Synth-DIY Yahoo! Groups Archives

Thread

OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

2015-09-30 by roark.paul@...

My workflow to make a good B&W print starts with a good digital RGB image. In a Lula B&W thread someone asked about the best camera for B&W that was reasonably priced. My recommendation was to buy a used Sony a7r (36 mp full frame). I thought I'd put a similar follow-up message here since the topic involves limited resources (out of production equipment) that I'd rather see this group be able to take advantage of.

So, assuming a good digital body like the Sony a7r, the next step toward getting a very high quality image is obviously a very good lens.

I have the very good Sony-Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8. It's the lens I use more than any other. This modern optic, with multiple aspherical elements, costs $800 at B&H. As good as the "Zony" 35 is, I like manual focus for landscape shooting. Among other things, it's easier and faster to do a dual-focus image capture when there is a focus stop.

My current MF solution is the 30 year old Canon FD 35mm. The Zony is certainly better from f/2.8 to 5.6, but at f/8 I'll let you decide which is better, the $800 or $80 lens.

See the comparison of the center and worst corner of the series at

http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Canon-v-Sony-35mm.jpg

(This was with the new Sony, but the old one is virtually equal for these purposes.)

The lens itself is just part of the story, of course. (I made a custom lens profile for the Canon and also was able to offset most of the focus errors due to slight de-centering on the Canon -- topics I'll probably document in a PDF at some point.) However, the point is, there are some old classics out there that are amazing bargains.

FWIW

Paul

PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home

Paul Roark Black and White Photography

View on www.PaulRoark.com

Preview by Yahoo

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

2015-09-30 by David Kachel

Paul Roark said: "My workflow to make a good B&W print starts with a good digital RGB image. In a Lula B&W thread someone asked about the best camera for B&W that was reasonably priced."

Thought I\u2019d add my two cents.

For the last six years or so I have been using a Sony a900 and a Zeiss 24-70, the expensive, high end zoom.

I make up to 16x20 B&W landscapes that are heavily manipulated with regard to tone. I have found this setup barely adequate (briefly had an Olympus, while transitioning from film to digital, which was a complete joke of a toy) and have often had to make compromises after manipulation had caused the image to start to crumble. At the time I bought it, the Sony was the only affordable full frame sensor available.

Since Sony has decided they will no longer make optical viewfinder full frame cameras, I have had to abandon Sony (equipment is for sale on ebay) and switch to Nikon. It did not take me long to realize that the Nikon is far more useful for my purposes and though the Nikon image can crumble too, manipulation potential is far greater than I could ever achieve with the Sony.

My conclusions are that one needs at least a 24megapixel full frame sensor (full frame is an absolute must), 36MP being preferable. The camera must not have a low-pass, anti-aliasing filter which should have been called a \u201cseverely blur all of your photographs\u201d filter. (What a difference!) Having to sharpen every image because of this \u201cfeature\u201d causes considerable information loss before you do anything else to your images. Fixed focal length lenses help a lot, even considering the most mediocre of them, as compared to the very best zoom lenses. They are also cheaper. I now have six single focal length Nikon lenses purchased used for about $400 less than one Zeiss zoom initially cost me. And a major contribution to image quality is also accounted for by the advantage of Nikon\u2019s 14 bit color depth as opposed to SonyR17;s 12 bit depth. Don\u2019t dismiss is. The difference is critical. Images are much less manipulatable when only 12 bit.

If you are NOT going to fold, spindle and mutilate your B&W images the way I do, then I would say the minimum requirements would still be 24 MP, no anti-alias filter (they are a stupid idea under all circumstances) and 12 bit depth will do you just fine. High quality zooms would be OK, too.

With film, no matter how much you manipulated your image when printing, you still had 100% of the information contained in the negative and could continue to manipulate, ad infinitum.

With digital, every time you do anything at all to your image, part of it evaporates. The more you work on it, the more it crumbles.

So, your sensor size, megapixel count and bit depth must provide enough information overkill that you can afford to throw a lot of it away, and still have a good image, OR, you must settle for very little manipulation.

Bear in mind that there are thousands of people out there who will insist they take all their photographs with their iPhones and get results just as good. Brain surgery with a spoon is also possible.

David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer

Fine B&W Photographs

WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com

BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com

EMAIL: david@...

PO Box 173

Globe, AZ 85502

(928) 275-0925

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

2015-09-30 by Ernst Dinkla

Paul,

A friend is converting my Canon FD 24mm 2.8 and 135mm 2.5 to EF mount + chip, the lenses are at least 10 years not used. More in view of an A7R II purchase + the EF to FE adapter than on the Canon 5D II that is my current camera. I already have an FD 55mm 1.2 with an EF mount. There are some EF lenses that I would use too and then I can go with one adapter for all. Wishful thinking probably but the chipped mount may even inform the camera which lens is mounted and maybe the IS gets the right focal length set that way. Depends on the adapter firmware upgrades whether that will ever happen.

Curious about the de-centering remedy.

Uncompressed RAW is announced for the Sony models.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

Dinkla Grafische Techniek
Quad, piëzografie, giclée
www.pigment-print.com

Show quoted textHide quoted text

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:48 PM, roark.paul@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m> wrote:

My workflow to make a good B&W print starts with a good digital RGB image. In a Lula B&W thread someone asked about the best camera for B&W that was reasonably priced. My recommendation was to buy a used Sony a7r (36 mp full frame). I thought I'd put a similar follow-up message here since the topic involves limited resources (out of production equipment) that I'd rather see this group be able to take advantage of.

So, assuming a good digital body like the Sony a7r, the next step toward getting a very high quality image is obviously a very good lens.

I have the very good Sony-Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8. It's the lens I use more than any other. This modern optic, with multiple aspherical elements, costs $800 at B&H. As good as the "Zony" 35 is, I like manual focus for landscape shooting. Among other things, it's easier and faster to do a dual-focus image capture when there is a focus stop.

My current MF solution is the 30 year old Canon FD 35mm. The Zony is certainly better from f/2.8 to 5.6, but at f/8 I'll let you decide which is better, the $800 or $80 lens.

See the comparison of the center and worst corner of the series at
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Canon-v-Sony-35mm.jpg

(This was with the new Sony, but the old one is virtually equal for these purposes.)

The lens itself is just part of the story, of course. (I made a custom lens profile for the Canon and also was able to offset most of the focus errors due to slight de-centering on the Canon -- topics I'll probably document in a PDF at some point.) However, the point is, there are some old classics out there that are amazing bargains.

FWIW

Paul
PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home

PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home
Paul Roark Black and White Photography

View on www.PaulRoark.com

Preview by Yahoo

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

2015-09-30 by Paul Grant

I am curious about converting to the EF mount versus using a FD mount on the Sony?  What are the advantages?

Paul

Show quoted textHide quoted text

> On Sep 30, 2015, at 12:48 PM, Ernst Dinkla ernst.dinkla@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Paul,
> 
> A friend is converting my Canon FD 24mm 2.8 and 135mm 2.5 to EF mount + chip, the lenses are at least 10 years not used. More in view of an A7R II purchase + the EF to FE adapter than on the Canon 5D II that is my current camera.  I already have an FD 55mm 1.2 with an EF mount. There are some EF lenses that I would use too and then I can go with one adapter for all.  Wishful thinking probably but the chipped mount may even inform the camera which lens is mounted and maybe the IS gets the right focal length set that way. Depends on the adapter firmware upgrades whether that will ever happen.
> 
> Curious about the de-centering remedy.
> 
> Uncompressed RAW is announced for the Sony models. 
> 
> Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst 
>  
> Dinkla Grafische Techniek 
> Quad, piëzografie, giclée 
> www.pigment-print.com
> 
> Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst 
>  
> Dinkla Grafische Techniek 
> Quad, piëzografie, giclée 
> www.pigment-print.com
> 
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:48 PM, roark.paul@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>  
> 
> My workflow to make a good B&W print starts with a good digital RGB image.  In a Lula B&W thread someone asked about the best camera for B&W that was reasonably priced.  My recommendation was to buy a used Sony a7r (36 mp full frame).   I thought I'd put a similar follow-up message here since the topic involves limited resources (out of production equipment) that I'd rather see this group be able to take advantage of.
> 
> 
> 
> So, assuming a good digital body like the Sony a7r, the next step toward getting a very high quality image is obviously a very good lens.
> 
> 
> 
> I have the very good Sony-Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8.  It's the lens I use more than any other.  This modern optic, with multiple aspherical elements, costs $800 at B&H.   As good as the "Zony" 35 is, I like manual focus for landscape shooting.  Among other things, it's easier and faster to do a dual-focus image capture when there is a focus stop.
> 
> 
> 
> My current MF solution is the 30 year old Canon FD 35mm.  The Zony is certainly better from f/2.8 to 5.6, but at f/8 I'll let you decide which is better, the $800 or $80 lens.  
> 
> 
> 
> See the comparison of the center and worst corner of the series at 
> 
>   http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Canon-v-Sony-35mm.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> (This was with the new Sony, but the old one is virtually equal for these purposes.)
> 
> 
> 
> The lens itself is just part of the story, of course.  (I made a custom lens profile for the Canon and also was able to offset most of the focus errors due to slight de-centering on the Canon -- topics I'll probably document in a PDF at some point.)  However, the point is, there are some old classics out there that are amazing bargains.
> 
> 
> 
> FWIW
> 
> 
> 
> Paul
> 
> PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home 
> 
> 
> PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home
> Paul Roark Black and White Photography
> View on www.PaulRoark.com
> Preview by Yahoo 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

2015-09-30 by Ernst Dinkla

Few advantages. One adapter only for both my EF and "FD" EF lenses + small chance the lenses will be recognized by the Sony camera later on. My 5D II can use them all too with some restrictions and chips are talking there already. It is not that I recommend that approach to anyone but my friend finds himself challenged to make it work and is on the same route with his equipment. He is very skilled in fine mechanics.

Next to Ed Mika there are other shops and DIY guys doing jobs like that, for example;

http://www.thelensdoctor.co.uk/page11.html

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

Dinkla Grafische Techniek
Quad, piëzografie, giclée
www.pigment-print.com

Show quoted textHide quoted text

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Paul Grant studiopbg@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

I am curious about converting to the EF mount versus using a FD mount on the Sony? What are the advantages?

Paul

> On Sep 30, 2015, at 12:48 PM, Ernst Dinkla ernst.dinkla@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> Paul,
>
> A friend is converting my Canon FD 24mm 2.8 and 135mm 2.5 to EF mount + chip, the lenses are at least 10 years not used. More in view of an A7R II purchase + the EF to FE adapter than on the Canon 5D II that is my current camera. I already have an FD 55mm 1.2 with an EF mount. There are some EF lenses that I would use too and then I can go with one adapter for all. Wishful thinking probably but the chipped mount may even inform the camera which lens is mounted and maybe the IS gets the right focal length set that way. Depends on the adapter firmware upgrades whether that will ever happen.
>
> Curious about the de-centering remedy.
>
> Uncompressed RAW is announced for the Sony models.
>
> Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
>
> Dinkla Grafische Techniek
> Quad, piëzografie, giclée
> www.pigment-print.com
>
> Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
>
> Dinkla Grafische Techniek
> Quad, piëzografie, giclée
> www.pigment-print.com
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:48 PM, roark.paul@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> My workflow to make a good B&W print starts with a good digital RGB image. In a Lula B&W thread someone asked about the best camera for B&W that was reasonably priced. My recommendation was to buy a used Sony a7r (36 mp full frame). I thought I'd put a similar follow-up message here since the topic involves limited resources (out of production equipment) that I'd rather see this group be able to take advantage of.
>
>
>
> So, assuming a good digital body like the Sony a7r, the next step toward getting a very high quality image is obviously a very good lens.
>
>
>
> I have the very good Sony-Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8. It's the lens I use more than any other. This modern optic, with multiple aspherical elements, costs $800 at B&H. As good as the "Zony" 35 is, I like manual focus for landscape shooting. Among other things, it's easier and faster to do a dual-focus image capture when there is a focus stop.
>
>
>
> My current MF solution is the 30 year old Canon FD 35mm. The Zony is certainly better from f/2.8 to 5.6, but at f/8 I'll let you decide which is better, the $800 or $80 lens.
>
>
>
> See the comparison of the center and worst corner of the series at
>
> http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Canon-v-Sony-35mm.jpg
>
>
>
> (This was with the new Sony, but the old one is virtually equal for these purposes.)
>
>
>
> The lens itself is just part of the story, of course. (I made a custom lens profile for the Canon and also was able to offset most of the focus errors due to slight de-centering on the Canon -- topics I'll probably document in a PDF at some point.) However, the point is, there are some old classics out there that are amazing bargains.
>
>
>
> FWIW
>
>
>
> Paul
>
> PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home
>
>
> PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home
> Paul Roark Black and White Photography
> View on www.PaulRoark.com
> Preview by Yahoo
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

2015-09-30 by Paul Roark

Ernst, the de-centering "cure" was a small shim (a small piece of tape -- had to try several to get the right amount) between the FD lens and the adapter. The FD mount may be unique in that is it a "breech lock" and not a normal bayonet. As such, the interface between the lens and adapter does not move. This makes it easy to be sure the small tape stays where it is needed.

Note that I test at "infinity" focus,using an uninterrupted view across a valley from my back yard that makes this easy.

Contrary to the Imatest results here for the Canon --

http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=4114 --

and here for the Zony -- http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=4125 --

the CA for the Canon was a weakness. The Zony is near perfect.

So, another part of this effort was to see how the Adobe Lens Creator

(http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/thankyou.jsp?ftpID=5490&fileID=5486 )

worked. I'm happy to report that it does a better job than is possible with the manual tools in the Adobe Raw Converter. The problem with the manual system is that it assumes axial symmetry around the center of the lens. Sadly, it's not that simple. The formula that works best on the left side is not the formula that works best on the right side, not to mention top, bottom and all the points between. The Adobe Lens Profile Creator uses lots of little black squares on a target to do a much higher sampling of the problems. It's still not what a manufacturer can do, but then the manufacturer makes one size to fit all, not taking into account the assembly defects of your particular lens. Sound familiar? It's canned v. custom lens profile.

I also made one profile at the f-stop I use (f/8), again, not compromising to try and cover all apertures.

Of course, I'm sure (I should say, "I would hope") a Zeiss Otus would do better, but light weight, as well as traditional manual focus and aperture controls are things I prize.

Paul, regarding the EF Canon mount, I have a fairly full Canon system. I started with the FD in the 1960's and switched to AF when we had kids. I was not fast enough with MF to focus on the moving targets the kids presented. The EF Adapter I have (Metabones III) gets some Exif info to the camera, but AF does not work with my lenses. The newer model and firmware upgrade helps. Some lenses now reportedly will AF fine. At some point I'll probably get the upgrade of new firmware, but mating the electronics of different systems is more complex than the MF, preset aperture mode of the FD optics. Also, the de-centering gimmick probably would not work with a moving bayonet mount, though I have not explored that.

I took a shot this last week with my 90mm Canon Tilt Shift, which I always considered an excellent lens. I mated it to the Sony via the Metabones adapter. In addition to the tilt, I took a number of frames and used Helicon to stack them. Aside from the expected Helicon issues with even minor wind, I was disappointed with the edge sharpness of the Canon lens. What I used to not notice becomes an annoying defect with the high MP Sony digital "film" I am now using.

Paul

www.PaulRoark.com

Show quoted textHide quoted text

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Ernst Dinkla ernst.dinkla@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Paul,

A friend is converting my Canon FD 24mm 2.8 and 135mm 2.5 to EF mount + chip, the lenses are at least 10 years not used. More in view of an A7R II purchase + the EF to FE adapter than on the Canon 5D II that is my current camera. I already have an FD 55mm 1.2 with an EF mount. There are some EF lenses that I would use too and then I can go with one adapter for all. Wishful thinking probably but the chipped mount may even inform the camera which lens is mounted and maybe the IS gets the right focal length set that way. Depends on the adapter firmware upgrades whether that will ever happen.

Curious about the de-centering remedy.

Uncompressed RAW is announced for the Sony models.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

Dinkla Grafische Techniek
Quad, piëzografie, giclée
www.pigment-print.com

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

Dinkla Grafische Techniek
Quad, piëzografie, giclée
www.pigment-print.com

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:48 PM, roark.paul@gmail.com [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

My workflow to make a good B&W print starts with a good digital RGB image. In a Lula B&W thread someone asked about the best camera for B&W that was reasonably priced. My recommendation was to buy a used Sony a7r (36 mp full frame). I thought I'd put a similar follow-up message here since the topic involves limited resources (out of production equipment) that I'd rather see this group be able to take advantage of.

So, assuming a good digital body like the Sony a7r, the next step toward getting a very high quality image is obviously a very good lens.

I have the very good Sony-Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8. It's the lens I use more than any other. This modern optic, with multiple aspherical elements, costs $800 at B&H. As good as the "Zony" 35 is, I like manual focus for landscape shooting. Among other things, it's easier and faster to do a dual-focus image capture when there is a focus stop.

My current MF solution is the 30 year old Canon FD 35mm. The Zony is certainly better from f/2.8 to 5.6, but at f/8 I'll let you decide which is better, the $800 or $80 lens.

See the comparison of the center and worst corner of the series at
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Canon-v-Sony-35mm.jpg

(This was with the new Sony, but the old one is virtually equal for these purposes.)

The lens itself is just part of the story, of course. (I made a custom lens profile for the Canon and also was able to offset most of the focus errors due to slight de-centering on the Canon -- topics I'll probably document in a PDF at some point.) However, the point is, there are some old classics out there that are amazing bargains.

FWIW

Paul
PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home

PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home
Paul Roark Black and White Photography

View on www.PaulRoark.com

Preview by Yahoo

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

2015-10-01 by Paul Grant

Thanks,  I didn’t think about the compatibiltiy with the 5D mark II.

Paul

Show quoted textHide quoted text

> On Sep 30, 2015, at 1:11 PM, Ernst Dinkla ernst.dinkla@...m [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Few advantages. One adapter only for both my EF and "FD" EF lenses + small chance the lenses will be recognized by the Sony camera later on. My 5D II can use them all too with some restrictions and chips are talking there already. It is not that I recommend that approach to anyone but my friend finds himself challenged to make it work and is on the same route with his equipment. He is very skilled in fine mechanics.
> 
> Next to Ed Mika there are other shops and DIY guys doing jobs like that, for example;
> http://www.thelensdoctor.co.uk/page11.html
> 
> Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst 
>  
> Dinkla Grafische Techniek 
> Quad, piëzografie, giclée 
> www.pigment-print.com
> 
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Paul Grant studiopbg@...[DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>  
> I am curious about converting to the EF mount versus using a FD mount on the Sony? What are the advantages?
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> > On Sep 30, 2015, at 12:48 PM, Ernst Dinkla ernst.dinkla@...[DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Paul,
> > 
> > A friend is converting my Canon FD 24mm 2.8 and 135mm 2.5 to EF mount + chip, the lenses are at least 10 years not used. More in view of an A7R II purchase + the EF to FE adapter than on the Canon 5D II that is my current camera. I already have an FD 55mm 1.2 with an EF mount. There are some EF lenses that I would use too and then I can go with one adapter for all. Wishful thinking probably but the chipped mount may even inform the camera which lens is mounted and maybe the IS gets the right focal length set that way. Depends on the adapter firmware upgrades whether that will ever happen.
> > 
> > Curious about the de-centering remedy.
> > 
> > Uncompressed RAW is announced for the Sony models. 
> > 
> > Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst 
> >  
> > Dinkla Grafische Techniek 
> > Quad, piëzografie, giclée 
> > www.pigment-print.com
> > 
> > Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst 
> >  
> > Dinkla Grafische Techniek 
> > Quad, piëzografie, giclée 
> > www.pigment-print.com
> > 
> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:48 PM, roark.paul@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> >  
> > 
> > My workflow to make a good B&W print starts with a good digital RGB image. In a Lula B&W thread someone asked about the best camera for B&W that was reasonably priced. My recommendation was to buy a used Sony a7r (36 mp full frame). I thought I'd put a similar follow-up message here since the topic involves limited resources (out of production equipment) that I'd rather see this group be able to take advantage of.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > So, assuming a good digital body like the Sony a7r, the next step toward getting a very high quality image is obviously a very good lens.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I have the very good Sony-Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8. It's the lens I use more than any other. This modern optic, with multiple aspherical elements, costs $800 at B&H. As good as the "Zony" 35 is, I like manual focus for landscape shooting. Among other things, it's easier and faster to do a dual-focus image capture when there is a focus stop.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > My current MF solution is the 30 year old Canon FD 35mm. The Zony is certainly better from f/2.8 to 5.6, but at f/8 I'll let you decide which is better, the $800 or $80 lens.  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > See the comparison of the center and worst corner of the series at 
> > 
> >  http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Canon-v-Sony-35mm.jpg
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > (This was with the new Sony, but the old one is virtually equal for these purposes.)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > The lens itself is just part of the story, of course. (I made a custom lens profile for the Canon and also was able to offset most of the focus errors due to slight de-centering on the Canon -- topics I'll probably document in a PDF at some point.) However, the point is, there are some old classics out there that are amazing bargains.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > FWIW
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Paul
> > 
> > PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home 
> > 
> > 
> > PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home
> > Paul Roark Black and White Photography
> > View on www.PaulRoark.com
> > Preview by Yahoo 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

2015-10-01 by Ernst Dinkla

Paul,

I get it, the optical axle was not perpendicular, I thought that one of the lens groups was shifted on the axle.

With the created EF mounts it will be possible to use some tape or alike in between the mount and the lens body, He has to grind about 1.4 mm off of the lens body anyway with a high speed grind head, can not be milled, too much stress on the structure.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

Dinkla Grafische Techniek
Quad, piëzografie, giclée
www.pigment-print.com

Show quoted textHide quoted text

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:15 PM, Paul Roark roark.paul@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Ernst, the de-centering "cure" was a small shim (a small piece of tape -- had to try several to get the right amount) between the FD lens and the adapter. The FD mount may be unique in that is it a "breech lock" and not a normal bayonet. As such, the interface between the lens and adapter does not move. This makes it easy to be sure the small tape stays where it is needed.

Note that I test at "infinity" focus,using an uninterrupted view across a valley from my back yard that makes this easy.

Contrary to the Imatest results here for the Canon --
http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=4114 --
and here for the Zony -- http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=4125 --
the CA for the Canon was a weakness. The Zony is near perfect.

So, another part of this effort was to see how the Adobe Lens Creator
(http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/thankyou.jsp?ftpID=5490&fileID=5486 )
worked. I'm happy to report that it does a better job than is possible with the manual tools in the Adobe Raw Converter. The problem with the manual system is that it assumes axial symmetry around the center of the lens. Sadly, it's not that simple. The formula that works best on the left side is not the formula that works best on the right side, not to mention top, bottom and all the points between. The Adobe Lens Profile Creator uses lots of little black squares on a target to do a much higher sampling of the problems. It's still not what a manufacturer can do, but then the manufacturer makes one size to fit all, not taking into account the assembly defects of your particular lens. Sound familiar? It's canned v. custom lens profile.

I also made one profile at the f-stop I use (f/8), again, not compromising to try and cover all apertures.

Of course, I'm sure (I should say, "I would hope") a Zeiss Otus would do better, but light weight, as well as traditional manual focus and aperture controls are things I prize.

Paul, regarding the EF Canon mount, I have a fairly full Canon system. I started with the FD in the 1960's and switched to AF when we had kids. I was not fast enough with MF to focus on the moving targets the kids presented. The EF Adapter I have (Metabones III) gets some Exif info to the camera, but AF does not work with my lenses. The newer model and firmware upgrade helps. Some lenses now reportedly will AF fine. At some point I'll probably get the upgrade of new firmware, but mating the electronics of different systems is more complex than the MF, preset aperture mode of the FD optics. Also, the de-centering gimmick probably would not work with a moving bayonet mount, though I have not explored that.

I took a shot this last week with my 90mm Canon Tilt Shift, which I always considered an excellent lens. I mated it to the Sony via the Metabones adapter. In addition to the tilt, I took a number of frames and used Helicon to stack them. Aside from the expected Helicon issues with even minor wind, I was disappointed with the edge sharpness of the Canon lens. What I used to not notice becomes an annoying defect with the high MP Sony digital "film" I am now using.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Ernst Dinkla ernst.dinkla@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Paul,

A friend is converting my Canon FD 24mm 2.8 and 135mm 2.5 to EF mount + chip, the lenses are at least 10 years not used. More in view of an A7R II purchase + the EF to FE adapter than on the Canon 5D II that is my current camera. I already have an FD 55mm 1.2 with an EF mount. There are some EF lenses that I would use too and then I can go with one adapter for all. Wishful thinking probably but the chipped mount may even inform the camera which lens is mounted and maybe the IS gets the right focal length set that way. Depends on the adapter firmware upgrades whether that will ever happen.

Curious about the de-centering remedy.

Uncompressed RAW is announced for the Sony models.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

Dinkla Grafische Techniek
Quad, piëzografie, giclée
www.pigment-print.com

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

Dinkla Grafische Techniek
Quad, piëzografie, giclée
www.pigment-print.com

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:48 PM, roark.paul@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

My workflow to make a good B&W print starts with a good digital RGB image. In a Lula B&W thread someone asked about the best camera for B&W that was reasonably priced. My recommendation was to buy a used Sony a7r (36 mp full frame). I thought I'd put a similar follow-up message here since the topic involves limited resources (out of production equipment) that I'd rather see this group be able to take advantage of.

So, assuming a good digital body like the Sony a7r, the next step toward getting a very high quality image is obviously a very good lens.

I have the very good Sony-Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8. It's the lens I use more than any other. This modern optic, with multiple aspherical elements, costs $800 at B&H. As good as the "Zony" 35 is, I like manual focus for landscape shooting. Among other things, it';s easier and faster to do a dual-focus image capture when there is a focus stop.

My current MF solution is the 30 year old Canon FD 35mm. The Zony is certainly better from f/2.8 to 5.6, but at f/8 I9;ll let you decide which is better, the $800 or $80 lens.

See the comparison of the center and worst corner of the series at
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Canon-v-Sony-35mm.jpg

(This was with the new Sony, but the old one is virtually equal for these purposes.)

The lens itself is just part of the story, of course. (I made a custom lens profile for the Canon and also was able to offset most of the focus errors due to slight de-centering on the Canon -- topics I'll probably document in a PDF at some point.) However, the point is, there are some old classics out there that are amazing bargains.

FWIW

Paul
PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home

PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home
Paul Roark Black and White Photography

View on www.PaulRoark.com

Preview by Yahoo

Digital BW, The Print

OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

Re: [Digital BW] OT - Old optics on modern digital cameras (for example, Canon FD on Sony a7)

Move to quarantaine