the new 25mm P lens from Cameraquest

David Murphy said:
Well, yes granted that *if* you shoot a lot at the near limit of the lens and *if* the lens is used wide open (or nearly so) most of the time and *if* you don't mind the horrific distortion of a wide angle on most subjects when used up close and *if* you've got a camera with a whooping bright and contrasty rangefinder patch that is very accurately calibrated and *if* you can't estimate a near distance at arms length within +/- 1.2 feet (or so), RF coupling may be handy!! Seems like a lot of "bucks" for a lot of "ifs".

(If you go and calculate more realistic shooting scenarios with a DOF calculator you will see that the 25/4 has remarkable DOF under most common conditions.)

On the other hand, no one is in the rangefinder lens/camera game for purely rational reasons (certainly not me) and we can always use more lenses, so actually I welcome it to the fold. I do think CV had a great idea though when they came up with the the original 25/4 which I own and adore. Its good quality and moderate price cracked what was previously an insanely overpriced market of lenses catering mostly to the photographic elite.
Click to expand...

I am more comfortable with having a lens coupled and I guess I am not as much a purist in RFs
 
Just received my 25p from CameraQuest. Took a couple of quick snaps with the 25p mounted on an M8 to check if my rough Sharpie coding (used a 486 filter and coded the lens as a 24mm Elmarit) was successful. The coding worked just fine and with the M8 lens recognition menu set for ON/IR there was no cyan fringing or vignetting. Accurate colors, moderate contrast, and good center sharpness. My copy may be slightly soft in the lower right corner, but not bad.

Sample Image (ISO 160, f/8):
large.jpg


Larger Image
 
Last edited:
The lower right corner of the frame might well be outside the lens's DOF range. Circles of confusion must be smaller for a given DOF with a smaller sensor.
 
Bryce said:
The lower right corner of the frame might well be outside the lens's DOF range. Circles of confusion must be smaller for a given DOF with a smaller sensor.
Click to expand...

You are right about that and I'll check more with other images to be sure.
 
well CR*P I had a pick up from the post office, but I thought it was for something else so I did not bother picking it up Saturday [thought it was a universal finder] looked at the form and it said from GANDY:bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :eek:
 
Ok, the lens has arrived. first, it is slightly smaller than the 35MM lens [not as tall] it has the inside lens cover instead of the over the hood cover [one is hard to get off, one is hard to keep on;) ]

next there are little flanges for both focus and fstop settings, I have just started to play with them, I think I like the little screw in bar for focus, however the other won't be falling out any time soon:D

oh yeah and I can FOCUS it though the viewfinder :cool: I am a happy camper
 
i just got my 21 pancake. yes, the wings are the same as the nokton 40 (both focus and aperture). i actually quite like them.
 
Unless the new model offers better optical performance I don't see much reason to buy it. Focusing that little baby (the un-coupled version,) is easy and fun.
 
I've had the original 25/4 for years, and I've always loved it (and never mis-focused a shot). One thing about using it on an R4M bugs me, though - the fact that things always looks out of focus in the rangefinder patch. Since it isn't coupled, the two images never come together in the patch. This obviously wasn't an issue using this lens with an external finder, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom