WA for my A7r - conundrum

[Ben Rubinstein]

Hi,

Honest truth I haven't been doing a lot of shooting recently. Been busy with our repro studios and just going through a slightly dry patch in general. Not that there's anything wrong, just not had the drive recently.

I have to honest with you Asher, the A7r is a very tough camera on wides. If anything I'd buy the camera for anything other than wides. Even a moderate wide like the Zeiss 25mm f2 lens, comparing the corners/edges with raw files shot at f8 between the A7r and D800, the sony makes that lens almost unusable in the edge quarters of the image. Looks far better on the D800. Same thing on the Zeiss 18mm albeit I've only had one RAW file to compare with that lens. Great on D800, useless on the A7r.

As far as my search goes, I'm going to get my little Pentax 24mm worked on to try and allow focus past infinity and try and fix the field curvature problems. To give you an idea the edges on the Zeiss 25mm looked as bad on the A7r as my ancient Pentax, saved me a whole lot of money that discovery. Although this experiment with my Pentax will probably cost me what the lens did ($150) it's still far cheaper than buying Zeiss just to discover that the A7r is nasty to them too.

The guy who sent me the raws of the zeiss lenses also sent me examples of the Sony Zeiss 24mm, it seemed noticeably better in the corners than the plain Zeiss.

We still have the Sony offering to wait for, their 16-35 f4. Zeiss is also releasing a line of their lenses in FE mount at photokina, if they've tweaked their optics to cope with the A7r it should be rather interesting! I can't see any other reason why it would have take so long for them to release their lenses in FE mount. There would be practically nothing clever to do other than build in an adaptor otherwise.

Good luck with your find, Asher. The Canon 17 and 24mm t/s lenses, the Nikon 14-24mm and the Leica WATE all seem to be the best options for the A7r right now. If you're interested the 24mm t/s when fully shifted (11mm either side, just 3 frames) will give you an image in 2:3 ratio of a 16mm FOV. So you get a tilt 16mm and 24mm with shift available at 24mm all within one, albeit big, lens. It is rather tempting for myself to be honest, one of the best Canon lenses ever made, dual action. Didn't you have a 24mm t/s once? I remember you carrying it when we went on that shoot a while back. I think you would need the mkII though to try and carry the A7r's resolution and corner mushing abilities.

 

[Asher Kelman]

I have to honest with you Asher, the A7r is a very tough camera on wides. If anything I'd buy the camera for anything other than wides.

My main use is for street and that's with the native FE Zeiss 55mm. I'll also pickup a 35mm if I can get a bargain. I have hopes that the Contax Zeiss 28mm f2.0 will work well too. I've found one very nice architectural picture with the 28mm, amazingly at f13.0!!!!

I really can manage stitching with the 35mm to get ultrawide if need be. I just have to check out the 18mm and see how it behaves.

Even a moderate wide like the Zeiss 25mm f2 lens, comparing the corners/edges with raw files shot at f8 between the A7r and D800, the sony makes that lens almost unusable in the edge quarters of the image. Looks far better on the D800. Same thing on the Zeiss 18mm albeit I've only had one RAW file to compare with that lens. Great on D800, useless on the A7r.

Your Zeiss above was f3.5. mine is a Distagon at 4.0 so perhaps it's better???

We still have the Sony offering to wait for, their 16-35 f4. Zeiss is also releasing a line of their lenses in FE mount at photokina, if they've tweaked their optics to cope with the A7r it should be rather interesting! I can't see any other reason why it would have take so long for them to release their lenses in FE mount. There would be practically nothing clever to do other than build in an adaptor otherwise.

Yes, the 16-25 is going to be worth waiting for. Yes, you remember correctly, I do have the Canon 24mm TSE II and will try that out when I get an Eos to FE adapter! I think that have an EF to Zeiss FE adapter will be very useful for both Canon lenses and other lenses with the EF mount especially the new Sony EF glass, as you predict.

The Leica WATE is a lens I like, but expensive. I'll watch your results and get used to the camera with my Contax lenses. I must say I was shocked by the bad report your bring on the 18mm Zeiss, but hopefully, my f4.0 version is better!

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Wouldn't hold your breath but if it is then I'd be really happy!

What is it you like so much about the zeiss look Asher? I love it in B&W and hate it in colour

 

[Asher Kelman]

Wouldn't hold your breath but if it is then I'd be really happy!

What is it you like so much about the zeiss look Asher? I love it in B&W and hate it in colour

Well Ben,

I love the Zeiss look on flowers and landscapes. I'm used to working in color with Canon for people and will continue to do so and have fun exploring color with the Zeiss lenses. I'll be taking 24 patch color chart reference and make my profiles and hope for magic!

I have also purchased and excellent+ 20mm 2.8 FD lens as that is reported to very good on the A7r, in fact several sources say it's better than the modern EF version! Now I'm done for a wjile or until Zeiss wows us!

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

The only reason I've not bought into the FD lenses may sound silly but um, all my lenses turn the other way...

 

[Asher Kelman]

The only reason I've not bought into the FD lenses may sound silly but um, all my lenses turn the other way...

This is 2014, Ben!

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

I actually prefer the canon way having used it all my life but I don't want to work with half my lenses being the opposite of the other half, very hard to subconsciously let your hands do the thinking that way.

 

[Asher Kelman]

I actually prefer the canon way having used it all my life but I don't want to work with half my lenses being the opposite of the other half, very hard to subconsciously let your hands do the thinking that way.

My 21mm Distagon was stolen, unfortunately so this single 100 mm FD lens is my poor mans substitute and, for me worth the extra bother to go against my Canon-bred instinct.

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Pretty much decided to go with the FD 24mm f2 (if I can find one) and FD 20mm f2.8 (just bought), at least to keep me going. I've decided I don't like the Zeiss look enough (don't like it at all for colour) that I t want to spend Zeiss money and anyway got fed up waiting for Sony. The extra cash saved will buy a ticket for my wife to go to her nephews Bar Mitzva, a new battery for my bike and still leave rather a lot of change!

 

[Asher Kelman]

Glad you got the Canon FD as it has a great reputation. I have the 20 mm and will test it shortly. I rented a 35 mm for a trip in Costa Rica and it never came off the camera! Very impressive but does have some distortion. I have not discovered whether Adobe or Capture One has that profile built in yet.

Looking forward to your results.

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Very much doubt that Adobe would bother with profiles for old lenses. You can build your own profiles however using Adobe free software built for that purpose.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Very much doubt that Adobe would bother with profiles for old lenses. You can build your own profiles however using Adobe free software built for that purpose.

I have built profiles for my Ricoh GR and the 6D. However, I was referring to the 35mm and 55mm Zeiss, Sony native FE mount lenses. The former I rented and the latter I bought as my normal lens. I'd think that Adobe would make profiles for the Sony modern lenses, don't you agree?

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Have they not done so yet? I'm surprised.

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Well the adaptor for the FD lens has come so far, Novoflex. I hadn't realised just how much shorter the adaptor is, the registration distance for FD lenses is significantly shorter than canon EF or Pentax M42/K mounts. I'll have the 20mm by the end of the month. Hoping it's good. Still not found a good 24mm. Seems you choose big or weak corners or the WATE with nothing much in between.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Have they not done so yet? I'm surprised.

Ben,

I'd been too busy to check! The out of the camera jpgs were fine. Yesterday I checked and the profiles are automatically used if one uses Adobe Camera Raw and goes to the pull down menu on the right and uses the auto options. With the 55 mm prime Zeiss lens, I see am a magic transformation and removal of the vignetting as well as correction of the slight barrel distortion.

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

Well the adaptor for the FD lens has come so far, Novoflex. I hadn't realised just how much shorter the adaptor is, the registration distance for FD lenses is significantly shorter than canon EF or Pentax M42/K mounts. I'll have the 20mm by the end of the month. Hoping it's good. Still not found a good 24mm. Seems you choose big or weak corners or the WATE with nothing much in between.

Ben,

I've not been impressed by the 20 mm FD and feel that with the Contax/Yashica Zeiss 18mm, time is better spent. I have never needed to check and select from multiple copies before. But that's what the FBI does - buys dozens of them at a time and then keeps just a few, LOL!

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

We'll see when I get it.

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Nowhere near as dramatic as Johnny's stuff.

Went to the local park this morning to do some more testing and see if there's any way I can get my Pentax 24mm to work. Basically no (corners need f22 to sharpen up and the bokeh is horribe throughout). However while I was there I decided to see what the corners of my Pentax Super Tak 35mm f2 will do stopped down (corners great from f8, vignetting is pp, but never loses that 'look'). I liked the picture actually, love the look of an old lens. So gentle and dreamy.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nowhere near as dramatic as Johnny's stuff.

Went to the local park this morning to do some more testing and see if there's any way I can get my Pentax 24mm to work. Basically no (corners need f22 to sharpen up and the bokeh is horribe throughout). However while I was there I decided to see what the corners of my Pentax Super Tak 35mm f2 will do stopped down (corners great from f8, vignetting is pp, but never loses that 'look'). I liked the picture actually, love the look of an old lens. So gentle and dreamy.

Ben,

Yes it's dreamy, I do feel that!

But I can't fully wrap my mind on this properly since I do not know what led to this nor how it would otherwise appear with another "not dreamy" lens. Could you approach this effect starting with the lens open and then gradually stopping down so we can see through your eyes what's going on. Is the center sharp and the outside soft? What do you think is going on with contrast, color and resolution?

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

This was actually a lens test with this lens, I wanted to see how long it took till the corners sharpened up. At f16 the corners are perfectly sharp but it doesn't detract from the images feel of a gentle rendition.

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Here is the same image at f2. I'm not really sure web sized previews show much of the difference.

What I do know is that the drawing at any aperture is vastly different to any modern canon or zeiss lens for example.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Here is the same image at f2...........

What I do know is that the drawing at any aperture is vastly different to any modern canon or zeiss lens for example.

Ben, for sure, the first image has what I think of the 3 dimensional drawing in the center of Zeiss lenses even wide open. It has much more presence with the trees exerting themselves and getting our attention. What f stop was the first one at?

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

f16. The Zeiss drawing is vastly different. The contrast would have been a world apart.

 

[Asher Kelman]

f16. The Zeiss drawing is vastly different. The contrast would have been a world apart.

I'm staggered by F 16 with anything less than MF, LOL! I rarely venture beyond 5.6! f8 is adventurous!

Still, it works. With Zeiss the effect in the center is different for sure, but there at more open apertures. But either one likes it or one does not!

But I know how beautiful Pentax glass can be, but most of my experience is with merely one lens, the 50 1.4 Takamur.

Does this lens clinch it for you or you will still look at the Canon FD lenses?

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

I've had this lens for a while. It's a 35mm prime. It's very very soft wide open. Almost impossibly to focus. I like it for it's 'look' which is very similar to it's brother the 50mm 1.4 Super Tak. Oh and a friend gave me it as a freebie about 6 months ago! I am quite happy to have this lens for my 35mm option (it's not a focal length I use much). Unless I add the truly excellent (and cheap) 35mm f2 FD lens for a more modern rendition with multi coating. This pentax super takumar lens flares badly (just bought a hood to try and help). It still doesn't fix my 24mm conundrum and I'm wondering whether the 20mm FD will be wide enough for me for an UWA. We'll see. What I really would wish for is a 24mm that renders like my 50mm or 35mm but also has corners as good as those two. I just wish it existed.

Here's another from the 35mm, this time wide open.

Why being staggered by f16 btw? Yes there is diffraction but these are not max achievment resolution lenses in the first place, they are 60 years old! DOF is extremely thin on a sensor with this much resolution. f8 is nowhere near enough DOF on this sensor for a landscape even with the 24mm (I have the pictures with this landscape to prove it). You either deal with diffraction (not a big deal), bracket focus and combine with software (pain) or use tilt lenses and movements to maximise DOF (impossible with this shot and for most shots I do).

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Here is a blog where the author has tested numerous 24mm lenses. His results are similar to mine with the Pentax and also show me that the OM is not worth the bother. Well worth a look!

http://www.codectest.com/

 

[Asher Kelman]

Here is a blog where the author has tested numerous 24mm lenses. His results are similar to mine with the Pentax and also show me that the OM is not worth the bother. Well worth a look!

http://www.codectest.com/

Excellent blog, Ben! I didn't see the section with lots of different 24 mm lenses.

BTW, which adapter do you use for the Pentax Tak?

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

If you look through previous blog posts over the past pages you will see where he has compared the Pentax K, the Kiron, the Sigma and the Canon FD including mutiple copies of the Sigma and FD.

I use Novoflex. Expensive yes (though cheaper in Europe than the US) but I don't need the headache of worrying whether it's the lens or the adaptor. If I know the adaptor is good I can evaluate my lenses far easier.

 

[Asher Kelman]

If you look through previous blog posts over the past pages you will see where he has compared the Pentax K, the Kiron, the Sigma and the Canon FD including mutiple copies of the Sigma and FD.

I use Novoflex. Expensive yes (though cheaper in Europe than the US) but I don't need the headache of worrying whether it's the lens or the adaptor. If I know the adaptor is good I can evaluate my lenses far easier.

Ben,

Do you swop out the adapter each time or could you imagine investing in separate ones for each lens. I have Canon FD and Contax MM lenses and therefore two adapters to leave on one lens type each. Same with the EF adapter I plan to acquire. So that seems to call for rear Sony A7r lens caps. Have you felt the need to protect the lens or you just remove the adapter, each time and put on its native rear lens cap?

I wonder if you have found an economical source for the rear lens caps?

Asher

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Hi,

Well last night I bought a the FD 24mm f2 and 24mm f2.8. I'll test them both to see which is the better all round option and sell the other, I got the f2 version remarkably cheap given what they've been going for recently. I'll post up my tests once I get the lenses but it might take a month or so to get them out here.

The novoflex adaptors are expensive if you have one for every lens. I have one per mount type. That also saves room in the bag. For a regular 3 prime carry (24/50/85) each will have their own adaptor as each is a different mount. For two of the mounts there are two lenses for each mount but those lenses will be used far less regularly, namely the 35mm and 20mm. Even so it's no bigger deal than just swapping a lens.

I always have a lens on the camera, this sensor due to being naked when the lens is off (shutter up) unlike on a DSLR when the shutter is down, is very susceptible to dust. You couldn't keep the camera body open without a cap or lens.

I don't use lens caps much at all to be honest, never have done though the novoflex adaptors come with a rear lens cap included in the box. The adaptor (for SLR lenses at any rate) provides an inch plus long tunnel to the rear lens element. You would have to try hard to touch the element and really be trying very hard to scratch it or to ding the rear of the lens. Dust blows off and you don't have to worry about grease. You could use the rear lens cap but I hardly believe it to be necessary.