carstenw wrote:
So I started trying to work around the fat DoF by finding subjects which stood alone in space, padded by a bunch of air before the next foreground/background object.
...
Anyway, starting with my daughter\'s trike, I started hitting what I feel is the right formula for generating 3D with the 50MP. It isn\'t super strong, like Martin\'s leather chair shot, but it is there. The foreground needs to be absent, the subject must stand alone in the plane of focus, more or less, and the background needs to be removed, but not completely absent.
....
Anyone who has a 50MP and is interested in the experiment could follow along with their own shots. This lens clearly has 3D potential under the right circumstances. I am still not producing shots which pop right out of the screen, but I am getting closer..
Hmm, nice shots Carsten, but I couldn\'t agree less with your theory. In my experience the 50 MP excels close up and at infinity but is really nothing special at medium distances (compared to other ZE\'s that is). The 50 Planar on the other hand is really superb at medium distances. Your car shot and bike shot would have IMO rendered much better with the Planar, and I\'ll explain why.
The key can be found in the MTF charts for both lenses (you can find them here: http://www.zeissimages.com/mtf.php). The distinct feature of both the 100 and 50 Makro Planars is the very high fine detail contrast (look at the 40 lp/mm). The Planar on the other hand has a low contrast in the fine detail and high contrast in the medium detail. When you shoot an object like the car with the MP you get a more fine detailed texture. With the Planar on the other hand more low frequency components would be emphasized - i.e you would get the appearance of a higher contour contrast. For objects with simple colors this means a lot, making them pop much more.
So if we go through the distances:
First close up. High contrast, high detail, excellent bokeh. Like it\'s 100mm big brother the 50 MP really shines here:
You can move back a bit, and it\'s a great portrait lens:
However, as you move further back the problems start. The increased DOF near the focal plane and the further sharp dropoff to blur are really not the strong point of this lens. Where the Planar would have had a graceful transition here we get a rapid jump and relatively dodgy bokeh.
..in short, not particularly impressive, but rather messy.
Alternatively at medium distances, as we see in your car shot when there is no busy background to interfere we get a rather mediocre transition from sharpness to blur. The colors are still excellent of course, but the rendering as a whole is really nothing special. The car shot implies a perspective and thus gives a 3D effect, but that\'s not the real thing. Here\'s another example of implied perspective:
This has nothing to do with the lens though. Here\'s the same effect with a Canon 135mm:
You can find some special cases for the 50 MP where you want to bring out a detailed texture of an object without emphasizing the contours of it, but I have found few real world examples where that works.
As we move to infinity, we have a superb lens again with an exceptional rendering of high frequency detail:
So in my experience the sweet spot of the 50 MP is close up - from macro to headshot portrait distances. In the medium distance range the 50 Planar is king. For larger distances to infinity and stopped down it becomes much more a question of personal preference. The Planar will give you high contour contrast while the Makro Planar will give you the fine detail.
carstenw wrote:
So I started trying to work around the fat DoF by finding subjects which stood alone in space, padded by a bunch of air before the next foreground/background object.
...
Anyway, starting with my daughter\'s trike, I started hitting what I feel is the right formula for generating 3D with the 50MP. It isn\'t super strong, like Martin\'s leather chair shot, but it is there. The foreground needs to be absent, the subject must stand alone in the plane of focus, more or less, and the background needs to be removed, but not completely absent.
....
Anyone who has a 50MP and is interested in the experiment could follow along with their own shots. This lens clearly has 3D potential under the right circumstances. I am still not producing shots which pop right out of the screen, but I am getting closer..
Hmm, nice shots Carsten, but I couldn\'t agree less with your theory. In my experience the 50 MP excels close up and at infinity but is really nothing special at medium distances (compared to other ZE\'s that is). The 50 Planar on the other hand is really superb at medium distances. Your car shot and bike shot would have IMO rendered much better with the Planar, and I\'ll explain why.
The key can be found in the MTF charts for both lenses (you can find them here: http://www.zeissimages.com/mtf.php). The distinct feature of both the 100 and 50 Makro Planars is the very high fine detail contrast (look at the 40 lp/mm). The Planar on the other hand has a low contrast in the fine detail and high contrast in the medium detail. When you shoot an object like the car with the MP you get a more fine detailed texture. With the Planar on the other hand more low frequency components would be emphasized - i.e you would get the appearance of a higher contour contrast. For objects with simple colors this means a lot, making them pop much more.
So if we go through the distances:
First close up. High contrast, high detail, excellent bokeh. Like it\'s 100mm big brother the 50 MP really shines here:
You can move back a bit, and it\'s a great portrait lens:
However, as you move further back the problems start. The increased DOF near the focal plane and the further sharp dropoff to blur are really not the strong point of this lens. Where the Planar would have had a graceful transition here we get a rapid jump and relatively dodgy bokeh.
..in short, not particularly impressive, but rather messy.
Alternatively at medium distances, as we see in your car shot when there is no busy background to interfere we get a rather mediocre transition from sharpness to blur. The colors are still excellent of course, but the rendering as a whole is really nothing special. You can find some special cases where you want to bring out a detailed texture of an object without emphasizing the contours of it, but I have found few real world examples where that works.
As we move to infinity, we have a superb lens again with an exceptional rendering of high frequency detail:
So in my experience the sweet spot of the 50 MP is close up - from macro to headshot portrait distances. In the medium distance range the 50 Planar is king. For larger distances to infinity and stopped down it becomes much more a question of personal preference. The Planar will give you high contour contrast while the Makro Planar will give you the fine detail.
