Tell us something good or bad about the lenses you are using

[gohaj]

Tell us something good or bad about the lenses you are using!

Let me start and get the ball rolling...

Canon ltm 28/3.5
Good
- good for digital as it is medium-low contrast
- small and light
Bad
- difficult to find
- can be expensive for mint copy


Will write something about other lenses soon.

 

[gohaj]

posting a photo from Canon ltm 28/3.5

 

[fuwen]

I am only shooting with negatives on Rollei 35RF (Voigtlander R2) with 40mm HFT Sonnar and ZMs 15/2.8, 21/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2 and 50/2. None of them disappoint me up to 8x12 prints (I dun print beyond 8x12). The ZMs are very flare resistant, very high contrast and still have the typical Zeiss smoothness. The 40mm Sonnar although being an old design is till performing well and it has a sweet character, but I think the one on the Rollei 35S is sweeter.

http://www.fuwen.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogsection&id=9&Itemid=110

Today just saw a very nice review of the ZM 28/2.8 Biogon in rangefinder forum.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62160

 

[Hacker]

I am only shooting with negatives on Rollei 35RF (Voigtlander R2) with 40mm HFT Sonnar and ZMs 15/2.8, 21/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2 and 50/2.

You are missing the ZM 85 f2 . :bigeyes:

 

[fuwen]

You are missing the ZM 85 f2 . :bigeyes:

Missing more than that, 18/4, 21/4.5, 25/2.8, 35/2.8 and 50/1.5. I was offered the 50/1.5 twice and is still thinking about it. But I prefer close distance fast action shot with 50mm on SLR, same with 85mm focal length. 85mm never my favourite focal length, I prefer 135mm, and now 100 macro after I switch from Rolleiflex to Contax.

Anyway financially I am not able to collect all the ZMs. Envy u and your Leicas.

 

[chiif]

Missing more than that, 18/4, 21/4.5, 25/2.8, 35/2.8 and 50/1.5. I was offered the 50/1.5 twice and is still thinking about it. But I prefer close distance fasts action shot with 50mm on SLR, same with 85mm focal length. 85mm never my favourite focal length, I prefer 135mm, and now 100 macro after I switch from Rolleiflex to Contax.

Anyway financially I am not able to collect all the ZMs. Envy u and your Leicas.

Offering you the 3rd time... it's still available.

Sorry GohAJ for hijacking your thread.

 

[spartacus.ret]

Offering you the 3rd time... it's still available.

Sorry GohAJ for hijacking your thread.

haha. wah, so determined to make a sale!

 

[fuwen]

Ha ha try to avoid this thread after seeing Chiif offer. Probably won't take up as still have other things in mind.... a chrome R4A, a ZI body, a Fogg pouch, Epson V500 or maybe a potential ZM 85/2.8 etc etc

Anyway Chiif is a wonderful guy.

I like my ZMs very much. I like the 40mm when I want a really small package to go. Not really a 35mm person I prefer 28/50. On the range finder 50/2 Planar becomes a short tele for me, and I finally get the Planar over the Sonnar also because it can focus nearer.

21/2.8 is nice to use and the lens is very usable at f2.8. The 15/2.8 is giving me some headache as I cannot really see what the lens sees based on the 15mm external finder. But this lens is already very good at f2.8. With the centre filter I feel very confident to use the lens as light fall off becomes very minimal. Size is not an issue to me as I am used to the weight of the SLR and am not really a street shooter.

When I want a one lens system and some speed then the almost zero distortion 35/2 will be the one to go.

 

[CooperS]

24mm Elmarit f2.8 ASPH.

Good: Almost no distortion based on angles and doesn't overly stretch the image.
Good: Damn sharp (IMHO) high contrast.

Bad: Vignetting in strong light when fully open.

 

[gohaj]

Sorry GohAJ for hijacking your thread.

Need u to write the 1st review on VC 28/2 here.

 

[chiif]

Need u to write the 1st review on VC 28/2 here.

I will.... after I get hold of one copy next week.

 

[gohaj]

Voigtlander 35/1.4 S.C.
Good
- good for colour photo on digital
- small and light
Bad
- too high contrast for B&W on digital (for my likings); but filter will fix the issue (see B&W photo below))

# Colour photo

# B&W Night Scene with Filter

 

[bernards]

Voigtlander 35/1.4 S.C.
Good
- good for colour photo on digital
- small and light
Bad
- too high contrast for B&W on digital (for my likings); but filter will fix the issue (see B&W photo below))

# Colour photo

# B&W Night Scene with Filter

Very nice. May I know what kind of filter did you use for the B&W?

 

[gohaj]

Very nice. May I know what kind of filter did you use for the B&W?

http://www.tiffen.com/dfx_ultra_contrast_ig.html

 

[milaurie]

SUMMARON 35mm f2.8.

Good:

Superb optical performance, even up close and wide open. @2.8, it is evidently sharper than the 8-E summicron and the type IV. No distortion and very pleasant bokeh too.

Bad:

1. While it is just as well built as the 8-E summicron, it is 1-stop slower than the Summicron.
2. It is only available in chrome which looks odd on a black body.

(BTW, the piece that I have is the early version, screw mount with a removable M-mount. Focus down of 0.7m. By replacing the M-mount with a coded LTM-M adaptor, it works just like a new lens on the M8.
Love this lens to bit.:heart:

Laurie

 

[gohaj]

how is the bokeh of this shot?

 

[gohaj]

using same lens. how is the bokeh?

 

[limhea]

Hi all,

I retired in 2004 and has not touched a camera since, not even a compact! I thought my retirement would give me all the time in the world to take more photographs; it wasn't so! There are just too many things to catch up, for example the retro HIFI scence. I remember, the most used lens and the sharpest I have was the Nikon 180 2.8 ED. Because, it was so good that I bought a second one for insurance, just incase! The lens was very affordable and I covered the cost of the lens in 2 weekends of photography. All on taking lotus and lily flowers in the lake. In 2 years, I sold hundreds of lotus and lily photographs using just the 2 Nikon 180 lenses that I have. All the photographs were enlarged to 16 and 20Rs without noticeable lost of sharpness or increase in grain. I am very surprised that not many peaple fancy this lens, most would prefer the 80-200 2.8 ED. What are your comment on this or am i in the wrong forum?

 

[bernards]

http://www.tiffen.com/dfx_ultra_contrast_ig.html

Thanks mate. Pic #1 is amazing. It's got the 3D effect.

 

[Daikoku]

Hi all,

I retired in 2004 and has not touched a camera since, not even a compact! I thought my retirement would give me all the time in the world to take more photographs; it wasn't so! There are just too many things to catch up, for example the retro HIFI scence. I remember, the most used lens and the sharpest I have was the Nikon 180 2.8 ED. Because, it was so good that I bought a second one for insurance, just incase! The lens was very affordable and I covered the cost of the lens in 2 weekends of photography. All on taking lotus and lily flowers in the lake. In 2 years, I sold hundreds of lotus and lily photographs using just the 2 Nikon 180 lenses that I have. All the photographs were enlarged to 16 and 20Rs without noticeable lost of sharpness or increase in grain. I am very surprised that not many peaple fancy this lens, most would prefer the 80-200 2.8 ED. What are your comment on this or am i in the wrong forum?

Nikon 180 2.8 ED was my fav before everything went autofocus...thats way before everything went digital...
Have to agree on the sharpness on the Nikon 180 2.8 ED