ampguy
Veteran
Thanks Kent
Thanks Kent
Since you have both M and S versions, does your S focus close wide open and spot on focus?
Is your ZM one of the originals which were by design optimized for 2.8, or one of the later or dealer modified ones to optimize focus for 1.5?
Thanks!
Thanks Kent
Since you have both M and S versions, does your S focus close wide open and spot on focus?
Is your ZM one of the originals which were by design optimized for 2.8, or one of the later or dealer modified ones to optimize focus for 1.5?
Thanks!
I have the ZM version and it's really a wonderful lens. The samples you posted are representative of the feel of the lens, accentuating the nice bokeh and "creamy" feeling. I consider it a "Noct light"
Kent
MikeL
Go Fish
I thought the focus-shift was due to the element design and the effect of changing aperture size, and less to do with the helical on both, which I assume is linear for both types.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
Focus Shift=Artful
WoolenMammoth
Well-known
what dealer is modifying lenses???????
ampguy
Veteran
could be
could be
The shot of the bike seat at F2, with focus on the ripped seat shows that there is focus shift, most 50/2 RF lenses focused on the ripped seat would have less in focus in front, and more in focus to the rear of the seat.
Totally Artful, in this case.
could be
The shot of the bike seat at F2, with focus on the ripped seat shows that there is focus shift, most 50/2 RF lenses focused on the ripped seat would have less in focus in front, and more in focus to the rear of the seat.
Totally Artful, in this case.
MikeL
Go Fish
ampguy
Veteran
Sorry
Sorry
I should have written factory modified for 1.5 optimization or non-factory modified as some folks believe it is just a cam reversal process.
Here is an interesting thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50337&highlight=zeiss+sonnar+modified
Roger - did you ever try a non 1.5 optimized ZM 50/1.5 Sonnar C, or just the factory optimized one?
Sorry
I should have written factory modified for 1.5 optimization or non-factory modified as some folks believe it is just a cam reversal process.
Here is an interesting thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50337&highlight=zeiss+sonnar+modified
Roger - did you ever try a non 1.5 optimized ZM 50/1.5 Sonnar C, or just the factory optimized one?
It even comes in the same box!
Yes, we want to see some f/1.5 shots!
I'm going to do a comparison of the three modern S-mount internals (this lens, the Millennium 50/1.4, and the Heliar 50/3.5) in the next week or two. I'll definitely be looking for focus shift wide open.
Thanks
Your comment is right on target. The younger generation here does indeed seem to spend more time in a virtual world of cell phone emails and portable console games etc. I've even heard of email parties where a group will get together and conduct all conversation by emailing each other on their cell phones. No speaking whatsoever WoolenMammoth
Well-known
hasnt the focus shift on this lens been discussed to death? Its not a question of fixing the lens, the shift is always there. The optimization is *where* the shift occurs. For all you guys that keep asking the same questions over and over you might try actually trying the lens out, its likely not the issue you imagine it to be... I mean, its not like this is the only lens that does this, yet this is generally the only lens where people talk about it.
The focus shift is more pronounced in the Sonnar formula lenses than in Planar lenses. The shift has do do with stopping the aperture down, tends to shift focus towards infinity. You can shim the lens to agree with the RF wide-open, but some error will creep in as you stop down to F4. You would have to couple the RF Cam of the lens to the F-Stop ring, or move the rear module of the lens as you stop down. I doubt the lens does either of those.
akalai
Well-known
Focus shift aside....
Why no Contax RF mount version???
I know that a Contax RF varaiant possibly would not be as marketable but it would have been nice to have one of these for my "Zeiss Ikon" Contax IIa.
Why no Contax RF mount version???
I know that a Contax RF varaiant possibly would not be as marketable but it would have been nice to have one of these for my "Zeiss Ikon" Contax IIa.
goliathus
Well-known
it's So beautiful !! Jon finally you got the real one, its appearance is very impressive!
Did you test the swirl bokeh which made by zeiss?? I'd like to see wide open shots!!
Did you test the swirl bokeh which made by zeiss?? I'd like to see wide open shots!!
WoolenMammoth
Well-known
Im not positive, but wasnt this lens originally designed for the contax? just get a real one... I did. The sonnar opton is intense and the focus shift on the old lens is nothing like the new zm.
ampguy
Veteran
which other lens
which other lens
I generally test all of my lens across their aperture ranges close up with rulers, cans of soup, etc. and haven't seen this much discrepancy, for example the f4 shots posted by the OP close up, show most of the focus area in front of the point of focus, where, with the exception of some of my LTM lenses, my Leitz, Zeiss Biogon, and 6 or so CV lenses generally match the focus point with front and back DOF area as calculated by dofmaster's tables.
I've always wanted to try out a C-Sonnar, but wouldn't know which optimization to get, the original 2.8+ or the 1.5. I don't like the idea of playing with cams myself, so I'm wondering how to get focus like behavior like that in dofmaster at f4 and up, while still be able to focus sharply at f1.5.
Perhaps I am asking for too much here.
which other lens
I generally test all of my lens across their aperture ranges close up with rulers, cans of soup, etc. and haven't seen this much discrepancy, for example the f4 shots posted by the OP close up, show most of the focus area in front of the point of focus, where, with the exception of some of my LTM lenses, my Leitz, Zeiss Biogon, and 6 or so CV lenses generally match the focus point with front and back DOF area as calculated by dofmaster's tables.
I've always wanted to try out a C-Sonnar, but wouldn't know which optimization to get, the original 2.8+ or the 1.5. I don't like the idea of playing with cams myself, so I'm wondering how to get focus like behavior like that in dofmaster at f4 and up, while still be able to focus sharply at f1.5.
Perhaps I am asking for too much here.
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
whether the sonnar 5cm was designed for the contax has nothing to do with the new c-sonnar.
the c-sonnar has a different FL (compared to its "ancestors"), which is made for leica viewfinders. and as nikon s-mount uses the exactly same FL, it's easy to change the ZM version c-sonnar to an s-mount lens, while it would be a completely new design for the contax mount.
(by the way, because the optical design of the ZM and the s-mount versions of the c-sonnar is identical, so are the effects on the focus shift. focus shift is not at all related to the focusing helical.)
another reason to prefer s-mount over contax: cosina designs its viewfinder stuff primarily for the japanese market, where the nikons are much more popular.
i wonder why i write this down -- it should be so easy to see.
s.
ps: really a nice combo, the nikon and the c-sonnar! jonmanjiro, thank you for this "report".
Last edited:
I have the Contax Opton Sonnar f1.5 and the Sonnar-ZM, and the f1.4 Nikkor, but I didn't know there was this ZM variety made in Nikon S mount... Pretty cool! Lovely results.
akalai
Well-known
Already have a few different variants of the Sonnar for my Contax IIa but would like a modern type 50mm lens (specifically in relation to contrast and coatings) to match with my Voigtlander SC wide lenses.
I'm not sure of exact numbers Jon, but the serial number range indicates that Cosina only allowed for a maximum of 1,000 units for this lens. I expect the actual figure produced is considerably less - perhaps 600 to 700.
Jon