Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Exciting news (for me)
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 9:04 am    Post subject: Exciting news (for me) Reply with quote

Hello all and thanks for sharing in my excitment. After years of lusting, I finally made arrangements for one of my dream lenses - Zeiss 85/1.2 60 years! I'll come back to this thread once I take delivery to post some sample shots. I'll be using the Leitax Contax MM to M42 NON-DESTRUCTIVE, REVERSIBLE mount swap and use the lens with my A900. I just wanted to emphasize the non-destructive point, I know it's like a burning match on dry leaves to suggest modding such a lens to some.

(...)

Anyways, it feels like Christmas again - can't wait to share the spoils.

Regards,


Kelly.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, a legendary lens!


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

great news !


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lucky you! Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow! I wasn't familiar with this optic, so I went to the bay and had a look around. No 60th, but they do have a few 50ths, like this one.

Click here to see on Ebay

Pricey! I can't wait to see images from it. I wonder how my lowly Canon 85/1.2 Aspherical stacks up to such a gem.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:
Wow! I wasn't familiar with this optic, so I went to the bay and had a look around. No 60th, but they do have a few 50ths, like this one.

Click here to see on Ebay

Cough, cough.

Quote:
Pricey! I can't wait to see images from it. I wonder how my lowly Canon 85/1.2 Aspherical stacks up to such a gem.

I think that would be a very interesting comparison.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Quote:
Pricey! I can't wait to see images from it. I wonder how my lowly Canon 85/1.2 Aspherical stacks up to such a gem.

I think that would be a very interesting comparison.


Yes, a comparison would be interesting. Btw: Is your Canon 1,2 85 a converted FD lens? If yes, who made that conversion?

Klaus


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

(...)

Part of the inspriation behind the purchase was in fact a thread from here -

http://forum.mflenses.com/planar-1-2-85mm-60-years-cats-and-dogs-t14884.html

Kelly.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

exaklaus wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
Pricey! I can't wait to see images from it. I wonder how my lowly Canon 85/1.2 Aspherical stacks up to such a gem.

I think that would be a very interesting comparison.


Yes, a comparison would be interesting. Btw: Is your Canon 1,2 85 a converted FD lens? If yes, who made that conversion?


Nope, it's still FD. I have a Canon F-1 and FTb that I still use regularly, so I want to be able to use it with them. I also have an FD-EOS converter, but it seriously degrades image quality when shooting with the lens open wider than f/4 or so. So what I do if I want to use it wide open with my EOS is remove the corrective lens from the adapter, and then just shoot close-up shots with it. Limited, but better than nothing. But because of these limitations it wouldn't be easy for me to make the comparison.

As for who does the conversions, I've seen the process documented on the web for the 85/1.2 Aspherical. But mflenses member Trifox also does it as part of his business, and by all accounts, he does a first-rate job.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hey Kelly,

i'm echoing the request for sample shots, even if they aren't comparisions. particularly at f/1.2 and f/1.4 would be cool.

hope Sonyland is treating you well. i recently went the other route to you: just jumped ship from Sony to Pentax...


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hey Kelly,

i'm echoing the request for sample shots, even if they aren't comparisions. particularly at f/1.2 and f/1.4 would be cool.

hope Sonyland is treating you well. i recently went the other route to you: just jumped ship from Sony to Pentax...


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Congratulations on the Planar 1.2/85 !
The rules however are valid for everybody: advertise of sales here only when the item is for sale on our Marketplace.
So I will now have to remove the references to the lenses for sale - sorry.
Of course after you publish them on the Marketplace you will be able to advertise them here.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:

Pricey! I can't wait to see images from it. I wonder how my lowly Canon 85/1.2 Aspherical stacks up to such a gem.


The difference in image quality is smaller than the difference in price:
http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/TEST_85mm_f_1,2/00_pag.htm
_


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
Congratulations on the Planar 1.2/85 !
The rules however are valid for everybody: advertise of sales here only when the item is for sale on our Marketplace.
So I will now have to remove the references to the lenses for sale - sorry.
Of course after you publish them on the Marketplace you will be able to advertise them here.


sorry Embarassed

Orio wrote:
cooltouch wrote:

Pricey! I can't wait to see images from it. I wonder how my lowly Canon 85/1.2 Aspherical stacks up to such a gem.


The difference in image quality is smaller than the difference in price:
http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/TEST_85mm_f_1,2/00_pag.htm
_


To Cooltouch - hard to imagine any 85/1.2 being 'lowly'! That said, it looks like from your link Orio, there is not much to seperate the lenses starting right from the optical design.

Are the 50 and 60 years identical (besides updated lens coatings, no doubt)?

Regards,


Kelly.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whats the non destructive MM to M42 conversion? I have 2 MMG lenses id like to use on my M42 mounts........


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 3:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thePiRaTE!! wrote:
That said, it looks like from your link Orio, there is not much to seperate the lenses starting right from the optical design.


Well, not really, especially if you read the review. While all three lenses are out-of-the-ordinary performers, a direct wide-open comparison of the Zeiss model with the Canon FD lens made by the author (Marco Cavina, a friend) is so described:

Quote:
I was able to use on the same subject the Planar and the FD-L shown in the first picture, and despite both proved to be true champions, both open and stopped down, at f / 1.2 the Zeiss could still and incredibly prevail noticeably, clearly visible in the projection with Colorplan Leitz 90 / 2,5, where at f / 1.2 the sharpness, brightness and cleanliness of the colors were so good that the only indication that suggested the f / 1.2 aperture came from the shallow depth of field.
At f / 1.2 the Zeiss prevailed also in suppressing flare, used in backlight without protections.


The description by Marco is precisely what I could experience using the lens. Here is two photos taken wide open (the first one possibly a very slight tiny bit stopped down, most likely by accident) with the Planar 1.2/85 and in a very strong backlight:

10.


24.


(if you are interested, the whole series is here: http://forum.mflenses.com/more-dances-t29845,highlight,%2Bdances.html)

As you can see, exactly like Marco reports, the colour and sharpness wide open are of the same quality that one would obtain from a stopped down lens; and the control of the flare is nearly perfect.

Aside from the very similar optical schemes (but not identical: the FD lens has two groups of two cemented elements, where as the Planar has separated elements), a big role in the wide open performance is played by the lens coating. Zeiss' T* coating is without any doubt the most performing coating ever used on a commercial lens. The impact on the performance is so decisive that as you can see, I could use my Planar 1.2/85 with it's huge front glass wide open in a backlight situation with a strong reflector directly inside the frame, and nearly zero flare annoyiance in the picture! And that (real life performance in impossible situations) is where the line is drawn between a great lens and an unbelievably stunning lens.
The Canon lens could not use that advanced coating (let's not forget also that all Zeiss lenses are multiple coated on every surface of every glass element, and that each element has it's own specific coating formula to match the different optical glass used). So Canon engineers tried to limit the amount of glass-air surfaces in the lens by cementing four elements into 2 groups. But still, Zeiss wide open performed visibly better; and flare is something that can not be directly recognizeable in an MTF test.
Marco also added that stopped down at around f/5.6 to f/8 the FD lens displayed an astounding calligraphic sharpness, even slightly superior to the impressive sharpness of the Zeiss. But of course, if you spend a lot of money on a f/1.2 lens, it's at f/1.2 that you wish the lens to excel.
Having that said, I am sure that the FD lens is a great runner up and most likely the absolute second best in that focal lenght and speed. But an Anniversary Planar with T* coating is a tough beast to face for every lens. The creator, engineer Woeltche, defined his own creation's performance as "astral".

Quote:
Are the 50 and 60 years identical (besides updated lens coatings, no doubt)?


As far as I know, they should be identical. It would also be quite tough after only 10 years of technological advancement to improve on a lens that is already on the edge of the unbeatable...
As for the coating, based on my experience as reported above, I don't think that the coating of the 50 years version could be much improvable either... Wink

_


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 6:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
cooltouch wrote:

Pricey! I can't wait to see images from it. I wonder how my lowly Canon 85/1.2 Aspherical stacks up to such a gem.


The difference in image quality is smaller than the difference in price:
http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/TEST_85mm_f_1,2/00_pag.htm
_


Thanks for this link, Orio. Since you know the guy who wrote this test, I have some comments and a question. The FD lens in the photo is an 85mm f/1.2 L, but the FD lens shown in the lens diagram is the 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical, and not the L as stated. The 85/1.2 L wasn't even made until the 1980s, and he's labeled it 1976 in the diagram. I have an old Canon F-1 guide that shows the lens diagrams of every Canon lens made when the book was printed, and the diagram for the 85mm Aspherical in the guide is identical to that shown in the drawing at Marco's web page.

So my question is, did he use the "L" lens shown in the photo, or an Aspherical one? Reason being is there is apparently a significant difference in performance between the two lenses. I've never had the opportunity to use the "L" version. I own an Aspherical one, and according to everything I've read where the two lenses were compared, the original Aspherical model was deemed to be superior. In fact, I've read evaluations where all versions of Canon's 85/1.2 were compared and the old Aspherical model still came out on top, old SSC coatings and all.

Nonetheless, I would be quite surprised if the Canon 85mm Aspherical were able to perform as well as the Zeiss because I cannot help but believe that there is some reason besides prestige factor that is why the Zeiss lens costs so much.


Last edited by cooltouch on Fri Jan 14, 2011 5:31 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

gillbod wrote:
hey Kelly,

i'm echoing the request for sample shots, even if they aren't comparisions. particularly at f/1.2 and f/1.4 would be cool.

hope Sonyland is treating you well. i recently went the other route to you: just jumped ship from Sony to Pentax...


Heya - why go North for the winter? haha, jk. We all make decisions to suit our needs. So far so good? And yes, you'll have no choice but to be inundated with samples once the dust settles Smile

dude163 wrote:
Whats the non destructive MM to M42 conversion? I have 2 MMG lenses id like to use on my M42 mounts........


www.leitax.com and look for his Contax to M42. Very easy install, literally took me 10 minutes. High quality craftsmanship, worth the $. Works for the 35 & 85/1.4 and we suspect the 85/1.2. I am the guinea pig on that. Nonetheless, if my existing kit doesn't do the trick, Mr Llato will modify.

Kelly.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Orio"]
thePiRaTE!! wrote:
...
Well, not really, especially if you read the review. While all three lenses are out-of-the-ordinary performers, a direct wide-open comparison of the Zeiss model with the Canon FD lens made by the author (Marco Cavina, a friend) is so described:


Thanks for the translation. I was using a translator site at work earlier but it wasn't very good.

Also, great set you shared! Even more reasons to help me justify this beast Smile


K.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:

So my question is, did he use the "L" lens shown in the photo, or an Aspherical one? Reason being is there is apparently a significant difference in performance between the two lenses.


I will ask him the question. Marco is a big fan of Canon lenses. He owns one of the very few copies made of the EF 50mm f/1.0:
http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Canon_EF_50mm_f_1,0_L/00_pag.htm

Here is the history of the FD 1.2/85 prototypes:
http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Canon_FD_85_1,2_IF_e_300_1,8_L.pdf

cooltouch wrote:
Nonetheless, I would be quite surprised if the Canon 85mm Aspherical were able to perform as well as the Zeiss because I cannot help but believe that there is some reason besides prestige factor that is why the Zeiss lens costs so much.


The price is also determined by factors that are not directly related to the image quality: for instance the Planar 1.2/85 was build in West Germany, where the labour costs are (or at least, were) much higher than in Japan.
Another factor is that at Zeiss factories (including the Japan outsourced facilities of Kyocera and Cosina) the production of Zeiss lenses is almost completely hand-factored, while Canon's production line is more automated.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Congratulations on this exceptional find, Kelly. We are now waiting for the photographs!

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Kelly


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
cooltouch wrote:

So my question is, did he use the "L" lens shown in the photo, or an Aspherical one? Reason being is there is apparently a significant difference in performance between the two lenses.


I will ask him the question. Marco is a big fan of Canon lenses. He owns one of the very few copies made of the EF 50mm f/1.0:
http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Canon_EF_50mm_f_1,0_L/00_pag.htm

Here is the history of the FD 1.2/85 prototypes:
http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Canon_FD_85_1,2_IF_e_300_1,8_L.pdf


Thanks for the link, Orio. I can't say that I read Italian, but English has acquired so many Latin cognates over the centuries that I can pretty much follow the gist of his discussion. Also, I'm curious: Marco refers repeatedly to a Canon 300mm f/1.8 L, which I've never heard of, as well as the 200mm f/1.8 L, which I have heard of -- at least as an EF lens. When I google "canon 300mm f/1.8" I get zero hits.

Yeah, that 50/1.0 is a lens I've only read about -- never seen one in person, but man-o-man, it has to be a lot of fun to use.

Thanks for asking him. I suspect that he was using the "L" lens shown in the photo.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

gillbod wrote:
hey Kelly,

i'm echoing the request for sample shots, even if they aren't comparisions. particularly at f/1.2 and f/1.4 would be cool.

hope Sonyland is treating you well. i recently went the other route to you: just jumped ship from Sony to Pentax...


Nice move. Laughing


PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doing a little more research, I found a recent post showing shots from the 85/1.2, and on page 2 a comparison of some other fast 85s. It looks like it holds the highlights really well, even with strong contrast in low light, very promising.

http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=974577&extra=&page=1

It also looks by a shot of the rear mount that the screws are not in the same positions as that of the Planar 1.4. Thus, any demonstration of the lens will be delayed while a solution is implemented.

K.