uhoh7
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all! | |
Steve Spencer wrote:
uhoh7 wrote:
Steve Spencer wrote:
carstenw wrote:
Steve Spencer wrote:
uhoh7 wrote:
I\'ve read just the opposite, the reason why the FE35/2.8 basically outperforms the Loxia on the A7 is that perhaps Zeiss was not ready to fully commit to such extremes. My reasoning is: they went a aways in the thick CG direction, away from the film plane, and that just might put those lenses right in the sweet spot for the Kolari thickness.
But I suspect we will see sometime soon. 
Where have you read that? Everything that I have seen from Zeiss suggests that they were designed specifically for the cover glass of the A7 series cameras.
I don\'t think there is any evidence, but I do believe the same. The performance in the corners of the FE35 and especially the FE24-70 is just not good enough for Zeiss, and I suspect that they knew that Sony had used a cheap, thick sensor glass covering in their initial models, to keep prices down and increase the chance of success for the system as a whole. I think that they then designed lenses which performed acceptably on such glass, but which will shine, or at least do much better, when Sony releases higher-speced models.
But the FE 35 and FE 24-70 are Sony/Zeiss likely designed by Sony. And if you look at the ZM 35 f/2 on the modified cameras it looks a lot like the Loxia 35 on the unmodified cameras, so I don\'t think the Loxia lenses will do better on the modified cameras and I certainly don\'t think the Sony/Zeiss FE lenses will do better and there is a little evidence there. In Roger\'s imatest results, which are close up the FE lenses did just a tad worse and this deterioration should get a bit worse at infinity.
Of course the ZM 35/2 is designed for film and the best you will see from it digitally is on the M9, not A7.mod. The Loxia 35/2 is certainly not up to those standards on any stock A7 series camera, and most seem to feel it is bested by the FE 35/2.8. I don\'t think expectations have been met with the 35 loxia for many potential buyers.
Why? How could this be? As Carsten notes, the 2470 has also been a real disappointment, though it\'s not terrible of course, but not what we\'d hoped for and certainly not for the price.
So, Steve you and I can guess about who thought what, and what was designed for what, but those are things we can never know.
However, I will bet you a six pack of nice beer, loser funded via paypal, not to exceed 10USD, that the Loxia 35 is better on the A7.mod or A7r.mod. Also I suspect the 2470 will be better too, but let\'s stick to the Loxia.
Better will simply mean edges and corners at some apertures. without terrible loss in the center.
I do agree with you and Michael that the FE35 and 55 will be a bit worse. But I agree with Carsten that the Zeiss 2470 and Loxia were not \"properly designed\" for the thick cover.
Michael, I would add that a thick cover for M43 is no problem because you don\'t have near the angles going with that tiny sensor. In fact ALT FF glass seems fine on the M43, abeit, cropped.
That\'s a great bet, but we better make it 15 dollars. We take our beer seriously here in Canada
Of course we don\'t know for sure how it will turn out, but in my view Zeiss screwed up if the Loxia don\'t work best with the stock cover glass.
And I never liked FF glass on m4/3rds that much. It just didn\'t look that great, but many people do.
OK we\'re on 15USD paypaled for beverage of choice, for 15USD I\'ll find a red  , and you will be able to get good beer
Winner to be arbited by the community here, good?
Tried to test the Elmarit 28 V3 today, but the weather....
DSC01121 by unoh7, A7M Sonnetar
DSC01124 by unoh7, Elmarit 28 V3
Basically from what I see it\'s better but smoked by the 28 cron at every aperture.
|
