We had some warmer weather over the Holidays- trip to the Playground.
My Daughter stayed still for this shot wide-open.
View attachment 4818370
But I stopped down to F4 for most of the time.
View attachment 4818371View attachment 4818372
She had just finished her Final exam for the term, Operating Systems and Systems Analysis and Design. Trip to the Playground.
I typically shoot most lenses wide-open or at F4 for informal comparisons like these. At F4- the Sonnar increases contrast substantially. With the Bertele- the contrast is already there at F2. The Sonnar has a lot of field curvature compared with a double-Gauss type lens, very low astigmatism. The Sonnar gives Comets, not Footballs. At F4- the Comets have become circles on the Sonnar, and on the Double-Gauss are typically tamed. At F4- most lenses are well-behaved.Brian, I get the bokeh character at the widest apertures, but what should I be looking for in the 'Sonnar look' otherwise, especially stopped down? I accept that my "palate" isn't as discerning for the Sonnar; read all the raves on the Tessar and just didn't find it all that compelling.
I've not done a direct comparison yet. I will be doing one. I'll post a quick Tripod mounted test that I did between the C-Sonnar, J3+, and 1950 KMZ J-3 with perfect glass, I did a lot of work on it as it was unusable. The rear triplet was in the wrong position.Thanks Brian. The rendering looks to my eye more 'modern' than say 1930s/ 1940s Sonnars which leads me to ask - how would you compare the Bertele to the Zeiss C-Sonar in rendering?
The Bertele has higher contrast, and less flare. With an older lens, especially a Sonnar- you do not know when flare and reflections creep into a photo until after viewing it. I've not had this happen with the Bertele.The higher contrast gives a greater "3D" effect. Contrast can be added in post but will it give the same effect as that given by the Bertele? It does seem a really nice lens.