Luvwine wrote:
Well, had a snafu with adapters, but got in a Hawks Family version 3 Helicoid adapter in teh mail today for use on my A7r. With only a bit of light left, I went into the back yard and used it to shoot some distant trees. This was hardly a careful test, but told me that, as I suspected from my closer distance testing, the CV 35 1.2 is indeed very competitive with, and so far I would say at least equal to the FE 35 2.8 at comparable apertures in corner to corner sharpnes once stopped down to F5.6 and perhaps even before--and is certainly as sharp at larger apertures towards the center of the frame. It also has the benefit of two extra stops of light but is much heavier and lacks autofocus. This is preliminary on my part, but thought I would present what I found, however lacking in rigor. If I had to choose just one 35mm lens, I would be sorely tempted to choose the CV 35 1.2. Just for fun, I also tried my Lux 50 and adjusted the Helicoid so that the Lux 50\'s hard stop at infinity was indeed infinity focus. It still took till F5.6 before the extreme corners began tightening up and until F8 before they were respectable. The FE 55 was a bit better than the Lux 50 (at F8) in the corners by F4 (prior to F4, it was decent, but branches on the light sky produced a pretty nasty color fringing on some branches in the corner). The Lux never got as good as the FE 55 in the corners (at F4 on), but was still quite useable. I would say that the FE55 is doubtless the better landscape lens but the Lux is not bad. There were parts of the frame--closer to the center, where the Lux 50 had an advantage over the FE 55. For the price, the FE 55 is a remarkable lens. I would still rather use the Lux 50 in low light and in applications where corner to corner sharpness is not critical. Still, if choosing just one 50, and just for the Sony A7r, the FE 55 is the one.
I didn\'t receive the FE 55 yet (probably on Tuesday) but my initial tests and comparisons of the FE 35 against the ZM 35/2 at infinity and close range are very revealing.
IMHO, the ZM 25/2 on a Leica body is superior to the FE 35, but on the A7, I can see the FE 35 uniform sharpness across the frame. Even at f/8 the corners of the ZM do not reach the levels of the FE.
However, at close range, the image center of the ZM has much more life (more micro contrast and 3D) and the photos are more attractive. It also seems to have about 1/2 stop luminance advantage at similar apertures, which means the FE 35 is really a f/3.4 lens.
I hope that future cameras will have improved sensor performance in the corners, but for the time being, the FE 35 would be the way to go for most uniform performance.
Jan 12, 2014 at 10:55 AM
Previous versions of edwardkaraa's message #12060329 « A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses »
