Leica's new MF system

[pss]

this might be a stupid question...but when you use leica (or any other brand) lenses on the canon via adapter....the f-stop obviously has to be set on the lens....does the f-stop close down? meaning does the finder go darker when i shoot at f8?

[paul_jones]

im looking for an old lens to stick on the front of my canon that flares badly. i like the look, but i still resonably sharp, but something i can point at a highlight and it flares like a cheap 60s 16mm movie camera.
so im going to use a canon to nikon adaptor, and try a really old nikon 50 1.4.

it might still be a bit too good, but its cheap to try.

can anyone suggest another fast, but old and imperfect lens to try?

paul

[eronald]

The Z21 has mustache distorsion.
Edmund

For me, it's neither about being 'anal' or resolution.

If shooting at 21mm with almost complete lack of distortion is important to you, as well as taking sharp photographs (right into the corners) at 2.8, or if having no chromatic aberrations to try and correct in post is on your shopping list - then Canon simply don't have a lens to fit the bill. I personally wouldn't forgo coupled metering unless the results really justified it. The second hand price tag on this lens says alot about the quality of the optics you are buying.

Equally, does Canon produce a flat field lens with next to no barrel distortion and minimal aberrations for technical work at around the 50mm length?....no, hence the use of a Zeiss 60mm Macro.

It has to be said the resolving power of these old Contax lenses is excellent - but the reasons for investing go far beyond resolution. Both lenses help produce superb photographs, both technically and aesthetically.

If you have the opportunity and inclination do try them for yourself.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215536\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Christopher]

The Z21 has mustache distorsion.
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215555\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Which isn't really a problem as long as you are not shooting architecture and for that I would not use any slr ^^

[ixpressraf]

im looking for an old lens to stick on the front of my canon that flares badly. i like the look, but i still resonably sharp, but something i can point at a highlight and it flares like a cheap 60s 16mm movie camera.
so im going to use a canon to nikon adaptor, and try a really old nikon 50 1.4.

it might still be a bit too good, but its cheap to try.

can anyone suggest another fast, but old and imperfect lens to try?

paul
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215550\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That will not work with a nikon 1,4. That was one of the best lenses ever unless you get a very very old one. The nikon 1,2 50 or 58 mm on the other hand could do the trick. i often used on on my digiflex with CF39Mp back. This way you get a 22Mp 35mm back with an unsurpassed image quality and a perfect use of all possible lenses.

[gwhitf]

...the f-stop obviously has to be set on the lens....does the f-stop close down? meaning does the finder go darker when i shoot at f8?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215545\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes. The finder goes dark.

That's what I meant by PITA Factor.

Imagine shooting people with that lens: Shoot; open lens; refocus; hope they don't move; stop back down; shoot.

Rinse and repeat, about a hundred times.

You might as well be shooting a view camera, and get the extra mojo out of the lens...

The only exception to the PITA thing would be if you were shooting wide open, and then at that point, it's just as fast as shooting a Canon lens that's talking to the camera body.

[Christopher]

Yes. The finder goes dark.

That's what I meant by PITA Factor.

Imagine shooting people with that lens: Shoot; open lens; refocus; hope they don't move; stop back down; shoot.

Rinse and repeat, about a hundred times.

You might as well be shooting a view camera, and get the extra mojo out of the lens...

The only exception to the PITA thing would be if you were shooting wide open, and then at that point, it's just as fast as shooting a Canon lens that's talking to the camera body.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215563\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes it always depends on the use. I don't should people with third party lenses. I tend not to shoot people at all :-P

For landscape, cityscape and my type of work it doesn't bother me to much. Would I want to a nice Canon lens with AF ? Yes certainly, but I on some work I don't want to trade the best possible quality from my camera. On other projects I don't care to much about sharpness and I will shoot with my 24-105. It always depends on what I want to achieve.

[paul_jones]

That will not work with a nikon 1,4. That was one of the best lenses ever unless you get a very very old one. The nikon 1,2 50 or 58 mm on the other hand could do the trick. i often used on on my digiflex with CF39Mp back. This way you get a 22Mp 35mm back with an unsurpassed image quality and a perfect use of all possible lenses.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215558\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

hi, i realy ment the 1.2 50 (or is a 55mm). thanks for the example.

paul

[ixpressraf]

hi, i realy ment the 1.2 50 (or is a 55mm). thanks for the example.

paul
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215607\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I had the 50mm 1,2 but i think the 55 1,2 nis a bit "better" for the effect you want. You can also try russian lenses: succes guaranteed!!! On my Contax i used  very old folding camera lenses mounted in pentacon-six tubes and a contax adapter: best flare and other softfocus effects      .

[carl dw]

The Z21 has mustache distorsion.
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215555\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Edmund,

Yes, this is why I used the phrase "almost complete lack of distortion" - the mustache distortion is slight, but nothing in comparison to the fully auto-everything, bendy everything, soft corner, chromatic aberration steeped Canon 'L' series wide angle lens offerings.

I would prefer to use a fully coupled Canon lens, but for me, it's the look of the final result as opposed to the tools I use to get there that matters.... unfortunately Canon seems unable to make decent wide-angle lenses. In fact they are so dismal that even the hassle of manually stopped down metering doesn't out way how duff they are.

I don't hold a flag for either Canon or Zeiss... if Zenit made a wide anle lens that behaved like the Zeiss 21mm you'd probably find that on the front of my Canon camera - and me on holiday spending the money I'd saved!

[Conner999]

Agree with prior poster.  I use/used Leica R, CY, ZF, Hassy Mamiya, CV, Nikon and, yes, EF on my EOS bodies and while I am as gear-agnostic as you can get, Canon needs to get its act together in the non-sport focal lengths (with a couple of exceptions) and in QC.

A good alternate lens and adapter(<$100) can breath a new life into your sensor - for not always big $$.

The trick when shopping for alternate glass is to see above the various Leica, OM, CZ and now sadly Zeiss ZF so-called 'fanboy' BS that praises every lens ever made by ____ and pounds on anyone who offers a more balanced critique.

The funniest example of this being a couple of ZF cheerleaders on FM who just took to task (unknowingly) the designer of the jaw-dropping Coastal Optics 60mm F4 APO UV, IR (amongst others)  over his technical critique of the new 18 ZF vs the 21 CY. The fact that they continued to push it when they knew he was a designer took it from funny to plain sad.

Nothing degrades someone's manners faster nor enhances their 'expertise', ego and bravery more than internet access and a forum nom d'guerre (sic?).

The trick is not too look for the praise a lens gets, but any critiques. One of those will tell you more than 101 useless 'it's awesome and a bargain' responses to your query.

You'd think photogs that use alternate glass would be more agnostic, but give people an excuse.....

[eronald]

Actually,almost all the alternative glass I've used has beaten the  originals I think what's happening is the profit margins on modern glass are too big.

The Canon wides are the worst offenders, I think they can be beaten by almost anything else. I've used the Nikon 17-35, Leica 21, Zeiss 21, anything alternative I have used has beaten my Canon 24-70 and Canon 24.  I one told some Canon Inc guys this, it was obvious they were aware that all is not as good as it should be.

I don't think the Canon guys are dumb, I think they've been forced to hold down costs. The 24 shift is a particularly bad offender, which is a pity because it is a good physical design and very convenient to use; so convenient in fact that it cannot be replaced. The 50/1.8 is also less good than it should be, whereas Nikon recommend their own 50 as one of their best lenses. Canon has let their range of primes rot. I'm really looking forward to Leica or Sony/Zeiss bringing better glass into the equation of 35mm or equivalent modern systems.

As for tricks when shopping, why bother ? Most of the 42mm screw-thread lenses can be found for less than $100, Contax 28mm idem, old manual Nikon or Olympus glass is also almost worthless now. It's a buyer's market as long as you don't need Leica glass or the really rare Zeiss pieces (21mm).

Frankly, when shooting as a hobby, I don't care much, but back in the days when I showed people full-page published editorial images and they remarked about missing sharpness, I must admit I was ashamed

I'm going to get an Alpa TC for my Phase back for travel - it'll be an update on the Zeiss 21 Nothing else could beat that lens.

Edmund

[carl dw]

Actually,almost all the alternative glass I've used has beaten the  originals I think what's happening is the profit margins on modern glass are too big.

The Canon wides are the worst offenders, I think they can be beaten by almost anything else. I've used the Nikon 17-35, Leica 21, Zeiss 21, anything alternative I have used has beaten my Canon 24-70 and Canon 24.  I one told some Canon Inc guys this, it was obvious they were aware that all is not as good as it should be.

I don't think the Canon guys are dumb, I think they've been forced to hold down costs. The 24 shift is a particularly bad offender, which is a pity because it is a good physical design and very convenient to use; so convenient in fact that it cannot be replaced. The 50/1.8 is also less good than it should be, whereas Nikon recommend their own 50 as one of their best lenses. Canon has let their range of primes rot. I'm really looking forward to Leica or Sony/Zeiss bringing better glass into the equation of 35mm or equivalent modern systems.

As for tricks when shopping, why bother ? Most of the 42mm screw-thread lenses can be found for less than $100, Contax 28mm idem, old manual Nikon or Olympus glass is also almost worthless now. It's a buyer's market as long as you don't need Leica glass or the really rare Zeiss pieces (21mm).

Frankly, when shooting as a hobby, I don't care much, but back in the days when I showed people full-page published editorial images and they remarked about missing sharpness, I must admit I was ashamed

I'm going to get an Alpa TC for my Phase back for travel - it'll be an update on the Zeiss 21 Nothing else could beat that lens.

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215662\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As well as cost constraints, I believe that latter day lens designers are also up against EC ruling that won't allow them to produce lenses with glass containing Lead or any other 'banned' substance. As I understand it, the optical properties of glass containing Lead were more efficient in earlier wide angle lens design than later incarnations.

I feel certain that if Canon could do the job cost effectively with the available (allowed) materials  right now then they would.

[eronald]

As well as cost constraints, I believe that latter day lens designers are also up against EC ruling that won't allow them to produce lenses with glass containing Lead or any other 'banned' substance. As I understand it, the optical properties of glass containing Lead were more efficient in earlier wide angle lens design than later incarnations.

I feel certain that if Canon could do the job cost effectively with the available (allowed) materials  right now then they would.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215679\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I like the Canon products - their system is top-grade consistent, usable and flexible. But it now lacks "flash" or fun factor; Canon used to be the BMW of cameras but it has turned into Mercedes - reliable but a bit stodgy. Nowhere near cutting edge.

Edmund

[John_Black]

That's a fair statement Edmund.  Perhaps a bit understated because there is value in consistent, dependable performance.  Canon does an excellent job in delivering a system that can handle a very broad range of conditions.

[pss]

Canon makes one of these devices for Canon files (at least they sell it in Japan), but it won't work with any other file.   The Epson will as long as it's a dslr, (no medium format).

http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/07/13/c...storage-device/

I bought the Epson for a fashion editorial shoot in Japan.  We set up a tethered station, but also used the Epson device and the Japanese clients loved it.  They could hold it and thumb through the images themselves and had the jpegs ready to download to their computer for comps and fpos.

We never ran the thethered computer, except for backup.

The problem with the Epson was (maybe still is) that the battery use is very low.  Just downloadin and viewing a few cards pretty much used up the power.

I don't get it because the new Nikon and the new Canon cameras the batteries last forever.

The other problem is the interface takes some time to get used to, because it's not touch screen.

Touch screen is the way to go.

I just have the feeling the technology is there, it's just nobody wants to do it or the companies that want to don't have the resource, except Apple and I guess Apple doesn't care that much about professional photograpy given the fact that they are selling 60 trillion Ipods a week.

I still wonder how hard it is for some kid in Sweden to hack an Ipod touch to accept a jpeg from a camera.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=214969\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

the canon wifi adapter can actually also be a http server....so it can run a website with all thumbs and previews (full size must get slow...)....which can be accessed by any iphone or ipod touch!....i will have to look into that but it seems like you might have your solution....

[James R Russell]

the canon wifi adapter can actually also be a http server....so it can run a website with all thumbs and previews (full size must get slow...)....which can be accessed by any iphone or ipod touch!....i will have to look into that but it seems like you might have your solution....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=216131\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Paul . . . thanks,

I'll try it if we have time.  I don't know about wi-fi for raw files, it seems to me like it could be slow.

Last week we were in Miami on location, this week NY.

Most of these two jobs I've shot with the Canon, some with the Contax Phase, all tethered.

The 1ds3 is kinda strange tethering.  If you shoot slow, it runs for a long time though the previews get slower and slower shooting raw and small jpeg.  Finally you just it a buffer, kind of like the old 1ds1 and you just have to wait.

It works out, but is annoying to wait.

Medium format on the other hand just tethers so easy and fast.  The previews may run behind but you never really hit a buffer and the whole system is so much more professional than Canon's tethering.

Still, there is a few things the Phase needs.  Higher ISO, I've said it a lot but for the last two weeks, there are times I go to 640 to 800 iso and need it very clean and the Phase (both my p21+ and P30+) just hits a wall at anything above 400 iso.

Second is 3.78's previews.  They just look too sharp and crunchy (for lack of a better word).

It's interesting if you go from the Phase to the Canon the Canon files looks soft, but if you go the other way around 3.78 looks over sharpened and somewhat brittle.   V4 pro can not come out a minute too soon.

Previews on screen are so important.  It's just the first thing everyone sees and to see it big and film like is so important.

Anyway, used the camera that worked for the job and everything is good, other than tonight I am way tired.

Sent to me today from on-set



Shot by the Hair Artist with his I-phone and e-mailed to me.

I know this is a very small file, but imagine being able to e-mail a preview like this from the camera, or to wi-fi it to everyone's I-phone or I-pod?

JR

[mcfoto]

Paul . . . thanks,

I'll try it if we have time.  I don't know about wi-fi for raw files, it seems to me like it could be slow.

Last week we were in Miami on location, this week NY.

Most of these two jobs I've shot with the Canon, some with the Contax Phase, all tethered.

The 1ds3 is kinda strange tethering.  If you shoot slow, it runs for a long time though the previews get slower and slower shooting raw and small jpeg.  Finally you just it a buffer, kind of like the old 1ds1 and you just have to wait.

It works out, but is annoying to wait.

Medium format on the other hand just tethers so easy and fast.  The previews may run behind but you never really hit a buffer and the whole system is so much more professional than Canon's tethering.

Still, there is a few things the Phase needs.  Higher ISO, I've said it a lot but for the last two weeks, there are times I go to 640 to 800 iso and need it very clean and the Phase (both my p21+ and P30+) just hits a wall at anything above 400 iso.

Second is 3.78's previews.  They just look too sharp and crunchy (for lack of a better word).

It's interesting if you go from the Phase to the Canon the Canon files looks soft, but if you go the other way around 3.78 looks over sharpened and somewhat brittle.   V4 pro can not come out a minute too soon.

Previews on screen are so important.  It's just the first thing everyone sees and to see it big and film like is so important.

Anyway, used the camera that worked for the job and everything is good, other than tonight I am way tired.

Sent to me today from on-set



Shot by the Hair Artist with his I-phone and e-mailed to me.

I know this is a very small file, but imagine being able to e-mail a preview like this from the camera, or to wi-fi it to everyone's I-phone or I-pod?

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=216154\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi James
I know this is off topic but what type of boots do you wear. We both have a boot collection.
Thanks Denis

[pss]

Paul . . . thanks,

I'll try it if we have time.  I don't know about wi-fi for raw files, it seems to me like it could be slow.

Last week we were in Miami on location, this week NY.

Most of these two jobs I've shot with the Canon, some with the Contax Phase, all tethered.

The 1ds3 is kinda strange tethering.  If you shoot slow, it runs for a long time though the previews get slower and slower shooting raw and small jpeg.  Finally you just it a buffer, kind of like the old 1ds1 and you just have to wait.

It works out, but is annoying to wait.

Medium format on the other hand just tethers so easy and fast.  The previews may run behind but you never really hit a buffer and the whole system is so much more professional than Canon's tethering.

Still, there is a few things the Phase needs.  Higher ISO, I've said it a lot but for the last two weeks, there are times I go to 640 to 800 iso and need it very clean and the Phase (both my p21+ and P30+) just hits a wall at anything above 400 iso.

Second is 3.78's previews.  They just look too sharp and crunchy (for lack of a better word).

It's interesting if you go from the Phase to the Canon the Canon files looks soft, but if you go the other way around 3.78 looks over sharpened and somewhat brittle.   V4 pro can not come out a minute too soon.

Previews on screen are so important.  It's just the first thing everyone sees and to see it big and film like is so important.

Anyway, used the camera that worked for the job and everything is good, other than tonight I am way tired.

Sent to me today from on-set



Shot by the Hair Artist with his I-phone and e-mailed to me.

I know this is a very small file, but imagine being able to e-mail a preview like this from the camera, or to wi-fi it to everyone's I-phone or I-pod?

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=216154\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i am getting my canon tomorrow and will try to look into the wifi gizmo a little when i get my hands on one....
it really sounds promising though.....raw files would be way too slow and not really necessary anyway...but from the manual (and what i have seen on the web...) you can set it up so anyone can access the files in the camera (cf or sd slots) via any web browser, like a little thumbnail gallery....so if you shoot small jepgs to one card all day long it should never fill up and anyone can check out the small jpegs on their iphones....the larger the files the longer this would obviously take, but this really isn't about large files anyway....

do you use C1 or the canon software to shoot tethered?

[James R Russell]

Hi James
I know this is off topic but what type of boots do you wear. We both have a boot collection.
Thanks Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=216161\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Denis,

I have a lot of different brands.

Tony Lama
Luchessi
Justin
Dan Post
Nocona
and a some from the smaller hand made boot companies.

Use to be just Dan Post but now there are so many good ones

Paul,

I use the Canon Software for the 1ds3.  It's kind of clunky but it works.


Paul Jones,

One trick for a lens that flares is visit the beach.

I use to have one Canon 50mm 1.4 that I kept cappped up from a day at the beach.

That fine mist after about 4 hours would make the most beautiful look to the lens, it will still hold sharpness, but also was very nice for flared and soft out of focus areas.



Another is some of the older Russian Lenses.  They flare nice and I think there is adapters for all of them.

JR