Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Like I said in an earlier post, I don't do kludgy workarounds, it either "Just works" or it doesn't. I have to nail the shot every time, no exceptions. Its not just because I do my fine art photography as my profession. Unlike the rare times when I do commercial work (which I would not shoot on film anyway, clients demand digital), I have no client demanding perfection with no tolerance for mistakes (and believe me, commercial clients have NO tolerance for mistakes). Its me: I am too obsessed with perfection to accept something that does not work as calibrated. I'm worse than any client.
My testing shows the lens works at f2.8 and smaller, and that's the only way I'll ever use it.
Last edited:
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
That would depend on how the tech adjusts it. I'm sure it could be adjusted so that its in the middle of the sharp zone, like a normal lens at f1.5. I think they do them like you said to minimize the appearance of focus shift when you stop down, but that wont give you the absolute best results if you do shoot at 1.5
mfogiel
Veteran
The sweet spot of this lens is one third of a stop beyond f 2.8, which I bellieve, is f3.2. The focus is spot on at this aperture, and the balance between DOF contrast and sharpness is outstanding. It is still very good for portraits till f 5.6, beyond f 5.6 it starts looking more like a Planar, but without ever getting completely harsh. BTW, if you really want to see this lens make wonders in portraiture, use it with some chromogenic film.
Last edited:
leicashot
Well-known
I've never seen a lens with so much many quirks that people can makes such good excuses for using it - must be good, but the quirks are too much for me. I like a lens without compromise, especially when it comes to focusing.
Buying a f/1.5 lens to use at f/2.8 onwards, and then having to guess focus at wider apertures? This lens must be the real deal!?!
Buying a f/1.5 lens to use at f/2.8 onwards, and then having to guess focus at wider apertures? This lens must be the real deal!?!
Last edited:
Ljós
Well-known
Chris, I am intrigued by the C-Sonnar myself, so don't take this as dissing the lens per se. But when I read your post and looked at the picture, I could not help to think that the (totally understandable) joy of having a new lens skewed your objectivity a little a bit. I think any halfway decent 50mm lens, stopped down to f4, should give tack sharp eyes and eyelashes. If you were alluding to the focus shift/optimisation-issue, then I rest my case. But if it is about sharpness at f4, then I think even run-of-the-mill SLR lenses from the seventies and eighties will give you all the eyelashes you could ask for at f4.
That said, I am looking forward to see what you will do with the lens in the future!
All the best, Ljós
mfogiel
Veteran
Originally posted by leicashot:
The reason is simple, this lens at F2.8 gives you the image which looks like taken with a super sharp lens with a softar filter on - you get the fine contrast in the eyes, but you do not see skin blemishes..., PLUS it gives you a DOF sufficient to keep all face in focus, PLUS it gives you a blur typical of a good F 1.4 lens wide open, PLUS it gives you a tri dimensionality of a Tessar. As far as I am concerned, it could be sold with just one F stop, but in any event I have solved the problem of focus shift: I have both versions, and use the fast one from f1.5 to 2.0, and the slow version from f 2.8 onwards...
The reason is simple, this lens at F2.8 gives you the image which looks like taken with a super sharp lens with a softar filter on - you get the fine contrast in the eyes, but you do not see skin blemishes..., PLUS it gives you a DOF sufficient to keep all face in focus, PLUS it gives you a blur typical of a good F 1.4 lens wide open, PLUS it gives you a tri dimensionality of a Tessar. As far as I am concerned, it could be sold with just one F stop, but in any event I have solved the problem of focus shift: I have both versions, and use the fast one from f1.5 to 2.0, and the slow version from f 2.8 onwards...
Last edited:
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
It was to show the focus was correct. I have a Summicron 50 as well and many 50s for SLRs and as you say, all are sharp at f4. The Sonnar is the only one where the aperture used affects focus accuracy though.
MCTuomey
Veteran
Totally agreed. Mine's optimized for f/2.8 as well, and I've just learned to do "the lean in" when shooting wide open at closer distances. The character of the Sonnar is just really something else and makes it worthwhile.
If I don't want to think about it, I'll use the Planar.
+1 Works for me. I really like the look of the C-Sonnar upclose at f2.8 - a touch of magic imho.
Maybe we need a thread titled "real deal lenses" or "lenses without compromise" to dispel confusion
Last edited:
Krosya
Konicaze
This is why I dont want to get one of these. I love how it draws but all those faults that list would drive me crazy too. Plus my "Sonnar" needs are covered by LTM Nikkor 5cm/1.4 and Jupiter 9 - 85/2 lenses.
Hope you can your Sonnar to a good use.
raid
Dad Photographer
Congrats on getting the lens, Chris.
I am impressed by what your son is doing.
I showed my wife one of the clips.
I wonder whether vintage 50mm RF lenses also have a focus shift or not.
I only noticed online discussions on focus shifts after the new Zeiss lenses were tried out by people. What about the CZJ 5cm 1.5 or 2.0? Did such lenses also show focus shifts but users were not discussing it here?
I am impressed by what your son is doing.
I showed my wife one of the clips.
I wonder whether vintage 50mm RF lenses also have a focus shift or not.
I only noticed online discussions on focus shifts after the new Zeiss lenses were tried out by people. What about the CZJ 5cm 1.5 or 2.0? Did such lenses also show focus shifts but users were not discussing it here?
andtky
Newbie
focus shift test
focus shift test
Hi,
I made a focus shift first with my 2.8 version and then with the new 1.5 optimised version of C Sonnar if anyone is interested:
http://members.chello.sk/akratky/Tests/C-Sonnar.html
Andrej
focus shift test
Hi,
I made a focus shift first with my 2.8 version and then with the new 1.5 optimised version of C Sonnar if anyone is interested:
http://members.chello.sk/akratky/Tests/C-Sonnar.html
Andrej
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Thanks for sharing, Andrej... Big differences...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
Shucks, that makes me sad. The lens wide open has one of my favorite signatures ever. But I understand you're train of thought.
Last edited:
DNG
Film Friendly
Chris, enjoy your new C-Sonnar... I love mine (not like I love my wife ).
I have used it exclusivity on my G1, So, if you ever what tack sharp at f/1.5 and f/2 without any tricks, using it on a Digital with Live View magnified Manual Focusing is the way to go.
For RF shooting.... Parts Extracted from the DOF Master Web site
At 1m, the DOF is only 1" or so, and it is front loaded. So, the eyes will have a slight softness, But, if you shot at 2m instead, no problem to keep the eyes in focus, since the DOF is 6 inches deep, but still front loaded a little, but the eyes will be sharp.
At 2m you are at a tight H/S shot of a person, so focusing on the eyes will have a few more inches in front, than behind, so, the ears should be starting to show some OOF. Which is fine for this type of portrait.
At 3m the DOF is closer to 10 inches deep, so at this distance for people photography. like on a street, not an issue at all.
You may want run a few tests with your son as your model at 1m, 2m and 3m all at f/1.5 and all focused on his eyes.... I think, if you like "Up Close" at 1m, And that is "Close" for a head shot, you will see the shift, but, for Head/Shoulder shots., you will be 2-3m away anyway, so it's a non issue.
I loved your sons 3s video.... Must of took him a few hours...at 30FPS? after he merged them in a movie stream.
). I have used it exclusivity on my G1, So, if you ever what tack sharp at f/1.5 and f/2 without any tricks, using it on a Digital with Live View magnified Manual Focusing is the way to go.
For RF shooting.... Parts Extracted from the DOF Master Web site
At 1m, the DOF is only 1" or so, and it is front loaded. So, the eyes will have a slight softness, But, if you shot at 2m instead, no problem to keep the eyes in focus, since the DOF is 6 inches deep, but still front loaded a little, but the eyes will be sharp.
At 2m you are at a tight H/S shot of a person, so focusing on the eyes will have a few more inches in front, than behind, so, the ears should be starting to show some OOF. Which is fine for this type of portrait.
At 3m the DOF is closer to 10 inches deep, so at this distance for people photography. like on a street, not an issue at all.
You may want run a few tests with your son as your model at 1m, 2m and 3m all at f/1.5 and all focused on his eyes.... I think, if you like "Up Close" at 1m, And that is "Close" for a head shot, you will see the shift, but, for Head/Shoulder shots., you will be 2-3m away anyway, so it's a non issue.
I loved your sons 3s video.... Must of took him a few hours...at 30FPS? after he merged them in a movie stream.
Last edited:
Krosya
Konicaze
Based on this - I dont get why would anyone get a 2.8 (original) version. To me it looks like what Sonnar is calibrated to 1.5 - it works very good at other f-stops as well. NOT something I can say about a 2.8 version.
thrice
Established
I love my 1.5 optimised version and wouldn't dream of getting one optimised for 2.8. I can pull the focus very slightly at 2.8/4.0 if the need to use those apertures arises. I have found DOF at f/5.6 and f/8.0 covers any shift.
All wide open:
All wide open:
maclaine
Well-known
I love my 1.5 optimised version and wouldn't dream of getting one optimised for 2.8. I can pull the focus very slightly at 2.8/4.0 if the need to use those apertures arises. I have found DOF at f/5.6 and f/8.0 covers any shift.
All wide open:
Whoa. These are great. Some of the best examples of this lens wide open I've seen on here in a while. Well done!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I was struck by something familiar with thrice's images and checked the exif ... M9!
They remind me a lot of the results my 50mm f1.4 ZF Planar produces wide open on my D700!
They remind me a lot of the results my 50mm f1.4 ZF Planar produces wide open on my D700!
Last edited:
thrice
Established
They seem to like digital full frame I used to have the ZF planar and have also noticed some similarities.
I used to have the ZF planar and have also noticed some similarities.
Seems like a beautiful lens wide open...