50/1.1 MS-Sonnetar: the next cult lens?

[uhoh7]

Seriously. Even otherwise very worthwhile, rational people say silly things at times. I didn't realize that only chefs can be food critics and only car manufacturers can comment on whether a car uses clean diesel or not.

It's hard to respect a food critic who has never had bite of the dish, and goes out of his way to insult the chef. 😉

 

[Dante_Stella]

I mostly was hoping to use a push cap, like the Kaiser ones Dante has written about. I always prefer those. I'm gonna try a 55, as I have a 56 that is just slightly too big. A 54 is the natural thing to order, but the lip of the lens is very narrow and it will have to fit over the knurling on the focusing ring.

Not sure what size push cap due to threads; it might be easier to mount a filter or empty ring and then a cap.

D

 

[IdealCamera]

It's hard to respect a food critic who has never had bite of the dish, and goes out of his way to insult the chef. 😉

Intriguing speculation there. I owned a Sonnetar for two years, from the first batch. Shots posted above in the thread. Sold it. I wasn't cut out for the new church of Sonnetar. But you should run for pope.

What makes it poor design and workmanship, in my view, are the following issues, ranked in order of relevance to me:

(1) the irregular minimal focusing distance (advertised as 0.8m, more like 0.87m);
(2) serious vignetting;
(3) flat look (again, my perception);
(4) mushy corners;
(5) aperture/focus ring handling;
(6) soft coatings.

I disagree that the quality and build of the Sonnetar even remotely approximates that of Zeiss lenses. Then again, I've never had Zeiss wobble. Others report they have.

Didn't mean to come crash your new cult. Sorry. When you get more than a half dozen members, I suggest you set up an office to ferret out heretics. Also, do publish a scripture or such.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

You know, it's quite possible to dislike something without ritually insulting everyone who is interested in it. That's a thing you could try.

 

[ferider]

Coming from a user of the lens, I thought IdealCamera's post was informative and funny. But it's missing a smilie or two. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law

 

[IdealCamera]

Coming from a user of the lens, I thought IdealCamera's post was informative and funny. But it's missing a smilie or two. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law

Ferider, IdealCamera does not do smilies. Just like Bob Dole. (I didn't know about Poe's law, but it think it makes sense.)

To the church assembled: I'm not out to insult you, I'm out to make fun of you. You posed a very ambitious thesis: that the Sonnetar will be a cult lens. Not just that it's good in your subjective experience, but that it is objectively so and it'll be worshipped by many as a result. Fine, but I get to disagree with what I perceive is half unmitigated, bubbly enthusiasm and half desire to justify the purchase. I didn't even acuse anyone of trying to drive up prices and create a secondary market for the used lenses.

Besides, all good cults need an external enemy to flourish. Makes doctrine go down more easily.

 

[filmtwit]

I think we're all still waiting for this happen.
😎

I'm out to make fun of you. . .

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

OK, here are a few sample shots taken with a Kolari-modded A7. (Sorry, haven't had time to develop the ones I shot on XX last week.) My kid's punk band seems to be my primary vehicle for stress-testing lenses; in general, I found this kit more fun to use than the Fuji 56/1.2; the Sony focus peaking has improved vastly since the last time I had a Sony camera, three or four years ago. Not hard to get a bead on a moving subject, even at 1.1. These are all 1.1 btw, I think all at ISO 6400, default sharpening, no NR.

It was, as you can see, a rather listless affair. They fired their new drummer right after the gig 🙁

 

[f16sunshine]

Kids are too hip these days. It was way easier being cool back in the 80-90's 😀

 

[uhoh7]

It's a dicey beast at 1.1. There is a little dot on the aperture around 1.4. Much cleaner there I think. In addition with the A7, I would experiment alot with the coma as it has huge effects outside the centers 🙂

I should have taken my own advice: LOL


EDEN 0-183 by Eden Children, on Flickr

But normally for work like this I always take the CV 50/1.1 which is far more reliable in terms of predictable results. Just a big monster hunk 🙂

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

normally for work like this I always take the CV 50/1.1 which is far more reliable in terms of predictable results. Just a big monster hunk 🙂

Exactly! I think of wide open as akin to drunk: when you're most yourself, for better or worse.

 

[Dante_Stella]

Speaking of beauty and the beast, and contrary to what might have been suggested on this thread, the Canon 50/1.2 is not exactly more well behaved than the Sonnetar. The first shot is wide-open; the second shot is at f/4. You wouldn't believe that these are even the same lens. I shot these both today.

In the first, you can see all the same bokeh swirly-ness and a lot more focus shift than a tuned Sonnetar (the point of focus is the left eyebrow; you can see on the fence where the lens actually hits). You can also see an almost 5m field curvature between center frame and the right edge.

In the second, you can see how this lens comes to bear when down a few stops. In fact, it has almost laser-like contrast.

The major difference with the Canon is vignetting, which with the 6-bit coding for the 1.0 Noctilux pretty much disappears. As I have been using these over the past few weeks, the Canon is great with the 240; the Sonnetar wins with the 246.

Dante


Canon 50/1.2 Wide-open:

Now at f/4:

 

[Dante_Stella]

Here is a pretty comparable set of bokeh illustrations which I didn't realize I also shot this afternoon. First one is the Canon 1.2 on the 240; second is the Sonnetar on the 246. Both are wide-open.

 

[Dante_Stella]

My third and final note is that the focusing effort between the two lenses is a night-and-day proposition; to go far to near (or vice versa) with the Canon is accurate but agonizingly slow compared to more modern lenses.

D

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

So, in the end, I sold my Sonnetar and bought another Canon 50/1.2. Handling is the reason. Despite the long throw, I love the feel of the Canon; it's one of my all-time ergonomic favorites. I will probably spring for an Amadeo adapter and an old Sonnar 1.5 in Contax mount, one of these days.

In the meantime, I finally developed my Sonnetar test roll and here are a couple of images. These were shot on Tri-X at 800 and developed in HC-110.

Late roses by J. Robert Lennon, on Flickr

Sun over wall by J. Robert Lennon, on Flickr

Spotted creek by J. Robert Lennon, on Flickr

Kids on bikes by J. Robert Lennon, on Flickr

 

[ferider]

I decided to try

I decided to try

After my initial scepticism, when I saw Dariush's lens in the classifieds, I decided to try. First tests are encouraging, quite an amazing lens in terms of size and rendering.

This is how I calibrate it for now:

(slightly beyong 4m towards infinity) When calibrated like this it is quite sharp at close to medium distances. For landscapes, I won't use it below f5.6. You can see my usual tests here (shift, focal plane curvature, infinity performance, etc.): https://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/2017/01152017.

The only thing that bugs me, is that I haven't found any filter solution that doesn't cause slight vignetting (I tried 52 and 55, and the latter outside and inside the hood).

Cheers,

Roland.

 

[hap]

Sonnetar

Sonnetar

Happened on mine too. Miyazaki just ground it down. Not the whole tab you're showing (that's what I thought too...). Pm me your email, and I'll send you a shot showing how much. Maybe 1mm off.

Dante

OK...I will weigh in on this one. I too got bad frame lines and apparently this is not terribly uncommon. It took me a month to get a reply from Dirk, although he gave me detailed pictures to widen the space between the tabs. I had a really really really hard time doing this with such a lens, although he assured me it was simple. It maybe simiple but I was doubtful and very careful. In the end I took it to my local repair tech and he had to file (really carefully) even after I gave him Dirks's clear pictures. Also repainted after filing. Yes, it works on my M4 P now....but it's "fiddly" on my M3 and faint secondary framelines come up. I was pissed off frankly, but now....I have cooled my jets. Nothing is perfect unless you spend 10K on a Leitz.

This is a beautiful lens....the coatings are fabulous and on all surfaces. Give me afew days and I will show you some results. On film cameras I just put the red dot where it is recommended. Very little movement at all. My repair guy and I fiddled with close focus and infinity adjustments on a GG with his M3. It can be quite accurate.

I use it as a 135 equivalent on my Nikon 1 V1. Have yet to try on M5.

 

[hap]

sonnetar

sonnetar

After my initial scepticism, when I saw Dariush's lens in the classifieds, I decided to try. First tests are encouraging, quite an amazing lens in terms of size and rendering.

This is how I calibrate it for now:

(slightly beyong 4m towards infinity) When calibrated like this it is quite sharp at close to medium distances. For landscapes, I won't use it below f5.6. You can see my usual tests here (shift, focal plane curvature, infinity performance, etc.): https://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/2017/01152017.

The only thing that bugs me, is that I haven't found any filter solution that doesn't cause slight vignetting (I tried 52 and 55, and the latter outside and inside the hood).

Cheers,

Roland.

Amazing.....at about a meter, the DOF is really thin. Was this where the coma setting was at that you showed in picture?

Those infinity pictures with the coma adjustment held in place? Only aperture change?

 

[ferider]

Amazing.....at about a meter, the DOF is really thin. Was this where the coma setting was at that you showed in picture?

Those infinity pictures with the coma adjustment held in place? Only aperture change?

Yes, all tests done with that setting (tried to optimize 1m focus plane first, before doing anything else). The default (4m setting) back-focused by about 1 inch at 1m distance, so I corrected a bit towards the camera.

I like that setting - don't mind stopping down at infinity; nice that close up, the lens exhibits only little shift - less than other Sonnars that I've tried. And the focal plane is just curved enough to mostly correct for the cosine error.

Roland.

 

[hap]

sonnetar

sonnetar

It's quite fun to shoot using the 1" sensor of the Nikon 1.

One advantage is the electronic shutter......eliminates the ND filter for good light....and of course live view, although kind of crude by todays LCD and EVF standards.