Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
willemvelthoven

Distagon 15 M8 IR filter test

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After receiving my Zeiss Distagon 2.8/15 (I traded my WATE against it, what a relief), I've been doing a little testing of Leica vs Heliopan IR/UV filters on the M8.

 

I'm not Sean Reid, so this is a bit informal and you get less to read. But then, it's free for all of you:-)

 

all images taken with these settings: iso160 f2.8 raw 5000K hue0. exported from LR. Firmware 1.107. The light was constant semicloudy with a bit of tungsten in the room: My messy real life mix light studio:-)

 

Heliopan filter - no lens detect:

Heliopan filter - no lens detect.

 

Leica filter - no lens detect:

Leica filter - no lens detect.

 

 

Heliopan - lens+IR/UV detect as WATE 16mm:

Heliopan - lens+IR/UV detect as WATE 16mm.

 

Leica Filter - lens+IR/UV detect as WATE 16mm:

Leica Filter - lens+IR/UV detect as WATE 16mm.

 

 

The results speak for them selves.

 

Heliopan has dramatically stronger cyan shift in corners. Useless without extreme correction. Leica lens detect + filter correction is no where near.

 

Leica filter has less cyan shift and the correction for cyan shift is more or less acceptable. vignetting is still apparent but much easier to deal with later by liking it of fixing it.

 

For those who know about filter sizes and wonder: i used an e72 heliopan but an e67 leica with a hama step-down ring.

 

Everything purchased from my favorite shop in Amaterdam, foto Nivo Schweitzer!

 

(they would not give me the step-down ring without 2x making sure that i was aware of the risk of vignetting - very friendly... They have knowledge + stock - very essential!)

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Willem, not sure what the relief you feel is, I assume the need to reselect the menu when changing focal length.

 

Can you confirm a theory I have - which is that the reason the Zeiss is not rangefinder coupled is that the lens is so large that the rangefinder window is blinded so that even if if was rangefinder coupled, there would be nothing to see in the rangefinder patch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi,

 

1. how do you code the lens? marker pen?

2. have you tried shooting without any filter, to see if the 67 filter is the cause of the vigetting.

 

thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Willem, not sure what the relief you feel is, I assume the need to reselect the menu when changing focal length.

 

the relief is indeed to get rid of that sequence: adjust focal length, adjust viewfinder, adjust camera. It is too much for me.

 

Also there was no dramatic quality difference between the WATE and my CV15. and i like to work with existing light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you confirm a theory I have - which is that the reason the Zeiss is not rangefinder coupled is that the lens is so large that the rangefinder window is blinded so that even if if was rangefinder coupled, there would be nothing to see in the rangefinder patch.

 

That is not the case... It does block a lot of the view in my 21mm finder though;-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. how do you code the lens? marker pen?

I used marker on white dymo tape

 

2. have you tried shooting without any filter, to see if the 67 filter is the cause of the vigetting.

Yes I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Willem this was shot at 2.8 which would have the worst effect on vignetting , did you happen to try this at 5.6 say and see if it cleaned up better. Also as i have said this and Sean has said many times the firmware is tuned to the leica filter specs so your results in this super wide area matches the WATE with regards to using a Leica filter also. I would love to know how you coded this lens also and frankly how big really is it. Any chance you can put the Zeiss side by side with a known leica lens and post that so we can see the real difference. I honestly would love to see just one shot with the leica filter on and IR on at 5.6 in this same setting just to see when it completly cleans up or doesn't .

 

Sorry i just put you to work but i have had a interest in this lens since the M8 came out . the thought of a 15mm 2.8 is pretty exciting.

 

Also quick question the focus throw long or short is it like 2 ,4,6 than infinity. another words could i easily say 10 ft away and find a setting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is not the case... It does block a lot of the view in my 21mm finder though;-(

 

In which case, I think Zeiss ARE cheap for not making the lens rangefinder coupled. I'll stick to the WATE, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when I turn the focus ring, the rear element does not move, and you can turn it all the way to 0.3m mark. my guess is that zeiss uses a different focus scheme.

 

 

 

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://farm1.static.flickr.com/171/473447542_346c6a7e79_o.jpg&key=96a537e2345c609286cacad3743236406bbefec2699b0412d3bca5865264458e">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Willem this was shot at 2.8 which would have the worst effect on vignetting , did you happen to try this at 5.6 say and see if it cleaned up better.

It sure does, But I bought the lens for it's 2.8 aperture! I already own the CV15 for 7 years and i'm happy with it. I don't have time to do much more testing right now but you can expect far less vignetting. The residue cyan shift may become more apparent in a test set up. In real life, I wouldn't worry so much anymore...

 

Also as i have said this and Sean has said many times the firmware is tuned to the leica filter specs so your results in this super wide area matches the WATE with regards to using a Leica filter also.

Obviously. I just wanted to confirm, also because Leica does not supply an e72 filter.

 

 

Any chance you can put the Zeiss side by side with a known leica lens and post that so we can see the real difference.

 

Also quick question the focus throw long or short is it like 2 ,4,6 than infinity. another words could i easily say 10 ft away and find a setting

It is as bulky and heavy as a noctilux. I have to get used to it and i will keep traveling with my cv lenses i'd expect. The centre of gravity is a bit more close to the camera. Therefore it's a bit less tiring to use than a noct.

 

Focus throw is rather short. And the scale is not very detailed. I had to do some exercises to get my focusing right at full aperture.

 

I'll try and post some more pictures tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

Thanks you very much for your reply. That helped get a sense of it. i don't mind a big lens and quite used to that from the DMR. If it was RF coupled i would have bought this the day the M8 came out. i just like to focus. That is just me though. Fascinating lens and the images i have seen are extremely good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark, my theory is that the Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 is not rangefinder coupled because the lens is already too large, and this would have made it even larger (perhaps so large that it blocked the rangefinder window...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the zeiss is misunderstood whereas the leica is overhyped (overpriced too). I am going to find a 67-72 adapter next week. B+W also makes a 72mm IR cut filter, but I believe leica's 67mm will be a better choice.

 

 

zeiss 15 on M8 (with uv filter):

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1380/1350069977_8cd9d35199_o.jpg&key=02e6ab56909e0b268b30754fe101e616427adecd0384593f64dfda651d182439">

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1249/1352572707_36cc536fbc_o.jpg&key=995154e37e1a93faafd4e08eda8165f75792847b54dcd3448c09c0df730950bb">

 

 

zeiss 15 on MP (with uv filter)

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://farm1.static.flickr.com/199/456371928_a103103a83_o.jpg&key=c08f24083c9822493c966b1a85976395f3f8eeb43cbf27bd6ce84dba2bec13f0">

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://farm1.static.flickr.com/234/457438581_06c65c7476_o.jpg&key=807204dd0836ff403f8fb73a4b76413e13c851a508d116cf5169e0e4f19d55f4">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have a look yourself. when focusing, the rear element group does not move, and looking at the front element, I also see nothing moving. i think there are some other reasons why the lens is not rangefinder coupled.

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://farm1.static.flickr.com/232/1497429615_ad9385e4d4_o.jpg&key=dceafa61747e802f7acb37590f200d825771c0f4af3967287ce082aeef52c4bc">

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2188/1497428997_8e836bab70_o.jpg&key=07238b10a06e9d268f3107ba6045055e271b1db2b90db04ef407459a4429c1b1">

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://farm1.static.flickr.com/171/473447542_08be3f9947_o.jpg&key=e39fefce3dce8aaf778144f6adc82263e303b3c1d14256ad5c258501bdf2cf85">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark, my theory is that the Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 is not rangefinder coupled because the lens is already too large, and this would have made it even larger (perhaps so large that it blocked the rangefinder window...).

 

Carsten, you may well be right, my assumption was that it was already too big but it may be the additional helicoid would have taken it over the top. I do hanker after a lens like a 28 Summilux or a 21 or 24 Summicron and the size might be a problem where you absolutely do still need rangefinder coupling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carsten, you may well be right, my assumption was that it was already too big but it may be the additional helicoid would have taken it over the top. I do hanker after a lens like a 28 Summilux or a 21 or 24 Summicron and the size might be a problem where you absolutely do still need rangefinder coupling.

 

Well, it's of course also a matter of cost/benefit. Do you really need it and are you prepaired to pay for extra cost and weight?

 

The distagon 15's depth of field is rather considerable, even at full aperture. At 0,7 meter (closest focusing distance of a Leica RF) depth of field is about 30cm on an M8.

 

Now if HCB could guestimate his focus with a 50mm, we should be able to do so with a 21eq lens.

 

Anyway, switching from viewfinder to distance finder and back all the the time makes me nervous (tried it with the WATE).

 

One can see the distance scale of the distagon through the 21mm viewfinder and adjust settings without taking an eye from the VF. It works for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After receiving my Zeiss Distagon 2.8/15 (I traded my WATE against it, what a relief), I've been doing a little testing of Leica vs Heliopan IR/UV filters on the M8.

 

I'm not Sean Reid, so this is a bit informal and you get less to read. But then, it's free for all of you:-)

 

all images taken with these settings: iso160 f2.8 raw 5000K hue0. exported from LR. Firmware 1.107. The light was constant semicloudy with a bit of tungsten in the room: My messy real life mix light studio:-)

 

Heliopan filter - no lens detect:

[ATTACH]56728[/ATTACH]

Heliopan filter - no lens detect.

 

Leica filter - no lens detect:

[ATTACH]56729[/ATTACH]

Leica filter - no lens detect.

 

 

Heliopan - lens+IR/UV detect as WATE 16mm:

[ATTACH]56730[/ATTACH]

Heliopan - lens+IR/UV detect as WATE 16mm.

 

Leica Filter - lens+IR/UV detect as WATE 16mm:

[ATTACH]56731[/ATTACH]

Leica Filter - lens+IR/UV detect as WATE 16mm.

 

 

The results speak for them selves.

 

Heliopan has dramatically stronger cyan shift in corners. Useless without extreme correction. Leica lens detect + filter correction is no where near.

 

Leica filter has less cyan shift and the correction for cyan shift is more or less acceptable. vignetting is still apparent but much easier to deal with later by liking it of fixing it.

 

For those who know about filter sizes and wonder: i used an e72 heliopan but an e67 leica with a hama step-down ring.

 

Everything purchased from my favorite shop in Amaterdam, foto Nivo Schweitzer!

 

(they would not give me the step-down ring without 2x making sure that i was aware of the risk of vignetting - very friendly... They have knowledge + stock - very essential!)

 

 

 

Thanks for the post. I've yet to see any cyan shift with the filters (the central area tested stays neutral) but I just retested the current Leica 21 and, as expected, the Leica filter is the best match for the current M8 firmware. Though, with studio tungsten, the correction is still not dead on with the Leica filter on the 21.

 

Of course, the wider the lens, the more obvious cyan drift will be. So, indeed (for most lighting conditions), the Leica filters are the way to go with the ultra-wides, unless one wants to bypass the M8 corrections and use Cornerfix.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Willem, not sure what the relief you feel is, I assume the need to reselect the menu when changing focal length.

 

Can you confirm a theory I have - which is that the reason the Zeiss is not rangefinder coupled is that the lens is so large that the rangefinder window is blinded so that even if if was rangefinder coupled, there would be nothing to see in the rangefinder patch.

 

I'll confirm that this is not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would love to know how you coded this lens also and frankly how big really is it. Any chance you can put the Zeiss side by side with a known leica lens and post that so we can see the real difference.

 

Hi Guy,

 

Side by side pics are in the ultra-wides review.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Willem,

 

My recommendation for that lens would be to use a 72 mm 486 and bypass the M8's in-camera corrections all together (lens detection off). Then make a profile in Cornerfix and just batch the files from the ZM 15. The results should be excellent as opposed to adequate.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...