Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Sonnetar
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2015 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Edited

Last edited by bernhardas on Wed Jun 15, 2016 7:31 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 7:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
uhoh7 wrote:
TY so much Attila Smile


So now we have the ridiculous position where we find 8 posts which make reference to Gerald before Gerald actually makes an appearance in the thread! You yourself give Gerald a "good kicking" - metaphorically of course. That's the nature of debate -sometimes. However those of us who were late to this thread - I caught a brief glimpse of Gerald's contributions before they were removed - are not in a position to judge whether your criticisms are justified or not. Are you not embarrassed by this situation?

Just ignore anything i say about him that's left. Smile

I don't carry grudges anyway, but I'm not too keen on taunting trolling from anyone. I much prefer genial discussion, and you won't find me attacking respectful people whether they may disagree with me or not.

Photo forums run the gamut, from the incredibly rude behavior at DPreview, to the very genial atmosphere at the FM ALT forum. RFF can be a bit rough, but it's an indispensable reference. Most of us want a friendly atmosphere with alot of sharing, humor, with underlying support in spite of differences in taste.

This forum does not love high priced lenses, and some members really don't love Leica, but that's OK and I think that attitude is evolving a bit as the the prices for the M9 drop and we see the M glass at it's best more often.

Many really loved the 75 Summilux images, even though it's a Leica, and one that was going for 1500 in 2000, but 3500 now. G, however, attacked that lens from the start and implied I was pretty stupid to have bought it. You can read that thread and get a taste of our battle here.

Certainly, as I've noted from the beginning, the Sonnetar is going to be a wild one, and it's probable limitations are denied by no one. It's patently obvious that "perfection" in super-speed glass means something huge, which in itself is a terrible limitation. The weight of the incredible .95 Noctilux is a giant downside. The Sonnetar looks to be an anti-noctilux Smile It's not huge, not aspherical, not modern in configuration (except glass and coatings), and it certainly won't be "perfect" Smile It also happens to be one tenth the price of the Noctilux.

All these things were a "given", but G felt a crusade was in order, as if no one understood a thing, and I was being sucked in by Japanese con-artists. G assumed I was an idiot, and I took that as license to expose his bottomless naiveté in the history of manual focus lenses; diagrams he googled, nonwithstanding. My apologies to everyone, sans G.

Whatever. That's all pretty boring, but you brought it up.

I don't think the Sonnetar will be boring. Shocking possibly, but not boring Smile

Nikkor RF 5cm 50/1.4 (1954) wide open (a very close relative of the sonnetar)

DSC02274 by unoh7, on Flickr
above on A7r below on Nex5

DSC01279-1-2 by unoh7, on Flickr


DSC00605-1 by unoh7, on Flickr

Yes G knew everything about sonnars, except I don't think he ever shot any of the RF 50s which made the name famous. What do you call someone who tears apart a lens or camera he has never shot? Paper tiger, maybe. Smile Annoying, certainly, at least to those who've paid some dues trying to learn them.

L1007325 by unoh7, Nikkor on the M9 WO
Love it or hate it, there's nothing in the world the same as this sonnar, and I'm sure the same will be true of the Sonnetar. Very little PP there.

BTW this was the first f/1.4 lens.

DSC05544 by unoh7, on Flickr

and the build of the sonnetar is very much styled like the Nikkor. Huge numbers were made. Possibly 200,000, mostly Nikon RF mount, but quite a few in LTM, and Contax RF.

Most know the nikon mount was supposed to be an exact copy of the Contax mount, but errors made them different. 35s and wider will work fine on either.

Lastly, my 1937 sonnar on a red-dial Contax 3a

DSC00189-1 by unoh7, on Flickr
The first truly great fast 50. Smile

Last edited by uhoh7 on Thu Jan 29, 2015 8:42 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
very nice images, I like them and good examples.

Agree about spiteful comments, it is not needed here Wink Fine with discussions of course
but it shoudl be done in a resopectful manner between adults; fanboys go elsewhere please Laughing


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 8:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Edited

Last edited by bernhardas on Wed Jun 15, 2016 7:30 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Guess What?


Untitled by unoh7, on Flickr

Some comment on the build: it seems outstanding.

The lens can take filters three ways, with exterior threads, interior threads and threads at the front of the hood. The M9 can only go to 4000, so for some of these shots there is a new 3 stop ND filter, reversed and screwed to the exterior threads, then the hood screws to the exposed threads of the 55 filter. You see the hood and filter in the foreground above, ready to screw on the external threads of the lens.

Caps are unusual: both screw over the elements. Rear cap is tiny and covers element only. Front cap came screwed to reversed hood, which was screwed to from of lens.

Stopless aperture is reverse of normal direction. Many blades, very smooth and heavy to turn. Focus is a bit lighter but well dampened. There is a small knob like the CV skopars. The entire lens turns with focus. Coma adjustment, I left as it came. This is also very dampened. Overall this is a very compact lens.

These are preliminary samples with mild PP which show performance at one coma setting only.

one of my first shots, WO of course:

L1027340 by unoh7, on Flickr

ND filter attached:

L1027359 by unoh7, on Flickr


L1027348 by unoh7, WO


L1027347 by unoh7, on Flickr

WO it def gets the glowy old school look going

L1027374 by unoh7, on Flickr


L1027393 by unoh7, on Flickr


L1027406 by unoh7, on Flickr

Let's start with these Smile Every shot above is at f/1.1


PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Grrrrrrrrreat!
I love Your point of view, Your pictures, Your Sonntar!
Thanks for sharing.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 7:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I wanted to start asking "When will the lens arrive?" yesterday Smile

Thank you for the first images!
Looks like not a MTF wise "perfect" lens like the Otus 55, but a good tool with extreme speed and very lightweight.
I love non "perfect" lenses Smile


PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Edited

Last edited by bernhardas on Wed Jun 15, 2016 7:30 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
No doubt about it - that Sonnetar fits perfectly into the evolutionary line of Sonnars. In fact, it renders just like a 1930s Sonnar 1.5/50 to my eyes, a little softer due to being 1.1 rather than 1.5 but the character is very very similar so I like it. The price is not bad at all either, considering how much a ZM Sonnar 1.5/50 costs new.

Bernhard, you should look for a 1960s or 1950s Jupiter-3 1.5/50, which is a copy of the Sonnar 1.5/50. I have one as well as an original Sonnar and the J3 is every bit as good. The Sonnar cost me 45ukp, the J3 cost me 45ukp with a beautiful Kiev IV with it.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

Bernhard, you should look for a 1960s or 1950s Jupiter-3 1.5/50, which is a copy of the Sonnar 1.5/50. I have one as well as an original Sonnar and the J3 is every bit as good. The Sonnar cost me 45ukp, the J3 cost me 45ukp with a beautiful Kiev IV with it.


+1 for the J3, I got one (ltm, 1964, red P) in Russia this autumn, and it really works great if you're after that particular vintage sonnar look.

Samples from the sonnetar look indeed very good, and the little thing itself looks beautiful.
Time for samples showing the effect of the coma correction now :wink:


PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Edited

Last edited by bernhardas on Wed Jun 15, 2016 7:29 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I had quite a few missed shots today as I struggled to learn the focus adjustment. But when it hits...


L1027479 by unoh7, on Flickr

I should add, this is f/1.6. The bokeh is unmistakable utterly classic 5cm sonnar style, but the color, which is untouched, is vivid as only very modern glass and coatings display. The shot also shows what an incredible color camera the M9 can be, and sometimes you will hear talk about how it's got "un-natural skin tones" or other such blather. The truth is the M9 WB, like many cameras, varies dramatically with the direction and nature of light source. But day in day out it gives me generally great colors; lenses of course will vary the result, and cleaner color than my A7: that's my own feeling. Smile

I'm hoping I can get the sonnetar to also put out decent landscapes at 5.6 and f/8, but that is a work in progress.

L1027484 by unoh7, on Flickr

I've been getting some pretty fuzzy edges, including in the shot above, but later today in testing they sharpened when I came off the infinity stop a tad. Smile


PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2015 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
CCD sensor and old design lens......tell me, why do we need change exactly? Razz


PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
uhoh7 wrote:



Well, that proves that 5 elements is enough for f1.6 at least!

Judging by that example, this Sonnetar is probably a better buy than a ZM Sonnar 1.5/50!

Note to Gerard: Just a little patience to wait and see how 5 elements performed could have saved you a whole lot of embarrassment.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2015 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cyrano wrote:
CCD sensor and old design lens......tell me, why do we need change exactly? Razz


With modern CMOS you can use things like on-chip A-D conversion and multichannel readout. That means more frames per second and lower read noise. Some people like these things.

Berthele started his life as a designer working for Ernemann who were in the business of making stuff - to sell. So his fast lens designs - the Ernostars - enabled the production of the Ernamox camera, which was portable and could be used in natural light - or so the books tell me. Ernemann became part of Zeiss and Berthele improved his designs and Ernostars became Sonnars. Presumably - and I'm only guessing - Zeiss wanted to make "better" products so that they could make more money.

Had Berthele had access to "better" glass, coatings, aspherics, modern computational methods., etc. do you think he would have used them ?

Edit : inclusion of "modern" before "computational"


PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2015 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Well, that proves that 5 elements is enough for f1.6 at least!

Judging by that example, this Sonnetar is probably a better buy than a ZM Sonnar 1.5/50!

Note to Gerard: Just a little patience to wait and see how 5 elements performed could have saved you a whole lot of embarrassment.


It depends what you mean by "prove". It looks like a personal opinion to me.

Your message to Gerald assumes that he would share your opinion. We have no way of knowing that. His early posts have been removed and he is not allowed to make any more. So why are you writing to him?


PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2015 3:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Why are you sticking your nose in?

I've told you before, you contribute nothing of value and instead, subtly troll by pointing out the most inconsequential errors in other people's posts.

Therefore I prefer to simply ignore you.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2015 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
cyrano wrote:
CCD sensor and old design lens......tell me, why do we need change exactly? Razz


With modern CMOS you can use things like on-chip A-D conversion and multichannel readout. That means more frames per second and lower read noise. Some people like these things.

Berthele started his life as a designer working for Ernemann who were in the business of making stuff - to sell. So his fast lens designs - the Ernostars - enabled the production of the Ernamox camera, which was portable and could be used in natural light - or so the books tell me. Ernemann became part of Zeiss and Berthele improved his designs and Ernostars became Sonnars. Presumably - and I'm only guessing - Zeiss wanted to make "better" products so that they could make more money.

Had Berthele had access to "better" glass, coatings, aspherics, modern computational methods., etc. do you think he would have used them ?

Edit : inclusion of "modern" before "computational"


Love those ernamox and fast lenses Smile

Yes, he would have used all the resources he could get.
But all those resources have produced monster lenses. He would have loved the fact his old sonnar was still the smallest by far Smile
And this lens does have modern glass and coating.

It's not either or, it's both the love of history and appreciation for the latest which drives my interest in lenses.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2015 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
cyrano wrote:
CCD sensor and old design lens......tell me, why do we need change exactly? Razz


With modern CMOS you can use things like on-chip A-D conversion and multichannel readout. That means more frames per second and lower read noise. Some people like these things.

Berthele started his life as a designer working for Ernemann who were in the business of making stuff - to sell. So his fast lens designs - the Ernostars - enabled the production of the Ernamox camera, which was portable and could be used in natural light - or so the books tell me. Ernemann became part of Zeiss and Berthele improved his designs and Ernostars became Sonnars. Presumably - and I'm only guessing - Zeiss wanted to make "better" products so that they could make more money.

Had Berthele had access to "better" glass, coatings, aspherics, modern computational methods., etc. do you think he would have used them ?

Edit : inclusion of "modern" before "computational"


I've no idea what any of that actually means.
Anyway, twas a tongue in cheek comment, I happen to like the rich colours of a CCD sensor and the 'old' designs in a modern reincarnation still rely on the old design. I like that too. Wink


PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2015 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks like this thread passed my nose Wink
What a beautiful piece Uhoh, congratz! Good size, simple Sonnar design, lightweight, for a good price too. Very Happy

But almost too fast for me. These old designs gets very bloomy and dreamy above f/1.4 and more of an effect lens. Very interesting lens indeed, but I would rather stay with my slower classic Nikkor and Canon LTMs Very Happy


PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 1:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nordentro wrote:
Looks like this thread passed my nose Wink
What a beautiful piece Uhoh, congratz! Good size, simple Sonnar design, lightweight, for a good price too. Very Happy

But almost too fast for me. These old designs gets very bloomy and dreamy above f/1.4 and more of an effect lens. Very interesting lens indeed, but I would rather stay with my slower classic Nikkor and Canon LTMs Very Happy

Well, we can't have ALL the lenses, can we? LOL

Perhaps it's really a super-color (great glass and coating) f/1.5, with the option to go all the way to 1.1, and light enough to toss in a pocket and not even notice.

Can't wait to try it on my A7M, which arrives monday. Smile That will let me really play with the coma adjustment and forget calibration.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 2:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Stay focused guys on the OT...no more references to the past "discussion"....lets give this thread and lens a chance now the samples are in.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 3:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hopefully everyone realizes it's very easy to get to the Full size image from these Smile

F/1.6:

L1027392 by unoh7, on Flickr

f/4 or faster:

Stopped Table by unoh7, on Flickr

wide open:

L1027353 by unoh7, on Flickrlowl

The lens gets very glowy wide open, which masks somewhat, the possible fact it's not all that soft when you find something in the POF. Soft/Sharp has an entirely different meaning for me at 1.5 and faster. By 1.1 it is a relative matter.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 4:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you for samples!


PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 6:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Well, that proves that 5 elements is enough for f1.6 at least!

Judging by that example, this Sonnetar is probably a better buy than a ZM Sonnar 1.5/50!

Note to Gerard: Just a little patience to wait and see how 5 elements performed could have saved you a whole lot of embarrassment.


It depends what you mean by "prove". It looks like a personal opinion to me.

Your message to Gerald assumes that he would share your opinion. We have no way of knowing that. His early posts have been removed and he is not allowed to make any more. So why are you writing to him?

You are right but your last question needs no answer..
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4