keoj
Established
I have a GA-1 adapter but have never used it. My G2 "kit" already has the three basics (28, 45, 80) but I'd like to experiment with the GA-1.
- Has anyone used it?
- Are G mount lenses superior or are the SLR Zeiss lenses comparable?
Thanks,
keoj
- Has anyone used it?
- Are G mount lenses superior or are the SLR Zeiss lenses comparable?
Thanks,
keoj
S
Socke
Guest
I never had or used the GA-1 although I thought about it when I just had the 45.
Comparing the results from my SLR Distagon 35/2.8, Planar 50/1.7 and Sonnar 85/2.8 with the respective G lenses I think they are on par.
But I seldom print bigger than 8x12 and my scanner has only 2700dpi and I never shot slides in the SLR so no real data.
The few 16x24 inch prints I have from both systems are shots in good light shot stopped down around f8 with 1/125th or faster.
Comparing the results from my SLR Distagon 35/2.8, Planar 50/1.7 and Sonnar 85/2.8 with the respective G lenses I think they are on par.
But I seldom print bigger than 8x12 and my scanner has only 2700dpi and I never shot slides in the SLR so no real data.
The few 16x24 inch prints I have from both systems are shots in good light shot stopped down around f8 with 1/125th or faster.
keoj
Established
So this sounds like an interesting experiment. I do primarily slides with Velvia 100 (very accurate) and scan at 4000 ppi. I post some obseravtions at some point. My expectation is that the G lense will be superior (perhaps due to the glass distance to the film), but we'll see.
keoj
keoj
S
Socke
Guest
Keoj, the 45/2 G-Planar may be a little bit better than the 50/1.7 C/Y-Planar, the C/Y-Distagon 35/2.8 is better than the G-Planar 35/2. The C/Y-Distagon 35/1.4 blows the G-Planar 35 out of the water 
Same for the 85/1.2 Planar against the 90/2 Sonnar, the 50/1.4 in C/Y mount is probabably as sharp as the 50/2 in G mount but one stop faster.
On the other hand, the lenses are so big and heavy that they don't make much sense on a G body, focusing isn't very precise with nothing but the distance scale on the lens.
C/Y lenses on a G body won't show their potential with these restrictions so the G lenses on a G body will be better than C/Y lenses on a G body.
But you have to use the camera on sturdy tripod to show this
Same for the 85/1.2 Planar against the 90/2 Sonnar, the 50/1.4 in C/Y mount is probabably as sharp as the 50/2 in G mount but one stop faster.
On the other hand, the lenses are so big and heavy that they don't make much sense on a G body, focusing isn't very precise with nothing but the distance scale on the lens.
C/Y lenses on a G body won't show their potential with these restrictions so the G lenses on a G body will be better than C/Y lenses on a G body.
But you have to use the camera on sturdy tripod to show this
keoj
Established
You're probably correct that the Zeiss lenses might not make that much of a difference. The G2 does look cool with these big babies on a small camera. Do you actually have a 85 1.2 lens?
keoj
keoj
S
Socke
Guest
No, I have the cheaper versions, 35/2.8, 50/1.7, 85/2.8 and 135/2.8. Lighter and thus more portable as well.