Previous versions of Tariq Gibran's message #13281458 « Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII »
Re: Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII
Steve Spencer wrote:
I will either get the camera modified or more likely get a Leica SL. It performs quite nicely on the A7r II without modification, but there is some added field curvature in the outer quarter or so of the image. If goes from a very flat field to a slightly curved field which curves in toward the camera. This can, IMO, ruin some shots at wider apertures, but it is also something that knowledgeable photographers can avoid and work around. Philber (Philippe) and Jako (Jack) both use it very well on an unmodified A7r II. So, it is not an easy answer to whether you need to modify the camera. I would do it. Others quite reasonably have not, but it does not work perfectly without a modification.
I have not seen anything thus far indicating that the ZM 35/1.4 would perform better on an SL (with regard to smearing or induced field curvature) vs an unmodified Sony A7x. So far, the tests I have seen (Sean Reid\'s) which compare the Leica digital M to the SL show that the SL suffers problems with troublesome rangefinder lenses vs the M. Conversely, some more recent retrofocus M designs (such as the newer Leica M 28/1.4 Aspherical), perform noticeably better on the SL vs M (which is an interesting development. Thus, I suspect that the most sure way to guarantee the ZM 35/1.4\'s best performance would either be on a digital M (obviously) or a modified Sony (vs the SL). Just something to consider.
Re: Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII
Steve Spencer wrote:
I will either get the camera modified or more likely get a Leica SL. It performs quite nicely on the A7r II without modification, but there is some added field curvature in the outer quarter or so of the image. If goes from a very flat field to a slightly curved field which curves in toward the camera. This can, IMO, ruin some shots at wider apertures, but it is also something that knowledgeable photographers can avoid and work around. Philber (Philippe) and Jako (Jack) both use it very well on an unmodified A7r II. So, it is not an easy answer to whether you need to modify the camera. I would do it. Others quite reasonably have not, but it does not work perfectly without a modification.
I have not seen anything thus far indicating that the ZM 35/1.4 would perform better on an SL (with regard to smearing or induced field curvature) vs an unmodified Sony A7x. So far, the tests I have seen (Sean Reid\'s) which compare the Leica digital M to the SL show that the SL suffers problems with troublesome rangefinder lenses vs the M. Conversely, some more recent retrofocus M designs (such as the newer Leica M 28/1.4 Aspherical, perform noticeably better on the SL vs M (which is an interesting development). Thus, I suspect that the most sure way to guarantee the ZM 35/1.4\'s best performance would either be on a digital M (obviously) or a modified Sony (vs the SL). Just something to consider.
Nov 09, 2015 at 03:14 PM
Previous versions of Tariq Gibran's message #13281458 « Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII »
