JimKasson Posted February 24, 2014 Share #4321 Posted February 24, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) The Carl Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO-Sonnar ZF.2 on the a7 vs the 135mm f/3.4 Leica APO-Telyt on the M240 results have been posted. Zeiss is sharp wide open but has a lot of corner light falloff at f/2 and some at f/2.8. The Leica takes a pass at those apertures. In the center the Leica is less contrasty than the Zeiss at all apertures, especially f/4. In the corners the Leica is noticeably less crisp at f/4 (but still very good in absolute terms) and has less contrast at all stops, including f/16, which is a surprise. At a little over half the price of the Leica lens, the APO Sonnar is a good choice for the a7 if IQ is the main concern, but its large size and weight makes it a poor physical match for the camera. If handheld shooting is your main concern and your pockets are deep, the APO-Telyt is the better choice. The APO Sonnar should perform well on the M240, and, thanks to its beefed-up lens mount, you won't have to baby the mounted lens the way I suspect you have to on the a7. In this series, there is no indication that the a7's AA filter is holding it back when compared the the M240, but I'd have to try the APO-Sonnar on the Leica body to make sure. There is only one instance (same branch, several f-stops) I saw of false color due to the M240's lack of an AA filter. Pictures here: Testing the Sony a7, part 11 | The Last Word Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 24, 2014 Posted February 24, 2014 Hi JimKasson, Take a look here The Sony A7 thread [Merged]. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
viramati Posted February 24, 2014 Share #4322 Posted February 24, 2014 The Carl Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO-Sonnar ZF.2 on the a7 vs the 135mm f/3.4 Leica APO-Telyt on the M240 results have been posted. Zeiss is sharp wide open but has a lot of corner light falloff at f/2 and some at f/2.8. The Leica takes a pass at those apertures. In the center the Leica is less contrasty than the Zeiss at all apertures, especially f/4. In the corners the Leica is noticeably less crisp at f/4 (but still very good in absolute terms) and has less contrast at all stops, including f/16, which is a surprise. At a little over half the price of the Leica lens, the APO Sonnar is a good choice for the a7 if IQ is the main concern, but its large size and weight makes it a poor physical match for the camera. If handheld shooting is your main concern and your pockets are deep, the APO-Telyt is the better choice. The APO Sonnar should perform well on the M240, and, thanks to its beefed-up lens mount, you won't have to baby the mounted lens the way I suspect you have to on the a7. In this series, there is no indication that the a7's AA filter is holding it back when compared the the M240, but I'd have to try the APO-Sonnar on the Leica body to make sure. There is only one instance (same branch, several f-stops) I saw of false color due to the M240's lack of an AA filter. Pictures here: Testing the Sony a7, part 11 | The Last Word Jim Well I don't know about the Zeiss but I have been literally amazed by the IQ I am getting from the apo-telyt 135 on the A7, the micro detail is just fantastic and my copy is sharp across the frame even wide open and contrast seems to be very good Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimKasson Posted February 24, 2014 Share #4323 Posted February 24, 2014 Well I don't know about the Zeiss but I have been literally amazed by the IQ I am getting from the apo-telyt 135 on the A7, the micro detail is just fantastic and my copy is sharp across the frame even wide open and contrast seems to be very good Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the APO-Telyt is a bad lens at all. In fact, I'm saying it offers very good IQ in a small, easy-to-handle package. It's a good match for the a7. Here's a set of images that shows the APO-Telyt delivering resolution high enough to create a lot of false-color aliasing in the central part of the a7 field at f/5.6. http://blog.kasson.com/?p=4808 Here's a set of images that shows the APO-Telyt providing more resolution than than even the a7R can handle: http://blog.kasson.com/?p=4450 The APO-Sonnar, for those who can accept its bulk and can make sure they don't bend the a7 lens mount, has IQ that's astounding. Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted February 27, 2014 Share #4324 Posted February 27, 2014 I agree the sony/zeiss 55 is just so good on the A7 that I really don't use the leica lux 50 asph anymore on my M. Apart from the IQ I just can hit the focus so much more wight the 55 on the A7 Impressive. Wondering whether Leica has anything in 50mm length M mount that equals sony/zeiss55's performance (irrespective of price)? BTW, for my M9/50Lux the corners become somewhat usable by f5.6 but I start seeing diffraction softness by f8 and very obviously at f11. That leaves f5.6 as the only aperture for corner to corner performance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted February 27, 2014 Share #4325 Posted February 27, 2014 irrespective of price.maybe the sizeit is certainly much more easy to do a big Zeiss 55mm than a small Leica 50mm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted February 27, 2014 Share #4326 Posted February 27, 2014 maybe the sizeit is certainly much more easy to do a big Zeiss 55mm than a small Leica 50mm Big Zeiss 71mm long weight 281g (55mm f1.8) Small Leica 52.5mm long Weight 335g (Summilux ASPH) Humm ? Note the Zeiss does Autofocus, disclaimer: I own a Summilux but not the Zeiss Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted February 27, 2014 Share #4327 Posted February 27, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Big Zeiss 71mm long weight 281g (55mm f1.8)Small Leica 52.5mm long Weight 335g (Summilux ASPH) Humm ? Note the Zeiss does Autofocus, disclaimer: I own a Summilux but not the Zeiss Otus 1.4/55 | ZEISS International Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted February 27, 2014 Share #4328 Posted February 27, 2014 My bad I forgot the small one was f1.8 but in my defence I call DXO mark/ DPReview to the stand. In fact it comes very close indeed to the astounding (but $4000) Zeiss Otus 55mm F1.4. DXO show both at 29MP sharpness with the Otus at T stop 1.7 the Otus is slightly better corrected for distortion and chromatic aberration. And while it may appear the two have similar levels of vignetting, at f1.8 the Otus has lower levels with disappearing more or less by f2.8. Whereas, the Sonnar never really clears it up. So I still contend Sony/Zeiss is remarkable in that size of package (and price) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted February 27, 2014 Share #4329 Posted February 27, 2014 My bad I forgot the small one was f1.8 but in my defence I call DXO mark/ DPReview to the stand. In fact it comes very close indeed to the astounding (but $4000) Zeiss Otus 55mm F1.4. DXO show both at 29MP sharpness with the Otus at T stop 1.7 the Otus is slightly better corrected for distortion and chromatic aberration. And while it may appear the two have similar levels of vignetting, at f1.8 the Otus has lower levels with disappearing more or less by f2.8. Whereas, the Sonnar never really clears it up. So I still contend Sony/Zeiss is remarkable in that size of package (and price) I keep my 50 summilux if you dont mind , and I dont take the Zeiss even for 50€ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted February 27, 2014 Share #4330 Posted February 27, 2014 I keep my 50 summilux if you dont mind , and I dont take the Zeiss even for 50€ So, what's your point? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted February 27, 2014 Share #4331 Posted February 27, 2014 I keep my 50 summilux if you dont mind , and I dont take the Zeiss even for 50€ You're loss then Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted February 27, 2014 Share #4332 Posted February 27, 2014 I don't think we can talk of lens in isolation. One can't use zeiss 55/1.8 on M therefore only way to use it will be to accept the +/- of A7/r system. Anyway, my original question was whether Leica has any 50mm lens in its arsenal with corner to corner sharpness at wide aperture. (disclaimer: I am still on M9) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted February 28, 2014 Share #4333 Posted February 28, 2014 I'll take it as a given that you shoot perfectly flat objects square on with the lens and the lens wide open often enough where having no field curvature is a concern. Maybe the new 50mm 'cron is worth a look (I've no experience with the lens not have I done any research on it). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted February 28, 2014 Share #4334 Posted February 28, 2014 That corner sharpness is restricted/compromised/fixed in the camera firmware, with the digital sensors, even the well adjusted, for their lenses, Leica ones. Unless the new Summicron was designed specifically for digital they were all designed for film and yes there is a difference, all to do with the sensor cells, their depth and micro lens (if any) angles. Any digital lens test is examining the combination of lens and sensor. hence the excellent lenses that are performing poorly on the Sony series, they are not bad lenses they are not poor, smearing the corners, the combination is doing that.The Sony glass is "matched" to the sensor design, optimised if you like, much as with the tolerances involved in "perfection" the Hasselblad H digital series (3DII onwards) are matched back to body. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted February 28, 2014 Share #4335 Posted February 28, 2014 So, what's your point? My point is that the main reason (for me) to buy a Leica System was not the quality, but size + quality The sony A7 is not a system Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimKasson Posted February 28, 2014 Share #4336 Posted February 28, 2014 The sony A7 is not a system ...yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted February 28, 2014 Share #4337 Posted February 28, 2014 ...yet.when it will I shall see Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest polygamer Posted February 28, 2014 Share #4338 Posted February 28, 2014 The sony A7 is not a system How very true ... However, I use it with Leica M mount lenses with 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 25, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, 135 mm and Leica/Leitz R lenses with 135, 180, 350 and 400mm focal length, (and others). Not too bad, for a non-system, I would say (and more versatile than my M9). Have a nice weekend! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted February 28, 2014 Share #4339 Posted February 28, 2014 How very true ... However, I use it with Leica M mount lenses with 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 25, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, 135 mm and Leica/Leitz R lenses with 135, 180, 350 and 400mm focal length, (and others). Not too bad, for a non-system, I would say (and more versatile than my M9). Have a nice weekend! but no autofocus I shall sell all my Leica gear only for a small FF AF system, Fuji , Sony , CocaCola , any .... , I dont care Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted February 28, 2014 Share #4340 Posted February 28, 2014 How very true ... However, I use it with Leica M mount lenses with 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 25, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, 135 mm and Leica/Leitz R lenses with 135, 180, 350 and 400mm focal length, (and others). Not too bad, for a non-system, I would say (and more versatile than my M9). Have a nice weekend! Poly I forgot, do you own the a7 or a7R? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.