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

Zeiss Makro Planar 2/100mm OOF CA Study
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:10 pm    Post subject: Zeiss Makro Planar 2/100mm OOF CA Study Reply with quote
An OOF CA test of the Zeiss Makro Planar 2/100mm showing some OOF green/purple fringing, but which disappears from about f4 onwards:











some real life tests shot at f2









so, do you like the green or the purple reflections better? Wink

And sorry to say that as a big Zeiss fan, the Voigtländer Makro
Apo Lanthar 2.5/125mm does that much better and gives true 1:1.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Shocked
Surprised as can be.
I think my Kiron 105 does better in this regard.

Maybe you ended up with a poor copy Klaus Confused


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, I was very much suprised too and was thinking a lot if I should publish that or not, the Zeiss fan I am. BUT although is is being kept somewhat "hush hush", I found a test result which confirmed my findings, so I dedcided to show my findings here.

So mine wasn't a "lemon", it is a design issue obviously - it is no "apo" lens. Here is the picture, but I don't have the link handy...



This source also confirms that:
http://ogiroux.wordpress.com/2009/03/14/carl-zeiss-2100-makro-planar-t-review/

and mentioned here:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/674787/0

The ZF Makro Planar 2/50mm does NOT have that!! See here:
http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/259-zeiss-zf-makro-planar-t-50mm-f2-review--test-report?start=1


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Makro Planar ZF 2/50 must be better corrected for CA, I guess..


There is some similarity --
as the famous pair of Contax Makros:

Makro-Planar 2.8/60 (less CA, very close to zero) and Contax Makro-Planar 2.8/100 (more CA)

I have got both Contax MP, Poilu has both -- he can confirm that as well..

So the CA issue is going up by increasing the focal length..

tf


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
interesting effect, are the text samples 100% crop?


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
croped from full format, 100% and scaled down for presentation here.

Last edited by kds315* on Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:30 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
trifox wrote:
The Makro Planar ZF 2/50 must be better corrected for CA, I guess..

There is some similarity --
as the famous pair of Contax Makros:

Makro-Planar 2.8/60 (less CA, very close to zero) and Contax Makro-Planar 2.8/100 (more CA)

I have got both Contax MP, Poilu has both -- he can confirm that as well..

So the CA issue is going up by increasing the focal length..

tf

the 100:2.8 have purple fringing in high contrast, the 60:2.8 zero
but purple fringing is a overload of the sensor and should be corrected in future generation as technologies progress
For CA like in the text sample, I can see trace at 2.8 but only at 100% crop


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I honestly doubt that it is "sensor overload" - why does the Makro Apo Lanthar 125mm then NOT overload the sensor?
Maybe if it hears the Zeiss name it goes into overload mode? Wink Wink

Like here in that high contrasty situation shot at f2 (leaves laft and right) - 100% crop:



PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I like working fully or nearly fully open esp. when a lens has that wonderful bokeh, but sth like that really throws me off for a lens
having that $$$$ price tag. And I like high contrast situations like that (a sorted out unsharp test shot due, but good to show what I am talking about there...)



100% crop



PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh dear! Surprised Shocked


patrickh


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
I like working fully or nearly fully open esp. when a lens has that wonderful bokeh, but sth like that really throws me off for a lens
having that $$$$ price tag. And I like high contrast situations like that (a unsharp test shot due, but good to show what I am talking about there...)

your samples show serious problems
such expensive lens and such CA is not acceptable

I found a review and it seems that it is indeed a design flaw

net review wrote:
The first negative is that it produces longitudinal chromatic aberrations and highlight fringing very easily. At f/2 the lens prefers gentle local contrast, and draws magenta/green casts and purple fringes on all harsh contrast edges that interact with the plane of focus. Whether this is problematic depends largely on whether shiny things like jewelry or glasses are present in or near the plane of focus.

http://ogiroux.wordpress.com/2009/03/14/carl-zeiss-2100-makro-planar-t-review/

I don't have such problems with the 100:2.8


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
poilu wrote:

the 100:2.8 have purple fringing in high contrast, the 60:2.8 zero
but purple fringing is a overload of the sensor and should be corrected in future generation as technologies progress
For CA like in the text sample, I can see trace at 2.8 but only at 100% crop


Oh, here we go with the "CCD overload" theory once again.

It's odd how fans of this theory are unable to explain the green fringes, or why the sensor overload changes so much as the lens is changed for another one.

Or why, when an apochromatic lens like a Voigtländer, Mamiya or Leica is mounted, this "sensor overload" disappears.

Or why CMOS sensors suffer from CCD overload.

Last edited by ChrisLilley on Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:21 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm completely with you Chris, that "overload theory" does not hold.

What I could accept are arguments that the light from the rear lens of a lens comes from an angle for the out of axis rays, and that this would couse that effect, since this is very depended on the lens design. Certainly the ZF 100mm and CV 125mm have different designs - BUT both are tele-lens designs so teh rays shoud be about parallel. For very wide angles lenses this might hold true.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Contax 2.8/100 does not show this CA because it's a different lens.

Instead, the Contax 2/100 MM version shows CA in out of focus areas - while the AE copy that I sold to Carlsson does not.

I am sure that a change in the lens design was made between the AE and MM version.

My guess is that the 2/100 ZF lens is derived from the 2/100 MM version of the Contax portrait lens, and has nothing to do with the old 2.8/100 Makro Contax 100.

Supporting this theory I think it's the fact that the ZF uses a floating element to obtain close focus correction.
This means that the optimal focus is at infinity just like the Contax 2/100, and that the macro range was obtained by adaptation of that portrait lens, and not by a specific macro design.

Now you have to consider that the shorter you focus, the narrower the depth of field, and the larger the out of focus areas, which is where CA happens.

Therefore, what is a normal (acceptable) CA in a portrait lens, becomes excessive when used in macro focusing.

I don't have the ZF lens, but I am sure that if Klaus or someone else takes some example photos at infinity or at portrait range, wide open, the CA will still be visible but less obnoxious.

I think Zeiss should have built the ZF 100 as portrait or infinite lens only.
As Macro it is not good enough.

I would say that Zeiss engineers like Glatzel or Woelche are not alive anymore and unfortunately, it shows.
-


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:

I would say that Zeiss engineers like Glatzel or Woelche are not alive anymore and unfortunately, it shows.
-


the a really bad conclusion for Zeiss ZF 2/100, I suppose. Glatzel's personality played the main role at Zeiss company ..

the good times are behind us.. the Contax won't come back again like used to be ..

tf

Last edited by trifox on Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:29 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
My Tokina 100/2.8 Macro (AF version) also shows this green-purple CA. I guess only APO lenses are guaranteed not to have it.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
trifox wrote:
Orio wrote:

I would say that Zeiss engineers like Glatzel or Woelche are not alive anymore and unfortunately, it shows.
-


the a really bad conclusion for Zeiss ZF 2/100, I suppose :
the good times are behind us.. the Contax won't come back again like used to be ..

tf


Well, most Z lenses are refresh of old designs. In some cases, like Distagon 18 and 25, very old designs. The design of both lenses comes from the Contarex age.

Most of Distagons of today are still the basic inventions of Erhard Glatzel, this means lens designs 30-40 years old.

At Zeiss they tried to do something new and different with the Z 100 but they did not succeed.
I am sure that neither Glatzel nor Woelche would have approved the design of a lens that does this CA wide open.

-


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well guys,

I afraid that the discussion will drift away from facts - and this was one of the main reasons why I waited quite some time to publish my findings, since I also wanted to search for confirmation of these facts by other testers.

The ZF 100mm is a true macro design I had understood (but I have no proof to show currently), not designed for portrait nor for infinity use. It is a side effect actually that it can be used for that still with pretty good results.

But then I just found that by searching quite some time:



Now that would indicate that it is a modified movie lens design (which was NOT for macro originally) which would support Orio's argumentation.

Still, even it it was a high resolution and high quality movie lens, such type of OOF CA would have been a killer for such a $$$$$ lens in the movie industry.... Question


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Makro Planar 2/50mm however is NOT a modified movie lens....



PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:

Still, even it it was a high resolution and high quality movie lens, such type of OOF CA would have been a killer for such a $$$$$ lens in the movie industry.... Question


After I got more "into lenses", I scrutinized a lot more the lens performance in the movies, and I have noticed, that even big movies display visible CA in the OOF areas of telephoto shots.
So perhaps people in the movies are not so much concerned about this.
Which in fact can make sense, because in the movies the picture is moving and there is a story going on, all factors that prevent the spectators from noticing such details.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hmm, that's a point indeed Orio. So maybe it is more about contrast, bokeh etc. that made these and other lenses famous. But why did Kinoptic then develop their famous "Apo" movie lenses which still fetch $$$$ used? And Angenieux did the same.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:
hmm, that's a point indeed Orio. So maybe it is more about contrast, bokeh etc. that made these and other lenses famous. But why did Kinoptic then develop their famous "Apo" movie lenses which still fetch $$$$ used? And Angenieux did the same.


Of course I don't say that APOs are useless lenses - just that not all movie directors seem to consider CA in OOF areas such a main worry.
You can notice CA also in the Taxi Driver stills that Marco Cavina has published:
http://www.luciolepri.it/lc2/marcocavina/articoli_fotografici/Zeiss_Planar_85mm_1,4/00_pag.htm


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:

Instead, the Contax 2/100 MM version shows CA in out of focus areas - while the AE copy that I sold to Carlsson does not.

My guess is that the 2/100 ZF lens is derived from the 2/100 MM version of the Contax portrait lens, and has nothing to do with the old 2.8/100 Makro Contax 100.

Therefore, what is a normal (acceptable) CA in a portrait lens, becomes excessive when used in macro focusing.


That is an interesting theory, and could readilly explain the observed high levels of axial CA.

As a comparison, the well regarded Nikon 85mm f/1.4 AIS portrait lens also suffers from axial CA which is really quite noticeable at wider apertures, even when used for portraits.

Orio wrote:
I don't have the ZF lens, but I am sure that if Klaus or someone else takes some example photos at infinity or at portrait range, wide open, the CA will still be visible but less obnoxious.


I like theories that result in testable predictions Smile


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
aoleg wrote:
My Tokina 100/2.8 Macro (AF version) also shows this green-purple CA. I guess only APO lenses are guaranteed not to have it.


APO lenses are designed to have a lot less of it.

If a graph is made of focus position vs. wavelength, a perfect lens (for visible light photography) would show a flat line from 400 to 700nm.

A single element lens would show a line or curve at an angle, so each wavelength has a different focus point; the line crosses the axis once. An achromatic lens (made from two types of glass used together) shows a curve which crosses the axis twice. That means that the green areas of the spectrum are on one side of the neutral focus position, and the red, blue and violet areas are on the other side (hence the green/purple effect). An apochromatic lens shows a curve which crosses the axis at three places, so three colours are in focus at once.

The performance of the apochromatic lens depends not just on where the crossing points are but also how far from the zero position the rest of the curve is. The closer it is, the less secondary spectrum gets mixed into the real colours.

Although the effect is most obvious at high contrast transitions (because the secondary spectrum of the bright area mixes with the primary spectrum of the dark area, making the colours very visible) it clearly is in effect over the whole image, blurring detail, reducing resolution and muddying colours.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very interesting results; thanks for publishing them, Klaus. I can now, thankfully, put to rest my lust after the Makro Planar, especially now that I'm a proud owner of the Macro Apo-Lanthar Very Happy
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2