Site Sponsors
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5
Results 201 to 209 of 209

Thread: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

  1. #201
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Looks good to me. Do you have any around f2.8-f4 by chance?

  2. #202
    Senior Member deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    310
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Hi Douglas,
    sorry I dont have it
    Leica M9 | SE 18 | Lux 24 | Lux 50 | ZM 35 | Nikon D700 | 35/1.8 | 45 PC-E | 50/1.4 | 70-200 VR II | SB 800+600 |SF 58|

  3. #203
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by deepdiver View Post
    OK, here is the picture, as i promised.
    INFINITY @ F11
    Looks great to me.

    Out of curiosity, is this Indonesia ? I might have to make a couple of trips there, to one of our manufacturing plants in the region (Batam, Indonesia).
    A900 with a few lenses, flashes etc.

  4. #204
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    Looks good to me. Do you have any around f2.8-f4 by chance?
    I think by his f/11 picture, he eliminated the DOF issue right ? Thus proving that even the farthest corners have no smearing, per se ?

    As far the 35/2 Biogon is concerned, it is a terrific performer even at f/2. By f/2.8, the whole field sharpens right up and by f/4 it is singing. Absolutely ZERO distortions (even onto the corners of Full-frame), which just amazed me.....you can shoot architectural stuff with absolutely no hesitation, with this lens.

    The 25/2.8 Biogon on the other hand has some minimal (but slightly complex) distortions but for a wide-angle, it is also a star performer.

    The only downside to the Biogons (vis-a-vis the Leica 35/2 Cron etc) is its slightly larger size (at least for a rangefinder lens) but there is no question in my mind, based on everything I read about it, that it is a superior all-round performer. Some people find the slightly larger size an advantage (ergonomically), when compared to the smaller (and controls tightly packed together) Leica 35/2.
    A900 with a few lenses, flashes etc.

  5. #205
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    I'm just curious how the corners look at around f4, because I do shoot at infinity at that aperture for some things when the light goes down. It is really starting to look the CV 35 2.5 is the only 35mm M lens with the smearing problem.

  6. #206
    Senior Member deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    310
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by roweraay View Post
    Looks great to me.

    Out of curiosity, is this Indonesia ? I might have to make a couple of trips there, to one of our manufacturing plants in the region (Batam, Indonesia).

    Hi Row,
    yes this is Indonesia, where millions of crazy motorcycles drivers on the road
    If the motorcycles hit ur car, then get ready to pay them some cash, no matter who is right or who is wrong.
    Motorcycle = Always win
    Car = Always Wrong in Indonesia
    Leica M9 | SE 18 | Lux 24 | Lux 50 | ZM 35 | Nikon D700 | 35/1.8 | 45 PC-E | 50/1.4 | 70-200 VR II | SB 800+600 |SF 58|

  7. #207
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by wayne_s View Post
    Look forward to seeing how the 35 'Lux does on the NEX5 on some good proper English hedges. Is that the latest FLE version?
    Yes, that's the one

    Quote Originally Posted by wayne_s View Post
    Could you snap a similar AOV comparison shot with the M9 and 35 'Lux to see the difference in IQ between the two systems? That would be very interesting to see too.
    Oh no . . . not going to do that - impossible to prove anything sensible because of the different sensor size and resolution. So, if you can't make a good methodology, all it achieves is to offend one lot of people and irritate another! But, it's the messenger (in this case me) that always gets shot!

    Two things are obvious:
    1. the higher resolution and lack of an AA filter together with the angled microlenses have a big advantage in good light (without a doubt).
    2. the NEX is much better at high ISO.

    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  8. #208
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by deepdiver View Post
    Hi Row,
    yes this is Indonesia, where millions of crazy motorcycles drivers on the road
    If the motorcycles hit ur car, then get ready to pay them some cash, no matter who is right or who is wrong.
    Motorcycle = Always win
    Car = Always Wrong in Indonesia
    Good to know that before-hand !

    I doubt I would be driving when in Batam, and will just ask the local folks to arrange transportation and let them handle all/any situations that might arise.
    A900 with a few lenses, flashes etc.

  9. #209
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    165
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Yes, that's the one



    Oh no . . . not going to do that - impossible to prove anything sensible because of the different sensor size and resolution. So, if you can't make a good methodology, all it achieves is to offend one lot of people and irritate another! But, it's the messenger (in this case me) that always gets shot!

    Two things are obvious:
    1. the higher resolution and lack of an AA filter together with the angled microlenses have a big advantage in good light (without a doubt).
    2. the NEX is much better at high ISO.

    all the best
    Ok, don't want you to get shot at.
    I thought people were pretty civil in this forum.
    I think comparison shots with the same framing/AOV is an accepted way to handle the difference between the FF sensor and a cropped sensor. They do that in the MF forum all the time.
    And upsizing the NEX 14MP image to the M9 18MP image size is the way to handle the MP difference of the two sensors. This way is the proper one but not everyone follows this when doing their high iso noise analysis comparisons.
    The microlenses help with light fall off and performance in the corners but are obviously more needed on a FF sensor camera and not nearly as much on the 1.5 crop sensor.
    What I wonder is whether the Leica M lenses can scale and not limit the IQ of the higher pixel density sensor of the NEX 5?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •