The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Lens recommendations for NEX-5?

sebboh

New member
The 42/1.2 has the swirliest bokih I know of. 38/1.8 and 40/1.4 are much better in that respect.

BTW, I have no idea why the 35/2 Planar from Contax is touted as the "best". From what I could see from the MTF charts of Zeiss, it is not the best in the Contax G line up.
i have to say i find swirls much easier to avoid with the 42mm than with the 38mm. also, i can't really make my copy of the 42mm swirl much at f/2 or smaller. the 38mm also has a harsher bokeh independent of swirls (more contrasty brighter rings on the oof highlights etc)

most everybody i've heard agrees that the contax g 45mm is a better lens than the 35mm, but 35mm may be a better focal length for NEX.

some swirly bokeh from the pen f 38mm: :D


and some less swirly bokeh from the pen f 42mm in a totally non comparable type of shot:
 

monza

Active member
The 42/1.2 has the swirliest bokih I know of. 38/1.8 and 40/1.4 are much better in that respect.

BTW, I have no idea why the 35/2 Planar from Contax is touted as the "best". From what I could see from the MTF charts of Zeiss, it is not the best in the Contax G line up.
Who are you quoting, Vivek?

The 35/2 Planar is without a doubt the 'best' 35mm lens made for the Contax G. :)

Luckily I don't choose lenses by MTF charts. The Pen F lenses would almost certainly be far from the 'best' if evaluated strictly on those terms. And it would be a shame for people to discount them simply because of a chart...almost all of them are wonderful lenses.
 

sebboh

New member
Sebboh, Your 42/1.2 behaves similar to my samples. More swirl.
if you say so, it's difficult for me to judge given the dof differences - at f/2 the 38mm swirls a lot more and it's hard to find comparable scenes for f/1.2 vs f/1.8 shots. whether it is more or less, the swirls from the 38mm annoy me much more often then the ones from the f/1.2.
 

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
35/2 Planar, Contax G. My favorite adapted lens by far...great color and sharpness, wonderful bokeh, and much closer focusing than the usual RF lenses, to me, a much preferred trade-off to having a focusing scale.
:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:
The 35 f/2 balances so nicely on the NEX. It focuses close and it is sharp. I have lots of M lenses, but I don't use them on NEX. I have the Contax G 35, 45 and 90. A set with 35 and 90 is perfect. There is nothing wrong with my 45, it is very sharp, but 35 just does it all for me.
I did try my Zeiss 25 f/2.8 ZM on NEX. It had a nice look, but has an odd shaped color cast on the edges. The CV 28 f/1.9 also is a candidate, but the form is not as nice as the 35 Zeiss Planar.
 

Jim DE

New member
Monza, I don't agree with Vivek all that often, but when used on the Contax G2 the 35mmF2 was the worst of the series of prime lenses by far imo. I own a Contax G2 with the 21mm (IMO the best of the series) the 28mm, the 35mm, the 45mm, and the 90mm. I used my 35 maybe 5-7 times and the results with color positive film was so bad I didn't even include it in my Contax G2 kit bag. It sits in a storage facility out in the midwest unfortunately because I would of loved to of tried it on my NEX. If you have been around the Contax G line for awhile and visited the various Contax G specific sites you would know I was not alone in my feelings about the 35mm IQ on the Contax G cameras.

I never owned the 16mm or the 35-70zoom because I did not like the fixed aperture of the 16 nor did I want a zoom. But, IMO the 35 was so far behind the other prime lenses I owned in IQ and it was only 7mm above the 28mm and 10 below the 45mm I saw no reason to carry it because I wouldn't like the results anyway.

I initially thought it specifically was just a poorly built lens but when I looked further into the problem it appeared to be a common complaint with this lens. Back prior to the adapted digital use the 35mm resale was by far the lowest of the group making it not worth selling it by itself but would carry a better value sold in a kit, that is why I kept it.

There were those few who thought the 35mm was a good lens and they liked the IQ but we know how people can vary as to what they think good IQ may be. I have seen a few very nice color positive shots from the 35mm on a Contax G2 but far far more that lacked the pop and clarity that was characteristic of other prime lenses in the series.

Monza you may very well own a great 35mmF2 Contax G lens (as I have stated I have seen a few great shots from a 35mmf2 in Kodachrome) as this is in no way an effort to minimalize or discredit your opinion on this lens. It is just to help inform others of the history this lens had in relationship to the other primes in the series when used on the Contax G line of 35mm film cameras. It seems to have a huge following of those who love the lens when used on a NEX digital cameras (for me I will have to see it for myself once I get out to that storage locker i have in the midwest when I moved from St Louis to the east coast--- sad thing is I could buy a used one for less than the cost of a roundtrip ticket out to there and back :( )

My NEX kit has the 28mm(used f8 and higher for landscapes), the 45mm (my goto lens), and the 90mm. I do love the Contax G lenses on my NEX.
 
Last edited:

monza

Active member
To each his (or her) own, of course. My tongue-in-cheek comment still stands that the 35/2 is the best 35, bar none, for the Contax G. :)

Having owned Contax G cameras since about 1995, I have a lot of experience with the cameras and lenses. The 35/2 has always been described as a 'lesser' lens than others in the line, but I have never honestly seen a side-by-side illustrating this claimed inferiority. Rather, the quotes I've seen are all tied back into the MTFs, and many of the people making the statements (not on this forum, but others) haven't ever used the lens. It may well be that the 35 is not quite the equal of the 45 (both being Planars) but this in no way means the 35 is 'bad.' It doesn't even mean that such differences are even easily visible...if the inferiority was that obvious to you, of course, that is all that matters.

The rest of the line sets a high standard, and if the 35 is under that standard, it certainly doesn't necessarily mean it is junk, and not even worth the bother of selling.

I agree 100% with your statement that 'people can vary as to what they think good IQ can be.' Especially when some of these people are just comparing charts...and not actual photographs.

I choose a lens based on whether I like what it produces, or not...not whether someone else likes it (or not.) I also find lens comparisons to be tedious, so I never bother doing them.

Certainly the vast majority of G shooters owned the 28 and 45, as the 35 wasn't introduced until later, so it is less common, and perhaps less desired due to the closeness of the focal lengths, as you explain.

On the Nex, the 28/2.8 becomes an equivalent 42/2.8, which isn't of much use to me compared to a 50/2 equivalent. The 45/2 on the NEX becomes too long...again, for me. So, for me (and Cindy and Terry and a few others I know) the 35/2 is the Contax G lens of choice.
 

Hannu

New member
I got my Nex 5 with 16 mm and 18-55mm on Saturday. Now I am waiting for A- mount adapter.

I am curious how my Sigma 24/2.8, Minolta 28/2, 35/2, 50/1.4, 85/1.4 and Zeiss 135/1.8, Sony 70-400 g are usable in Next. In addition Minolta 35-70/4 and original 35-105 mm.
 

Ocean

Senior Subscriber Member
I have been using the 35/2 Contax G lens since 1998 and I am very satisfied with its performance. It has a similar if not identical optical formula of the Leica M Summicron 35 IV pre-ASPH. While it is not as perfect as the 45/2 G, it is certainly not a "bad" lens at all. Whatever the deficiency this lens has in full frame, it will certainly become less of an issue on SONY NEX or Panasonic G/GF/GH.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
The fact is rather simple. The Zeiss Planars aren't meant to be wide angle lenses. The design then goes to a Distagon or a Biogon.
 

douglasf13

New member
If the Contax lenses had focus scales on them, I'd probably already own the 35. Is it possible to add them somehow?
 
M

meilicke

Guest
If the Contax lenses had focus scales on them, I'd probably already own the 35. Is it possible to add them somehow?
I used a pencil on my LX3 to mark the various focal lengths. Something like that (or a fine sharpie) may be an easy way. And a good setup to measure distance. :)
 

douglasf13

New member
It seems like that would be the case, but the G lenses do have the unusual focusing mechanism. Can anyone confirm that it would work?
 

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
My Kipon adapter has a silver focus ring. I see no reason why you couldn't mark distances on the ring if you want to scale focus.
I just tried focusing on a distant object, marking the ring, focusing near and moving back to the mark. The far object was spot-on in focus. You could use a sharpie or engrave the ring. I would test this out with a pencil and make sure that taking the adapter on and off doesn't change anything.
 
Last edited:

monza

Active member
If the Contax lenses had focus scales on them, I'd probably already own the 35. Is it possible to add them somehow?
I also have thought about doing this, but I decided it wasn't worth the effort as I would never shoot a 50mm via hyperfocal.
 

Jim DE

New member
Cindy that would work if you never changed the lens or always removed the lenses with the focus ring at a fixed location. I use the Kipon notches as a reference point to the word NEX on the adapter for a ball park focus once I have established close focus and infinity focus for the lens that is currently mounted only..... once removed and another lens installed these reference point clearly change.

Monza..... I truly wish I had my Contax G 35mm at this location because I surely would of tried it and quite honestly may just love it on the NEX as you and the others do; ya never know. Also I have NEVER looked at lens charts .... ever. It is not something I do .... I like you buy or try to determine first hand my likes or dislikes. ;) if I had listened to others there would be quite a few photographic tools I currently love that I would of never bought ... like the NEX in some peoples opinions ;) Or the Contax G2 for that matter which I bought a month after its introduction (which my Leica friends still bad mouth) and I still use it weekly with a great deal of enjoyment using Velvia film.

Here is one taken today after my other post with the NEX5 and the 28mm Contax G lens on White Clay Creek in PA about 3 minutes before it started raining
 
Last edited:

HansenTsang

New member
>>- wide-angle landscape lens (something wider than the Sony 16mm lens)<<

You only budget choice will be the Sam Yang (Rokinon). I bought the Rokinon with Nikon mount so I can use it on my D700. I get the Nikon to NEX adapter and it works great.

>>- fast "normal" prime in the 30-50 range (effective 45-75mm range)<<

How fast is fast for you? I am using the Canon FD to NEX adapter and a Canon 50 f1.2 FD. Very nice lens but huge for the NEX.

>>- fast portrait lens in the 50-70mm range (effective 75-100mm range)<<

You can use either a Nikon 85 f1.4D or Canon FD 85mm if you have the mount.
 

Jim DE

New member
Cindy I just though about it some more and another way that would work is if you owned a Kipon adapter for every lens and mounted lens plus adapter at every lens change.
 

monza

Active member
Jim, you obviously have experience with the 35/2 and that's what counts. :)

As far as using the 28mm on the NEX, you are aware of the compromises; I find it interesting you are willing to live with these compromises on digital, but on the other hand, you found the 35/2 on film was unacceptable. The 35/2 certainly doesn't have any corner issues or color shifts with either analog or digital. One clear advantage of the Planar design.
 
Top