| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/06/2015 03:44:28 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
I have the 35mm 1.2 Nokton |
That is one of the few wide lenses that apparently works very well on the Sony A7's. The Voghtlander 21mm f/1.8 that Paul makes great use of is another. I like the look of both of them although Zeiss has recently come out with a 35mm 1.4 m-mount which is meant to be superb and i'm drooling over. 35mm is not a favourite focal length of mine though so it's one that can wait. |
|
|
|
08/06/2015 03:45:20 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
These are in Leica M Mount. There are many adapters out there for Leica M. |
This is really good for those using mirrorless cameras... for DLSRs, however, the very short register distance of the Leica M mount (27.95mm) will make mounting them while maintaining infinity focus impossible.
ETA: The register distance is also called the Flange Focal Distance.
Message edited by author 2015-08-06 15:49:05.
|
|
|
|
08/06/2015 05:00:25 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by rooum:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
I have the 35mm 1.2 Nokton |
That is one of the few wide lenses that apparently works very well on the Sony A7's. The Voghtlander 21mm f/1.8 that Paul makes great use of is another. I like the look of both of them although Zeiss has recently come out with a 35mm 1.4 m-mount which is meant to be superb and i'm drooling over. 35mm is not a favourite focal length of mine though so it's one that can wait. |
I really do like the 35mm 1.2. I actually bought it from a fellow DPCer in the UK. It has a quality to the image that I really like, and it's super sharp.
A couple of challenge entries taken with it.
 
My current entry in the Free Study was also taken with this lens.
|
|
|
|
08/06/2015 05:02:59 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
These are in Leica M Mount. There are many adapters out there for Leica M. |
This is really good for those using mirrorless cameras... for DLSRs, however, the very short register distance of the Leica M mount (27.95mm) will make mounting them while maintaining infinity focus impossible.
ETA: The register distance is also called the Flange Focal Distance. |
You're right, I was thinking more mirrorless than dSLR. Although, Voigtlander does make a line of lenses in Nikon mount, even has the chip in the mount. The 58mm 1.4 looks pretty sweet.
|
|
|
|
08/06/2015 05:58:19 PM · #30 |
Question - - nevermind, that page Fritz listed answered it:
Originally posted by Wikipedia:
In order to produce an adaptor that permits focus to infinity without corrective optics, the flange-to-film distance the lens is designed for must be greater than that of the camera body it is to be adapted to, giving room for the adaptor. |
So corrective optics (hence $$ to maintain quality) are required for a body in a system that has a longer FFD. Mirrorless are shallow, DSLRs longer. Interesting, Nikon-F is longer than Canon-EF.
Plus it lists all the systems' FFD's. Excellent. Perhaps a mirrorless is in my future. :)
Message edited by author 2015-08-06 19:03:03. |
|
|
|
08/06/2015 06:09:39 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Question - do adapters typically have an element in them, or are they just spacers? Presumably an element could reduce quality a tad? (I may be jaded by having used a "cheap macro filter" which made the images suck, vs extension tubes which work great comparatively.)
This M lens to EF mount adapter looks like an empty spacer to me... but reviews on a similar one say it can't focus to infinity.
Maybe it depends on whether you need to increase or reduce the Flange Focal Distance (thanks Fritz)? You could increase with just air, but to properly reduce you'd need an element?
Perhaps a Sony is in my future. :) |
Correct on all points. Ideally the adapter will just be an empty sleeve with electronic connections to link the lens to your camera. This works if the native camera body is THICKER than your recipient camera body, so you have to put in a spacer to get the lens the right distance from the focal plane. That's what's so cool about these Sony a7 cameras especially; they can fit any lens every built pretty much.
If you're going the other direction, say trying to put a Nikon lens on a Canon body (dSLRs), THEN your adapter would have to have glass in it, because the body case on a Nikon is THINNER (less deep) than the Canon's.
The example you noted of an adapter that won't work at infinity, that's because it's trying to mount lenses intended for a rangefinder camera (very thin/shallow body) to a dSLR (very thick/deep body because it includes a mirror box).
R. |
|
|
|
08/06/2015 06:19:17 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
... say trying to put a Nikon lens on a Canon body (dSLRs), THEN your adapter would have to have glass in it, because the body case on a Nikon is THINNER (less deep) than the Canon's |
Thanks Robert! Wait, I read that chart as Nikon-F mount is thicker than EF, Nikon-S is thinner than EF. So which Nikon mount is more prevalent? |
|
|
|
08/06/2015 06:56:30 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
... say trying to put a Nikon lens on a Canon body (dSLRs), THEN your adapter would have to have glass in it, because the body case on a Nikon is THINNER (less deep) than the Canon's |
Thanks Robert! Wait, I read that chart as Nikon-F mount is thicker than EF, Nikon-S is thinner than EF. So which Nikon mount is more prevalent? |
Nikon F is the one used on all of Nikon's DSLRs.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2015 01:20:06 AM · #34 |
Phew, manual focus is hard at 1.4 -- that focusing screen may be a good idea. Bumping up to f/2 - f/2.8 certainly improves my keeper ratio!
A couple other notes with this lens: the camera is completely unaware of the aperture, so it doesn't record in the exif what the aperture is. It does meter correctly on aperture priority. I also don't get red "in-focus" indicator dots (not sure if I should or not.)
The min focus distance at 3.3' is juuust far enough to be slightly irritating -- I like getting in close, and that's part of what makes great bokeh. I may play with my smallest extension tube on it.
It'll take some getting used to, but I'm excited for the challenge, actually.
Message edited by author 2015-08-07 10:53:31. |
|
|
|
08/07/2015 09:27:31 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Phew, manual focus is hard at 1.4 -- that focusing screen may be a good idea. Bumping up to f/2 - f/2.8 certainly improves my keeper ratio!
A couple other notes with this lens: the camera is completely unaware of the aperture, so it doesn't record in the exif what the aperture is. It does meter correctly on aperture priority. The min focus distance at 3.3' is juuust far enough to be slightly irritating -- I like getting in close, and that's part of what makes great bokeh. I may play with my smallest extension tube on it.
It'll take some getting used to, but I'm excited for the challenge, actually. |
I have to use a tripod for my shots at f/2.8 because the slightest movement in the focus is lost with just a breath. But if you use it on a tripod it's golden...It was the same with my 50mm f/1.4 and I've used extension tube(s). More for getting in closer with the 50mm. My 55mm is a 1:1 ratio which is swwwwweeet, |
|
|
|
08/07/2015 05:10:12 PM · #36 |
Try f/0.95 as a focussing challenge.
About 50 years old and a bargain (compared to the Leica equivalent).
I love the way it looks:
   |
|
|
|
08/07/2015 05:14:14 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Paul:
Try f/0.95 as a focussing challenge. |
I didn't know it was possible to go under 1! |
|
|
|
08/07/2015 06:26:52 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Paul:
Try f/0.95 as a focussing challenge. |
I didn't know it was possible to go under 1! |
Try Stanley Kubrick's Zeiss f/0.7 lenses. Zeiss only made 10 of them. Six went to NASA and Kubrick bought three.
There are actually a couple of affordable super fast lenses available now apart from Paul's Canon. The Chinese company, Mitakon have come out with a 50mm f/0.95 for Sony that does look ok. Plus i like that box it comes with.
Message edited by author 2015-08-07 18:30:36. |
|
|
|
08/07/2015 07:06:14 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Paul:
Try f/0.95 as a focussing challenge. |
I actually sold a copy of that one for a friend a few years back. There were two versions of it, one for Canon rangefinders, the other used as a TV lens. The TV version could be easily converted to rangefinder use.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2015 09:24:44 PM · #40 |
The Leica 50mm .95 Noctilux runs above $10,000.
If you follow any of the Leica forums or Facebook sites you'd be amazed at how many people own one. |
|
|
|
08/09/2015 02:55:00 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by Paul:
Try f/0.95 as a focussing challenge. |
I actually sold a copy of that one for a friend a few years back. There were two versions of it, one for Canon rangefinders, the other used as a TV lens. The TV version could be easily converted to rangefinder use. |
There's the mounting issue and then the rangefinder coupling issue. Mine is a rangefinder variant and has a section of the back glass element cut away to allow the coupling to mate. However, my Canon 7sz (the camera it came with) has two mounts, an internal LTM and an external mount. This particular lens used the outer mount and is not natively capable of being mounted on any other rangefinder (despite being a rangefinder lens). I've had mine converted to Leica M mount and can now be used on my M240 and on my Sony A7II with a M to FE adaptor.
Rangerfinder focussing is a bit too tricky anyway and if I use it on the M240, I tend to use the EVF with focus peaking. |
|
|
|
08/09/2015 10:30:10 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by Paul:
There's the mounting issue and then the rangefinder coupling issue. Mine is a rangefinder variant and has a section of the back glass element cut away to allow the coupling to mate. However, my Canon 7sz (the camera it came with) has two mounts, an internal LTM and an external mount. This particular lens used the outer mount and is not natively capable of being mounted on any other rangefinder (despite being a rangefinder lens). I've had mine converted to Leica M mount and can now be used on my M240 and on my Sony A7II with a M to FE adaptor.
Rangerfinder focussing is a bit too tricky anyway and if I use it on the M240, I tend to use the EVF with focus peaking. |
Ha, I was unaware that there were variants *within* the rangefinder variant!
One of the reasons I really like the Canon EOS mount is its adaptability. Mirrorless takes that to a new level. For that reason alone, I know that there is a mirrorless body in my future, but that day is probably still a couple years off.
|
|
|
|
08/09/2015 10:51:39 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Ok, I just saw a Canon 85mm 1.2, salivated, missed my mid-range primes (I've owned an 85 1.8 and a 50 1.4, one sold, one dropped), did some reading, and I discovered the Rokinon 85mm 1.4 for $239.
I asked myself, "Self, how did you not know about this lens?!" It was an insta-buy! I know it's all manual, but reviews are decent and the price for this speed is fantastic! A portrait / still-life lover's dream come true? But curiously, not many dpc owners.
This makes me wonder -- what other lesser-known, reasonably-priced lens gems are out there? Used? Adapted? Niche? What'cha got and what's it best at? |
I own the Rokinon 85/1.4 for micro 4/3rds and the only thing I don't like is it suffers from bad CA that I'm still not proficient at cleaning up. Other than that it's sharp with beautiful bokeh and excellent build quality. Oh, and the hood it comes with fits very poorly and is of low quality but that's pretty minor.
Rokinon (same lenses as Bower and Samyang) offer quality lenses in many different focal lengths and if you want another great value priced portrait lens you may want to check out their new 135mm f2.0 lens. I don't own it but I already have a Minolta 135mm MD f2.8 (not the better Rokkor-X) that I'm very fond of and got for just $40 off of ebay.
One of the great things about EVFs is that they make manual focus so easy and accurate. I get far more keepers now using the enlarged view and focus peaking on my Panasonic GX-7 and to me it's a more involved way of shooting that I enjoy a lot more than autofocus. Btw, the contrast detection autofocus on mirrorless m43 cameras are very accurate and just as fast as the phase detection used on DSLR cameras and lenses for AFS shooting but fall short when using AFC for moving subjects. And they never have to be calibrated for front of back focus problems either. |
|
|
|
08/10/2015 12:06:28 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
it suffers from bad CA that I'm still not proficient at cleaning up. Other than that it's sharp with beautiful bokeh and excellent build quality. |
Yep, I can confirm all that.
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
you may want to check out their new 135mm f2.0 lens. |
Ooh, looks like another nice, fast, reasonably priced manual prime. For me, I'm pretty happy with my similarly priced 80-200 f/2.8, though, but that 2.6' min focus distance sure looks nice.
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
fall short when using AFC for moving subjects |
I've owned a digital rebel, Nikon D700 and a 5D mk II, and I've never been impressed with auto-focus on moving subjects. Maybe that's what you pay the big 1D bucks for?
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
One of the great things about EVFs is that they make manual focus so easy and accurate. |
Yep. I just received the EG-S super precision focusing screen, and I wasn't that impressed unfortunately. It was a little better, but not much. At the same time, I discovered and played with live view for focus, and it's pretty amazing, even without peaking.
Quite honestly, this has me even more interested in checking out a mirrorless, probably in the Sony lineup. I actually think I'm more thoughtful composing on the LCD (though admittedly I've only tried it briefly, and action could be harder.) |
|
|
|
08/10/2015 09:01:55 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Yep. I just received the EG-S super precision focusing screen, and I wasn't that impressed unfortunately. It was a little better, but not much. At the same time, I discovered and played with live view for focus, and it's pretty amazing, even without peaking.
Quite honestly, this has me even more interested in checking out a mirrorless, probably in the Sony lineup. I actually think I'm more thoughtful composing on the LCD (though admittedly I've only tried it briefly, and action could be harder.) |
same here, i installed mine and i expected to see more of a difference. its definitely easier to hit focus manually but I'm sort of under whelmed. of course it is easier to visualize the wide open DOF before you take the shot.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2015 10:43:41 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by Mike:
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Yep. I just received the EG-S super precision focusing screen, and I wasn't that impressed unfortunately. It was a little better, but not much. At the same time, I discovered and played with live view for focus, and it's pretty amazing, even without peaking.
Quite honestly, this has me even more interested in checking out a mirrorless, probably in the Sony lineup. I actually think I'm more thoughtful composing on the LCD (though admittedly I've only tried it briefly, and action could be harder.) |
same here, i installed mine and i expected to see more of a difference. its definitely easier to hit focus manually but I'm sort of under whelmed. of course it is easier to visualize the wide open DOF before you take the shot. |
Do make sure that the camera diopter is optimized for your vision. I found this to be more critical with the EG-S than the standard screen. The EG-S also took a little while to get accustomed to, but I can definitely say that my MF hit rate has jumped dramatically with the EG-S. Not that manually focusing a fast lens can ever be mistaken for "easy."
I will have to try using live view, although I am very much a viewfinder kinda guy.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2015 10:47:55 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Quite honestly, this has me even more interested in checking out a mirrorless, probably in the Sony lineup. I actually think I'm more thoughtful composing on the LCD (though admittedly I've only tried it briefly, and action could be harder.) |
I'd make sure you try one out in a shop for a bit before going for one. I love the mirrorless cameras from Sony, Fuji and Olympus and they are much better the dslr's in many ways but there are many ways in which they lag behind such as auto-focus etc. |
|
|
|
08/10/2015 12:13:36 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Do make sure that the camera diopter is optimized for your vision. I found this to be more critical with the EG-S than the standard screen. The EG-S also took a little while to get accustomed to, but I can definitely say that my MF hit rate has jumped dramatically with the EG-S. Not that manually focusing a fast lens can ever be mistaken for "easy."
I will have to try using live view, although I am very much a viewfinder kinda guy. |
it is, i noticed a difference, i was just expecting to see a marginal increase in the ability to manual focus through the viewfinder. when i first looked through it I checked to make sure i bought the right one. :)
|
|
|
|
08/10/2015 12:44:55 PM · #49 |
Yep, that was exactly my experience. It was, "huh, that's a little better I guess." The other thing that had me down was that I got it shipped form Amazon, and the package had clearly been opened, and there were a few specks on the screen, so my negative impression wasn't entirely the EG-S's fault.
But again, I've was surprisingly impressed with live view focus when zoomed in. However, I'd want to see both the full crop and a zoom-ed bit (ideally I could move the zoomed-in bit.) Apparently some cameras do this? Looks like this feature is called "dual mode" on the Fuji XT-1. Do the Sonys have this? Seems awesome! |
|
|
|
08/10/2015 07:44:54 PM · #50 |
I had the opportunity to mess with Live View focus for a little macro work this afternoon, documenting an issue at work. I went back to the viewfinder. The rear screen just doesn't give me as good an indication of the focus plane, probably because of the relatively low resolution.
|
|
