staying away from the really cheap ones though as the tolerances are pretty lack and the overall build quality is a bit cheap too.
Best lens I can recommend would be either a Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 (which is a little pricey) or a 50mm f1.5 (if the longer focal length works for you) They both are very sharp, even wide open, and more importantly have a really nice smooth bokeh, very akin to a Leica Lux style of rendering.
Its highly subjective though in what one considers a "good" drawing style though. I posted an image comparison a few pages back with the 35mm f1.2 and f1.4 Nokton's and you can see how dramatic of difference there is between them in how they render.
I personally think the 35mm f1.4 bokeh is quite bad, and I find it very jittery and distracting looking, but other people love it for that very reason, as it does have a unique sort of "lofi" retro look. Its the total opposite of a Cron style, and for some, thats a plus.
Just have to experiment, but luckily there are lots of good lenses out there, most reasonably priced, and you can usually buy them for about you can sell them for, so just have to try some stuff til you find something thats your taste, which really is part of the fun
That Fotodiox Pro line does look better than others that I've seen in regards to the lens release switch, although it looks like it still protrudes more than the Voigtlander. I don't have particularly giant hands or anything, but I don't like the finger area of the grip to be obstructed. Do your fingers hit the release switch at all?
It don't find it gets in the way at all, its actually pretty low profile in design and hardly any more noticeable than the cheaper ones with the small little release tabs.
millsart wrote:
It don't find it gets in the way at all, its actually pretty low profile in design and hardly any more noticeable than the cheaper ones with the small little release tabs.
Yeah, I have a cheaper one with the small little release tabs, too, but they still stick out more than the flush tab on the Voigtlander. Of course, I do use a half case with the NEX often, so that takes up a bit more finger room, but, even without it, I prefer the Voigtlander tab quite a bit...although I certainly can't say whether that is worth and extra $100 to folks. That is a bit crazy on my part!
My most egregious offense is that I bought a second version of the Voigtlander in silver for my silver ZM lens, and I must admit that it looks incredible, since they match, but I believe that I'm not supposed to care about such things.
douglasf13 wrote:
My most egregious offense is that I bought a second version of the Voigtlander in silver for my silver ZM lens, and I must admit that it looks incredible, since they match, but I believe that I'm not supposed to care about such things.
You should care Douglas; those who don't care buy grey ferrarris
sebboh wrote:
the close focus distance on the contax appears to be about 16 inches. i've had the contax 45/2, the pen f 42/1.2, the pen f 38/1.8, but no pen f 40/1.4. i think i can extrapolate for familial traits though - the contax will have better contrast, much better flair resistance, less distortion, less field curvature, and be a bit sharper stopped down (almost certainly at f/2 as well). the pen f will have a much better focusing experience (very nice focus ring vs on adapter focus ring), also be very sharp, but suffer from some field curvature, focus an inch or two closer, be a stop faster, and have more interesting bokeh. the contax's bokeh can be described as average - what you'd expect from a very well corrected lens. the pen f's will be more funky - much worse in some situations, but truly awesome in a select few....Show more →
thanks for that, looking at the images you posted some show good 3d. lately i started leaning towards preferring 3d over creamier bokeh, which i don't think the pen 40mm does well. or maybe its the photog . it would be interesting to see same scenes taken with the contax 45 and the pen 40
kahren wrote:
thanks for that, looking at the images you posted some show good 3d. lately i started leaning towards preferring 3d over creamier bokeh, which i don't think the pen 40mm does well. or maybe its the photog . it would be interesting to see same scenes taken with the contax 45 and the pen 40
i'm pretty sure the the contax 45 will produce more micro contrast and general contrast, so i'll definitely say it'd be better for producing 3D (to me).
My thumb kept wanting to rest in that area, but I'd hit the movie button all of the time, so the camera leather gives my thumb a place to rest without moving around. I wish we could reprogram the movie button, since I rarely use it. 
