Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 209

Thread: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

  1. #1
    Coms37
    Guest

    Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    I spent a large part of this morning reading up about third party lenses one would be able to use on a Nex.

    I've read about so many different lenses that for a non-techie like myself it becomes quite confusing.

    I have a simple question, what is the best performing "normal-focal length" lens/prime one can use on a Nex; good sharpness, center and edge/corners, nice color rendition, minimal discrepancies such fall-off, vignetting etc.

    Is this easy to answer?

  2. #2
    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've basically been scouring forums for a month in search of this answer. So far, we know that the Contax G 35 does ok in the corners, and the CV 35 2.5 does poorly. I haven't seen details corner crops at infinity from any others.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    I've been looking too, and bokeh is another priority for me, and edge/corner performance less so. I saw some nice samples on a forum from the new 35mm Lux asph, but spending $5K on a lens isn't an option for me.

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    I've been looking too, and bokeh is another priority for me, and edge/corner performance less so. I saw some nice samples on a forum from the new 35mm Lux asph, but spending $5K on a lens isn't an option for me.
    Yesterday at the farmers market I specifically was trying to torture the bokeh on the Contax G 35 with complicated backgrounds .....
    Attachment 33665 Attachment 33663 Attachment 33662 Attachment 33667
    Attachment 33666 Attachment 33664

  5. #5
    Coms37
    Guest

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    I even wondered if it was worth getting any kind of adapter.... most lens reviews on the Nex aren'r to spectacular. And as for a 5K 35 Asph. Lux.... I agree a tad more expensive than anticipated.

    I believe that all this fuss about trying different lenses through different adapters is more a "hobbyism" rather than actually achieving better results. I fully undertsand why folk would want to do that, I'm not one that is keen on these technicalities though. I like the form factore of the Nex, I like the zoom lens, although it's not even close to sliced bread, allas.

    I like the X1 IQ... expensive, rather sluggish but great imagery, now this should have interchangeable lenses, "get the M9" you would say, I tried the M9 but wasn't really "it" for me. I will however get by with the Nex/zoom but am afraid that I will always crave for a better OOC IQ since PP'ing with whatever medium I find very tedious....

    Me.... the difficult kind, I know :-)

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    And the other objective was sharpness- these are all the crops. I can post the full sized images if people want.
    Attachment 33668 Attachment 33669 Attachment 33672
    Attachment 33671 Attachment 33670

  7. #7
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Thanks, Terry! Now if you would please close (or better yet delete) this thread before the whole world sees it and make it impossible for me to find a used Contax G 35 for a reasonable price .

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    Thanks, Terry! Now if you would please close (or better yet delete) this thread before the whole world sees it and make it impossible for me to find a used Contax G 35 for a reasonable price .
    Somehow I was expecting that reaction from someone.

    I need to give credit to Monza for having me try this one....I hadn't paid full attention to the long Contax on m4/3 thread.

  9. #9
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Coms37 View Post
    I believe that all this fuss about trying different lenses through different adapters is more a "hobbyism" rather than actually achieving better results. I fully undertsand why folk would want to do that, I'm not one that is keen on these technicalities though. I like the form factore of the Nex, I like the zoom lens, although it's not even close to sliced bread, allas.
    Not for me. If Sony would offer a fast, standard prime, I wouldn't be nearly as worried about adapting rangefinder glass. Fast primes are the goal for me, on NEX or any other camera, and the current NEX offerings are only an average wide prime and a simple kit zoom. If/when Sony offers an excellent standard prime, I'll be all over it, but, until then, it's all alternative lenses for me.

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    Not for me. If Sony would offer a fast, standard prime, I wouldn't be nearly as worried about adapting rangefinder glass. Fast primes are the goal for me, on NEX or any other camera, and the current NEX offerings are only an average wide prime and a simple kit zoom. If/when Sony offers an excellent standard prime, I'll be all over it, but, until then, it's all alternative lenses for me.
    Well your first opportunity to see how they do is on the new 35mm DT lens that was just announced.

  11. #11
    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

    Unfortunately, I'm not really interested in adapting an Alpha prime for my daily standard prime, because the size of the Alpha lenses, plus the extra length from the adapter makes this a no-go for me. Granted, I'll probably adapt and use the 50mm, since it's a tele on NEX, and I don't mind the size for my occasional tele use. Your Contax 35 is still the lens for me, although they're becoming tough to find. I'm kicking myself, because I had a feeling it was the way to go a few months ago, and I should've planned ahead!

  12. #12
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Nice examples from the 35/2 Planar, Terry.

    It seems there are always compromises...RF lenses as a rule are small, with a shorter flange distance, so physically a nice match for the NEX. On the other hand, RF lenses generally don't focus close (with the Contax G focusing closer than Leica M counterparts) and because of their design, wides can have corner issues when used on digital sensors.

    If one is willing to overlook size as a criteria, then that opens up many SLR lenses, which focus closer and don't have corner issues.

    My wide choice for the NEX is a Nikkor 24/2.8, which has great bokeh (unusual for a wide, it's on Mike Johnston's bokeh list, scoring an 8), close range correction, and focuses to only 0.3m. The manual focus version is inexpensive. I used this lens quite a lot on my old Nikon D300, also an APS-C sensor camera, and was extremely happy with it. Adapted to the NEX, it will be a far smaller package than the Nikon was.

    With regards to size of SLR lenses, here is a comparison of a Leica 50/2 Summicron-R and the Sony 18-55 kit lens. Add a Leica R adapter, and they are similar in size (of course the Leica lens is relatively heavy compared to the plastic internal construction of the kit lens.) Close focus under 0.5m.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Robert, well said re: SLR/RF lens advantages/disadvantages re: close focus, lens size, and corner performance with wides. I had the Ai-S 28/2.8 and found that the sharpness and bokeh (on a D700, FM-2N, and D5000) were very good. Many of the manual focus SLR lenses are quite small. The adapter can make them a bit unwieldy though.

    I'm also looking at the ZM 35mm f/2 Biogon. Curious how that lens would compare to the Contax G 35/2 for use on an NEX body.

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    I did not have any time to test anything. I am here in India with a bunch of Olympus pen F lenses.

    As I expected, the pancake 38/2.8 is just a very sweet combo with the NEX.

    The 40/1.4 is doing a splendid job as well.

    [disclaimer: these may not be the "best" for the NEX but are much better than the NEX']

  15. #15
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    A good point, Vivek. Best depends on who is making the judgment and what their needs are. Makes me ponder a bit about things like 'Best Actor' and 'Best Song'.

    Amin, the 35/2 Biogon is a traditional RF-style wide, with an extended rear element. The 35/2 Planar Contax G is more like an SLR lens. I thought I saw some samples shots with the Biogon, will have to search. (Planar on the left.)

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Sorry, if it has already been mentioned, by does anyone know where a Contax G adapter for the NEX can be obtained ? I am interested in kicking up the performance a notch on my NEX5.

    Sony (via the president of their Imaging and Sound division) has already stated that Carl Zeiss lenses for the NEX are in the pipeline but if/when those arrive, I can sell off the 35/2, if I want to go with the CZ/NEX lenses.

    I already have the A-mount-to-NEX adapter but of course the extra inch added to the length of the A-mount lens, makes this a bit of a lopsided arrangement and hence want to go with a more compact option.....like say a reasonably priced Leica M or other RF options where the flange-back distance (and hence the adapter thickness) would be less obtrusive.
    A900 with a few lenses, flashes etc.

  17. #17
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Available here: http://bit.ly/ctQqNc

    Photo by Terry:

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Thanks for the image, Monza. Appreciate that.

    While looking at the other options around, any thoughts on how the Contax G 28mm f/2.8 performs on the NEX. Or alternatively, how does the Voigtlander 35 f/1.4 Nokton (M-mount) perform ?
    A900 with a few lenses, flashes etc.

  19. #19
    Senior Member deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    310
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    I'm using Nex 5 with ZM biogon 35/2
    I think this combo is really good....
    All @F2









    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|

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    156
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by deepdiver View Post
    I'm using Nex 5 with ZM biogon 35/2
    I think this combo is really good....
    All @F2
    those look great! have you checked to see if there's any corner smearing at infinity?

  21. #21
    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

    Ooh, those shots look great, deepdiver. We'd love to see some corner crops at infinity (the problem area for M lenses.)

  22. #22
    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
    I'm using Nex 5 with ZM biogon 35/2
    I think this combo is really good....
    All @F2
    The drawing style looks really good with the 35/2 Biogon.

    Still debating about the $559 Voigtlander 35/1.4 Nokton (200gms) and this Biogon....the larger max aperture and the small size of the Nokton sounds great, but have no idea how it performs on the NEX5.

    Here is the Nokton 35/1.4
    A900 with a few lenses, flashes etc.

  23. #23
    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
    Ooh, those shots look great, deepdiver. We'd love to see some corner crops at infinity (the problem area for M lenses.)
    I believe the Biogon 35/2 is pretty even in its rendering and maintains sharpness into the outer corners, even wide open. It is an impressive optic, even though I am trying to go as cheap as possible here (along with the f/1.4, which I doubt a future Sony NEX lens will match), by opting for the Nokton.

    Of course the 35/1.2 Nokton is also a sub-$900 lens, but is relatively large and heavy at 1.1lbs.....but of course is an f/1.2, which makes it a rare animal.
    A900 with a few lenses, flashes etc.

  24. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    156
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by roweraay View Post
    I believe the Biogon 35/2 is pretty even in its rendering and maintains sharpness into the outer corners, even wide open. It is an impressive optic, even though I am trying to go as cheap as possible here (along with the f/1.4, which I doubt a future Sony NEX lens will match), by opting for the Nokton.
    the issue douglas and i are concerned about is how the lens works on the NEX in particular, not the lenses general performance. many rangefinder lenses with a short distance from the rear element to the sensor have problems on digital in the corners that they don't have on film (due to the angle of incident light). that is why the m9 has offset microlenses on the edges of it's sensor.

  25. #25
    Senior Member deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    310
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Sorry i did not bring the infinity photo with ZM 35 today.
    I tried it yesterday, It's really good... did not see any smearing at all
    will post it later.
    BTW,
    I do have a sample from NEX 5 + Leica SE 18 at infinity.
    looks good!!



    crop 100% left



    crop 100% right



    To be honest I'm a bit disappointed with the JPG quality.
    Is there a way to open the RAW file?
    I tried LR 3, but cannot.
    Anyone?

    thx
    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|

  26. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    156
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    those look really good. that's great to know. i have been opening my NEX raw files with RPP which shows a lot more detail than i see in the jpegs. unfortunately RPP is mac only and not very smooth workflow wise. hopefully adobe will come out with support soon.

    Quote Originally Posted by deepdiver View Post
    Sorry i did not bring the infinity photo with ZM 35 today.
    I tried it yesterday, It's really good... did not see any smearing at all
    will post it later.
    BTW,
    I do have a sample from NEX 5 + Leica SE 18 at infinity.
    looks good!!

    To be honest I'm a bit disappointed with the JPG quality.
    Is there a way to open the RAW file?
    I tried LR 3, but cannot.
    Anyone?

    thx

  27. #27
    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

    That Leica 18mm doesn't look focused to infinity to me. Is it not focused on the plants in the forground? What aperture was used?

  28. #28
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    I think we need to clarify what we mean by focus on infinity. What I don't mean is set the lend to infinity. You will have passed the focus point with most lens adapters. To actually focus at infinity, select an object far enough away to be considered infinity and then using the manual focus assist, actually focus on the object use enough magnification to get a sharp focus. If you just set the lens to the infinity position, in small pictures it will look ok but on close examination it will be soft.
    V/r John

  29. #29
    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

    Yeah, when I say focus to infinity, I mean focus at objects at infinity. Some poorly made adapters unfortunately don't allow you to simply set the lens at infinity.

  30. #30
    Senior Member deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    310
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Crop for the top left





    Crop for top right


    I believe I was using F8 to take this picture

    let me know what do u guys think.

    thx
    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|

  31. #31
    Coms37
    Guest

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Posted earlier in another topic .... hmmmm (mistake)

    Yes the 35mm looks really nice, and I was wondering where to get one forgetting that I have a whole boy of contax stuff in the wine cellar (which I use as a camera storing room).... including the 35mm (amongst other)

    the box;

  32. #32
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Coms37 - you just made some people really jealous!

  33. #33
    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

    Made me very irritated.
    I had all of those a couple of years ago and sold 'em for a song to a penniless student

    Just this guy you know

  34. #34
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Made me very irritated.
    I had all of those a couple of years ago and sold 'em for a song to a penniless student
    But think of the joy your brought to that penniless student.

  35. #35
    Coms37
    Guest

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    I went through all my boxes in the "wine cellar" I have so much stuff that I have forgotten about, like the Contax stuff, if I wouldn't of thought twice I would of gone out and bought a 35mm..... all to do with age you know!

  36. #36
    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 TEBnewyork View Post
    But think of the joy your brought to that penniless student.
    Yeah, well, maybe and maybe not! Actually, I'm only being greedy, I could have sold them around here for much more money these days, I don't think I'd have been using them.

    Just this guy you know

  37. #37
    Coms37
    Guest

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Do you mean that such a set is actually worth money?


    (I mean more than a couple of euro's)

  38. #38
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    A few months ago, 90mm Sonnars were about $100 at B&H; 45/2 Planars could be had for $150-$175 for 9+ condition. 35/2 were always a bit more as they didn't make nearly as many of those, I think I paid $200 for mine about a year ago. Good luck finding those prices now...

  39. #39
    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 Coms37 View Post
    Do you mean that such a set is actually worth money?


    (I mean more than a couple of euro's)
    Certainly are - micro 4/3 and the other mirrorless cameras like the NEX have changed all that. Lot's of NEX users slavering to get hold of them

    So if you don't want them yourself - this is probably a good place to sell them (especially if you're based in the States).

    Just this guy you know

  40. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by sebboh View Post
    the issue douglas and i are concerned about is how the lens works on the NEX in particular, not the lenses general performance. many rangefinder lenses with a short distance from the rear element to the sensor have problems on digital in the corners that they don't have on film (due to the angle of incident light). that is why the m9 has offset microlenses on the edges of it's sensor.
    I know the theory behind what you are talking about. And I believe some of the corner problems in the M cameras (and lenses) are due to the fact that they were designed decades back for film and were not digital specific designs. Once the digital age hit, they are now trying to make the old film designs perform really well under digital, which is what led to the M8 requiring to be a 1.3x sensor, even with micro-lens offsetting and the M9 requiring even more radical micro-lens offsetting design to make it work, with a 1.0x sensor.

    The above however, is diametrically different from cameras like the NEX, which have been built from the ground up, with digital in mind. And as long as the RF lenses were designed over the past 5 years or so (after the onset of the digital age), my feeling is that it will not have any issues. Of course the older lenses may or may not have issues and its performance is, in turn dependent on how they were originally designed and whether there was a big focus on lens telecentricity during their original design phase.

    And everytime Douglas brings up the "incident angle" issue, I point him to the Sony DSC-R1, which came with a 1.68x near-APS-C sized sensor and its 14.3-71.5mm f/2.8-4.8 lens, had its rear element positioned just 2.1mm (that is millimeters !) from the digital sensor plane. Absolutely no micro-lens offsetting, absolutely no vignetting, absolutely no aberrations or optical imperfections that one could detect - corner to corner. The imaging was as close to perfect, from an optical standpoint. Of course the difference here is that the Sony R1 was built from the ground up to be a digital product (and so was its lens)......as is the NEX camera.

    The lenses we are talking about, are Full-frame rangefinder lenses after all, and not lenses that barely cover the APS-C imaging circle. But I agree, that with the older designs, I might treat it on a case-by-case basis on how well they perform on digital.
    A900 with a few lenses, flashes etc.

  41. #41
    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 roweraay View Post
    I know the theory behind what you are talking about. And I believe some of the corner problems in the M cameras (and lenses) are due to the fact that they were designed decades back for film and were not digital specific designs. Once the digital age hit, they are now trying to make the old film designs perform really well under digital, which is what led to the M8 requiring to be a 1.3x sensor, even with micro-lens offsetting and the M9 requiring even more radical micro-lens offsetting design to make it work, with a 1.0x sensor.

    The above however, is diametrically different from cameras like the NEX, which have been built from the ground up, with digital in mind. And as long as the RF lenses were designed over the past 5 years or so (after the onset of the digital age), my feeling is that it will not have any issues.
    Sorry, this is absolutely not the case - in fact, the lens with the steepest angle of incidence in the Leica range is the 28mm elmarit asph, which was designed to go with the M8.
    Telecentric lens design adds complications which have ramifications in terms of size and design - Leica and Zeiss and especially Voigtlander are not designing their modern lenses with consideration for modern sensors which don't correct for them.

    Quote Originally Posted by roweraay View Post
    Of course the older lenses may or may not have issues and its performance is, in turn dependent on how they were originally designed and whether there was a big focus on lens telecentricity during their original design phase.
    There wouldn't have been, as it really isn't an issue with film!
    Quote Originally Posted by roweraay View Post
    And everytime Douglas brings up the "incident angle" issue, I point him to the Sony DSC-R1, which came with a 1.68x near-APS-C sized sensor and its 14.3-71.5mm f/2.8-4.8 lens, had its rear element positioned just 2.1mm (that is millimeters !) from the digital sensor plane. Absolutely no micro-lens offsetting, absolutely no vignetting, absolutely no aberrations or optical imperfections that one could detect - corner to corner. The imaging was as close to perfect, from an optical standpoint. Of course the difference here is that the Sony R1 was built from the ground up to be a digital product (and so was its lens)......as is the NEX camera.
    Exactly, so the lens would have been both telecentric, and, more to the point, it wold have had an exit pupil around the size of the tiny 2/3 sensor in the R1.

    Quote Originally Posted by roweraay View Post
    The lenses we are talking about, are Full-frame rangefinder lenses after all, and not lenses that barely cover the APS-C imaging circle. But I agree, that with the older designs, I might treat it on a case-by-case basis on how well they perform on digital.
    You should treat all rangefinder lenses like this - they mostly have a small exit which means that there must be a steep angle of incidence at the edge of a sensor.

    these modern lenses are costly (often many times the cost of the NEX) - I think it's pretty rash to assume that they are going to work well on a sensor which wasn't even a consideration during the design procedure. I don't say they WON'T work, just that one shouldn't make assumptions.

    Just this guy you know

  42. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    156
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by roweraay View Post
    The above however, is diametrically different from cameras like the NEX, which have been built from the ground up, with digital in mind. And as long as the RF lenses were designed over the past 5 years or so (after the onset of the digital age), my feeling is that it will not have any issues. Of course the older lenses may or may not have issues and its performance is, in turn dependent on how they were originally designed and whether there was a big focus on lens telecentricity during their original design phase.
    the fact that the NEX was designed from the ground up with digital in mind is where the (possible) problem stems from. most of the lenses were not. i am relatively certain that zeiss's zm line as well as voigtlander's rangefinder line was designed with film in mind. leica lenses designed since development of the m8 started are more likely to be designed for digital; however, they are could also be designed specifically for the offset microlenses of leica cameras. i agree with you though that none of this is a worry for a lens designed specifically for a standard digital sensor.

  43. #43
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by roweraay View Post

    And everytime Douglas brings up the "incident angle" issue, I point him to the Sony DSC-R1, which came with a 1.68x near-APS-C sized sensor and its 14.3-71.5mm f/2.8-4.8 lens, had its rear element positioned just 2.1mm (that is millimeters !) from the digital sensor plane. Absolutely no micro-lens offsetting, absolutely no vignetting, absolutely no aberrations or optical imperfections that one could detect - corner to corner. The imaging was as close to perfect, from an optical standpoint. Of course the difference here is that the Sony R1 was built from the ground up to be a digital product (and so was its lens)......as is the NEX camera.
    I pretty much agree with what Jono says (outside of the R1 sensor size.) Many of the newer rangefinder lenses in question still have issues on m4/3, and we've yet to see how they perform on NEX. NEX seems to have a thinner sensor pack, so it looks to be performing better with these lenses than the m4/3, despite the sensor size difference, but I'm still having a hard time finding examples of razor sharp corners at infinity when stopped down a bit.

    I know that the R1 is your example in these discussions, but it is quite a different beast. I'd like to see a diagram of its lens elements. How big is the rear element of the lens? Since the R1 doesn't have to work in the confines of a system with an interchangeable lens mount, Sony may have stuck some pretty large elements in there (especially the ones located nearer to the sensor in the body of the camera.) The R1 lens is relatively huge in NEX terms, and it extends well into the body of the camera, giving the illusion of a smaller lens (and the sensor is a bit smaller than NEX.) I certainly don't doubt that lens makers can make short-focus, modern NEX lenses that exhibit good corners at wide angles, but size certainly comes into play. In fact, I have a feeling that is why the NEX mount diameter is so big to begin with. It'll be interesting to see what Sony does with higher end lens designs.

    Sony please give us a 50mm equivalent prime!

  44. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    156
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    Sony please give us a 50mm equivalent prime!
    actually sony (zeiss) don't listen to him . i want a 35mm and a 85mm equiv prime. i'd rather carry these two than one normal lens (plus there's a lot of legacy options in the neighborhood of 50mm). make them f/2 or faster and decently compact. also if you could make the 85mm equiv a sonnar with similar rendering to the zm 50mm f/1.5 that would be glorious.

  45. #45
    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 a one lens kinda guy, but.... I'll take all three!

  46. #46
    Coms37
    Guest

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    One of the concerns I have is lugging around all these lenses again, you will need a shoulder bag, or equivalent, and it will become slightly unhandy.... Why not go for a D3 with a 24-70 2.8 lens which will probably provide a better rendition than all these mentioned lenses anyway.

    I like the Nex, though I rather prefer carrying the X1 around (always) for it does fit in pockets and you can have a good IQ camera with you at all times.

  47. #47
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Exactly, so the lens would have been both telecentric, and, more to the point, it wold have had an exit pupil around the size of the tiny 2/3 sensor in the R1.
    I believe the R1 had an APS-C sensor.

  48. #48
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Best "non-Nex" Lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Coms37 View Post
    One of the concerns I have is lugging around all these lenses again, you will need a shoulder bag, or equivalent, and it will become slightly unhandy.... Why not go for a D3 with a 24-70 2.8 lens which will probably provide a better rendition than all these mentioned lenses anyway.
    I lift weights on the weekend, but wouldn't want to carry them around with me all the time.

  49. #49
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Coms37 View Post
    One of the concerns I have is lugging around all these lenses again, you will need a shoulder bag, or equivalent, and it will become slightly unhandy.... Why not go for a D3 with a 24-70 2.8 lens which will probably provide a better rendition than all these mentioned lenses anyway.

    I like the Nex, though I rather prefer carrying the X1 around (always) for it does fit in pockets and you can have a good IQ camera with you at all times.
    I agree it's too large if you're using a zoom. With tiny primes, it seems at least partially pocketable.

  50. #50
    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

    Thanks Douglas / Monza

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    I believe the R1 had an APS-C sensor.
    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    I pretty much agree with what Jono says (outside of the R1 sensor size.)
    Quite right - apologies - grovel even - up a gum tree, I was thinking it was 2/3". it was roughly APS-c sized . . . mind you, it doesn't alter the idea that it was almost certainly telecentric with a large exit pupil.

    Fab camera incidentally.

    Just this guy you know

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
  •