Lenses

[mercer]

49 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

The Leica is there as that's what I'll be shooting it on but yeah, I shot it on the Quattro just to tease you a bit !

Hint for L mount alliance sceptics about adapting lenses will note that I'll be putting a Nikon F and a Contax C/Y lens on with cheap adapters without any issues...

I got a bit too tied up in other stuff yesterday (not least the latest episode of the Brexit omnishambles !) but I'll do some this afternoon.

I don't want to pre-empt the results but, yeah, my early messing about points in the direction of the differences not being outrageous.

Considering the Samyangs change hands on eBay for a quarter of the price of the Contax Zeiss then that might be good news for you.

As you can then put the savings towards a Leica. 

I knew it! Well a Quattro is more likely than a Leica but since I’ve never, intentionally, shot a still since I bought my first DSLR, both probably aren’t the smartest of purchases.

Regarding Samyang vs Zeiss... I assume only a sophisticated eye would notice the difference and only a nerd would care one way or the other.

Which leads me to a bigger point... I am probably overthinking this stuff.

20 minutes ago, JordanWright said:

Thats what I do with the 28-70 2.6 and the helios 58mm on a speed booster XL, although I do find myself wanting something wider sometimes 

That 28-70 is such a cool lens. I briefly had one last year but bought it for such a great price, I decided to make a little extra cash on it.

Part of me thinks I would probably be better off selling a bunch of things and getting a Canon 24-70mm and the 50mm 1.2 L for a two lens set and be done with it.

But...

There are just so many lenses that are mechanical and optical works of art... the Nikkor 35mm 1.4... or the Zeiss 28mm f/2 “The Hollywood” to resign myself to just two lenses.

But on the other hand, I’ve always subscribed to the notion that story is king so all of these lenses are truly just to tickle my fancy and could have a minor effect in the end.

[kye]

57 minutes ago, mercer said:

Couldn’t agree more. I think I’ve mentioned this before, probably multiple times, but I am the type of shooter that could film an entire movie with a single lens. But then I always worry I should have at least a second longer lens option. Which is another reason why I like fast 50mm lenses for that middle ground.

You raise a great point about having different sets, especially if I stick with my gut reaction of having a modern and vintage lens set. I guess as of now, my modern set is my Canon lenses and my vintage is my Zeiss QBM. It’s those damn Zeiss ZF Classics are throwing a wrench into my plans.

Another option that was kinda my original plan when I bought my 5D3 was to build a set around one fast prime and then get a zoom to cover the rest of the focal lengths. For instance, I had the Canon 24-70mm f/4 and the 35mm f/2 as my fast prime. Due to some unforeseen life circumstances I had to abandon that idea. But maybe that’s worth revisiting.

Anyway, the moral of the story is that I blame you because all of your lens tests got me thinking. 

So, thanks!

You're welcome!!

Of course, nothing in my lens tests is stopping you from just putting a 50mm on the camera and then leaving the house...  

28 minutes ago, JordanWright said:

Thats what I do with the 28-70 2.6 and the helios 58mm on a speed booster XL, although I do find myself wanting something wider sometimes 

Wider than the 28? or similar to but wider than the Helios?

If you're talking the helios, then here: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?152436-Russian-Soviet-USSR-Lens-Survival-Guide

You're welcome too!!

ah, pigeons located, cats thrown..  my work is done!

[JordanWright]

Yeah the Zeiss 28mm is constantly tempting me and I'm looking at maybe picking up the Zeiss Flektogon 20mm 2.8

[Emanuel]

6 minutes ago, JordanWright said:

Yeah the Zeiss 28mm is constantly tempting me and (...)
 

I've used a pretty affordable Vivitar 28mm f2.0 coupled to a native F mount to MFT adapter along the P4K, aside flares, nothing else to declare : -)

[BTM_Pix]

Back to vanilla glass with a couple of stills from the Pocket 4K with cheapish second hand utilitarian EF lenses that have IS.

Colour is the Canon 10-18mm f4.5/5.6 and the B&W from the Tamron 16-300mm (yes 300mm) F/3.5-6.3.

Both of them benefit light gathering and sharpness wise from being put on a speed booster as they are here.

[mercer]

52 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

I've used a pretty affordable Vivitar 28mm f2.0 coupled to a native F mount to MFT adapter along the P4K, aside flares, nothing else to declare : -)

That lens is often mentioned in reviews of other 28mm f/2 lenses. It seems the general consensus is it’s a pretty decent lens but for only a little more you can get the Nikkor ai-s which is phenomenal. Either way, it’s a great option for a budget lens.

58 minutes ago, JordanWright said:

Yeah the Zeiss 28mm is constantly tempting me and I'm looking at maybe picking up the Zeiss Flektogon 20mm 2.8

I have the ZF version and not the traditional Contax “Hollywood.” I got it for a good price but it wasn’t cheap by any means. And the only reason I bought it was because it was a Duclos mod. By just using it for a few minutes in the house, I couldn’t say it was leaps and bounds better than the Nikkor 28 or the Zeiss QBM 25mm. But I have a feeling that the Hollywood is a lens that requires a little more than a couple minutes around the house test.

1 hour ago, kye said:

You're welcome!!

Of course, nothing in my lens tests is stopping you from just putting a 50mm on the camera and then leaving the house...  

Comment of the day!

59 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Back to vanilla glass with a couple of stills from the Pocket 4K with cheapish second hand utilitarian EF lenses that have IS.

Colour is the Canon 10-18mm f4.5/5.6 and the B&W from the Tamron 16-300mm (yes 300mm) F/3.5-6.3.

Both of them benefit light gathering and sharpness wise from being put on a speed booster as they are here.

Thanks for proving my suspicions that I am wasting time and money worrying about lenses. 

[Cinegain]

@BTM_Pix That Canon zoom... needs some kind of modification when adapted to MFT, could you confirm? And is that a lot of trouble?

[BTM_Pix]

42 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

@BTM_Pix That Canon zoom... needs some kind of modification when adapted to MFT, could you confirm? And is that a lot of trouble?

It does need a modification but its perfectly easy to do.

Here is a full tutorial on how to do it for this specific lens (but can be applied to other similarly tricky EF-S lenses) although this is a far higher precision route to doing it than I did.

I took the "hacking" part of the title of this tutorial a little bit more literally !

 

[BTM_Pix]

1 hour ago, mercer said:

Thanks for proving my suspicions that I am wasting time and money worrying about lenses. 

Speaking of which....

I did tests at f1.4 and at f5.6

The top row is the Samyang 85mm at f1.4 and f5.6 and the bottom row is the Contax Zeiss 85mm at f1.4 and f5.6

I deliberately underexposed slightly as I would do normally with the SL but have added no corrections hence the slightly darker image.

First up, the chart stuff.

The Contax Zeiss has a glow at f1.4 but its a tiny focus error on my part being a blind buffoon.

I could have stopped at this point as its pretty obvious that the difference between them is marginal but I like to give value for money so I did a bit more of a contextual test.

It might not seem an obvious test (it looks more like a cry for help with all that booze) but its quite informative to illustrate the out of focus rendering, handling of colour and tonality, detail etc etc.

Same lineup, so the top row is the Samyang 85mm at f1.4 and f5.6 and the bottom row is the Contax Zeiss 85mm at f1.4 and f5.6 and focus is set on the Cointreau bottle.

Just to add a bit more context to what you are getting separation wise for your f1.4 dollar, I brought a couple of slower manual lenses of a similar focal length to do the same test with with both being shot at their maximum aperture.

The top row is the Contax Zeiss 28-85mm at 85mm f3.4 and f5.6 and the bottom row is the Leica 90mm Summicron M at f2 and f5.6

CONCLUSION ?

My own view is its not really worth pixel peeping between the Samyang 85mm f1.4 and Contax Zeiss 85mm f1.4 when they are as close as this.

The Samyang though.....bargain.

[mercer]

@BTM_Pix great test, thank you. Hmm... I am at a loss for words. I think it’s safe to say that the Zeiss is better especially with the color tonality of the whites in the shot.

But overall, the Zeiss isn’t an obvious, hands down winner.

Damn, maybe I need to test the Rokinon/Samyang 50mm. 

Do you happen to have the 24mm?

[Parker]

@BTM_Pix Thanks for the test! I'm kind of shocked the difference isn't more obvious either, especially since in recent months I have switched from Rokinon cine primes to exclusively contax zeiss glass ? 

[AlexTrinder96]

Great stuff @BTM_Pix love both the 85 and 135 from Samyang! So underrated!

[BTM_Pix]

29 minutes ago, mercer said:

@BTM_Pix great test, thank you. Hmm... I am at a loss for words. I think it’s safe to say that the Zeiss is better especially with the color tonality of the whites in the shot.

But overall, the Zeiss isn’t an obvious, hands down winner.

Damn, maybe I need to test the Rokinon/Samyang 50mm. 

Do you happen to have the 24mm?

I think it has a fraction more contrast but really only a fraction and its nothing that couldn't be adjusted for.

I have the 8mm (not a fan but purely for ultra wides of stadiums so a necessary evil), the 14mm and, yes, the 24mm f1.4

Is that a challenge ?

28 minutes ago, Parker said:

@BTM_Pix Thanks for the test! I'm kind of shocked the difference isn't more obvious either, especially since in recent months I have switched from Rokinon cine primes to exclusively contax zeiss glass ? 

I think I should take the post down while we sell our Contax Zeiss collections on eBay !

17 minutes ago, AlexTrinder96 said:

Great stuff @BTM_Pix love both the 85 and 135 from Samyang! So underrated!

I haven't got the 135mm but I've seen a few cheap enough that might change that...

[heart0less]

55 minutes ago, mercer said:

Do you happen to have the 24mm?

Beware of the Sammy 24 mm - there is a big copy variation. Some of them are stellar, some - not so much.

 

If you get a good copy, it's an exquisite lens.

[leslie]

6 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

 

i like this photo, that manhole has a lot of character. Here in aus we would probably  just concrete or bitumen right up to the edge of whatever piece of flat steel was left lying around. However does look alot like entrapment with that leica left out in the open like that

 

3 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

It might not seem an obvious test (it looks more like a cry for help with all that booze) but its quite informative to illustrate the out of focus rendering, handling of colour and tonality, detail etc etc.

CONCLUSION ?

 

i like to think you have shown admirable restraint ?

[BTM_Pix]

6 minutes ago, leslie said:

i like this photo, that manhole has a lot of character. Here in aus we would probably  just concrete or bitumen right up to the edge of whatever piece of flat steel was left lying around. However does look alot like entrapment with that leica left out in the open like that

Its to commemorate the spot from where Oskar Barnack took the very first picture with a Leica camera.

And this is it

6 minutes ago, leslie said:

i like to think you have shown admirable restraint ?

I'm a lightweight drinker so I'd have taken a shot of booze every time I took a shot of the booze I'd have been on my back before we got to the third lens.

[leslie]

10 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Its to commemorate the spot from where Oskar Barnack took the very first picture with a Leica camera.

And this is it

I'm a lightweight drinker so I'd have taken a shot of booze every time I took a shot of the booze I'd have been on my back before we got to the third lens.

i have done a similar thing except i'm cheap and i don't drink (alcohol)  i bought a bunch of different coloured bottles from some  $2 shops. waiting for a nice offcut of black granite from work to make up a bench top for the man cave

interesting story by the way.

[kye]

10 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

I could have stopped at this point as its pretty obvious that the difference between them is marginal but I like to give value for money so I did a bit more of a contextual test.

...

Just to add a bit more context to what you are getting separation wise for your f1.4 dollar, I brought a couple of slower manual lenses of a similar focal length to do the same test with with both being shot at their maximum aperture.

Thanks!  I feel like I got more value than I paid for ???

One of the things I noticed in my lens tests was that when I was comparing lenses with slightly different focal lengths at the same aperture the slight difference in DOF due to the slight aperture size actually made quite a bit of difference in 3D pop, even at something like f5.6 (which is F11 in FF terms).  In some sense there really isn't an alternative to faster glass.

8 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

I think I should take the post down while we sell our Contax Zeiss collections on eBay !

LOL, maybe.  Although when I was looking for comparisons I kept finding them in various places but what surprised me was that even with the right keywords google wasn't that good at unearthing them.  I wouldn't be too worried about how much we're impacting the global marketplace here in this thread 

[noone]

On ‎3‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 2:19 AM, mercer said:

That lens is often mentioned in reviews of other 28mm f/2 lenses. It seems the general consensus is it’s a pretty decent lens but for only a little more you can get the Nikkor ai-s which is phenomenal. Either way, it’s a great option for a budget lens.

 

That 28 f2 Vivitar is a decent enough lens but to me it has two main issues.    Firstly it has a lot more distortion than most 28mm lenses and secondly it often gets stuck blades.    I had two and one did have the blades stuck together while the other was ok.       I used it a fair bit but was not good with people close in due to the distortion.

[BTM_Pix]

On 3/13/2019 at 7:15 PM, mercer said:

Do you happen to have the 24mm?

Unfortunately I don't have a similarly fast 24mm to test against the Samyang 24mm f1.4

But as way of an interesting comparison I do have a reasonably fast 25mm lens.

So in the next episode of "Fun With Focal Lengths" we will be doing this...