Jump to content

BastianK

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    114

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male / Männlich
  • Location
    Stuttgart
  • Country
    Deutschland

Converted

  • City
    Stuttgart
  • Job
    Ingenieur
  • Your Leica Products / Deine Leica Produkte
    M19

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. BastianK
    Do you really think the mountain range on the left side should look like it does? I don't. It is way more in focus than it should be.
  2. BastianK
    Already at 1.0 m focus distance I see a lot of issues caused by the Voigtländer's field curvature shape and things only get worse from there. As you will see from that comparison, the Voigtländer is the one that "stands out" compared to the others, while the Thypoch manages to match the bokeh quality of the much bigger Sigma 28mm 1.4 Art and Nikon AF-S 28mm 1.4E. Quite impressive, considering the massive size differences. The Laowa - sadly - has a similar curvature of the field as the Voigtländer, it becomes an issue a bit later though, around 2.0 m.
  3. BastianK
    Thanks for sharing! I do however kinda recommend to wait until I publish my comparison of fast 28mm lenses before buying the Voigtländer, as I think for some tasks the Thypoch Simera 28mm 1.4 might be the more desirable lens 🙂
  4. BastianK
    There is another issue, some M39 lenses have a slanted cam. Here also the radial orientation of the lens in combination with the adapter plays a crucial role. Had a lens like that, tried it with idk, 6 different adapters (including one of the expensive Voigtländer ones), never was really happy with the results.
  5. BastianK
    Karbe may go for the lowest possible bar saying a lens is "Apo" (like Sigma did in the past, too). Fact is, there are plenty of lenses out there that correct all longitudinal chromatic aberrations perfectly, also the ones in the out of focus areas which do seem to be much harder to correct than the simple "purple fringing". And most manufacturers only award their lenses an Apo tag if that is actually the case. And only if that is the case I find an Apo tag is actually helpful to the customer. And neither the 50mm 0.95 nor the 50mm 1.4 Asph are among those.
  6. BastianK
    As someone who has used both lenses I can only say: best joke I read today. Leica 50mm 0.95 on Leica M10 (100% crop): Leica 50mm 1.4 Asph on M10 (100% crop): In the dimensions desirable for an M-mount lens it is hardly possible to include enough lens elements to correct all the aberrations that come with making a lens as fast as f/0.95. Even the Nikon 58mm 0.95 is not a real Apo lens, but it is the f/0.95 lens that comes closest. 17 elements in a 2 kg lens where needed for that, whereas the Leica 50mm 0.95 only has 8 elements and in a (by comparison) lightweight 767g structure.
  7. BastianK
    https://phillipreeve.net/blog/comparison-super-fast-50mm-m-mount-lenses/ Many side by side comparisons. More of an upgrade than a downgrade, not only for your wallet.
  8. BastianK
    What about the Type I do you consider being a benefit for this application?
  9. BastianK
    loCA
  10. BastianK
    Only because you can show one picture with no areas of high contrast and therefore no CA doesn't mean the lens is free of CA. It merely means you took a picture of a scene where they don't show up. I also wonder about your underlying tone, trying to make Nitnaros appear as a subpar photographer because he shows a picture with no artistic value to you, which he merely did to show an optical aberration he encountered. Picture also doesn't look like he took it in a laboratory. How are such comments helpful to the discussion? It reminds me of a child being sour because someone said his toy isn't as great as he thinks it is himself.
  11. BastianK
    What kind of CA, lateral or longitudinal? The amount of lateral CA does not change on stopping down (except for extremely rare cases) but your Nikon cameras will automatically correct these in-camera for Jpegs whereas your Leica camera doesn't. Longitudinal CA should be very well corrected with this lens (way better than what the 135mm 3.4 has to offer). The Zeiss lens is however one with a floating elements design, where the correct flange focal distance is crucial for optimal performance. If your Nikon -> Leica adapter is too short (or even worse: too long) you can encounter (vastly) decreased image quality and more CAs. How to check if your adapter is too short? Focus at something located at infinity (e.g. the moon) and check what the distance scale reads. My guess: something closer than infinity.
  12. BastianK
    I don't think a 135mm is any fun to focus via the rangefinder, so that might not be a bad idea. You might even consider a cheap Samyang 135mm 2.0 which is almost as good optically as the Zeiss you mentioned. That has come down a lot in price on the used market though, so you might want to invest that for nicer materials.
  13. BastianK
    You ask me to tell you a 135mm lens specifically for M-mount that is better. Instead of just dropping a name of a lens you got a complete review from me that proves the point, further showing that I actually used the lens (the 135mm 3.4 Apo Telyt as well by the way). You didn't ask me if I know someone else that knows a 135mm lens that is better, in that case I might have posted a link to someone else's review 🙂 I do however prefer to talk about lenses I have actually used and not those I only know from marketing material.
  14. BastianK
    You have zero idea what you are talking about and no idea about the differences between lateral and longitudinal CA, I will not continue talking with you here as it is pointless.
  15. BastianK
    Sure, this one for example: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-ms-optics-aporis-135mm-2-4-fluorit-mc/ If I have to stop the lens down anyway to get rid of the loCA there are also plenty of cheaper options available, e.g. the old 135mm 4.0.
×
×
  • Create New...