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

Contax Vario-Sonnar: 28-85 or 35-135
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 3:02 am    Post subject: Re: Contax Vario-Sonnar: 28-85 or 35-135 Reply with quote
Nikos wrote:
I am considering to get a Contax zoom.
I have seen some on eBay, in very good condition.

Both the 28-85 and the 35-135 are an attractive focal length for me.
In terms of optical quality, which one would you prefer?
Are they comparable with the Contax primes at, say, f/5.6 ?


I got my C/Y Zeiss VS 35-135/3.3-4.5 last week. Here's Tom Shea's review of C/Y Zeiss lenses: http://photo.net/equipment/contax/shea-lenses

I feel I am getting more and more like this lens. The VS 28-85mm is an excellent lens, but the VS 35-135mm performs better. Especially the sharpness, it's sharp throughout the whole range. Here are the weights of these lenses: the VS 28-85 735g; VS 35-135 860g, Nikon 24-70/2.8 900g, and 70-200/2.8 is 1530g. If we can carry the Nikons, why can't carry these C/Y Zeisses (except the Nikons are auto)? I am not sure will keep the 28-85 or the 35-135, probably the VS 35-135. Smile

Here are some test shots, hand-held, no PP. (C/Y Zeiss VS 35-135/3.3-4.5, Sony A7R):
@ f5.6


[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20148/big_8065_DSC00142jpgnamed_3.jpg]
[/url]

Wide-open


Last edited by cellotone on Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:19 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Great sharpness and colours, pretty good for an untouched image! Thanks for sharing them in big size!


PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
AhamB wrote:
I read the Contax N 24-85 is even better, but becomes a bit expensive with the extra cost of Conurus conversion (which does buy you AF and auto aperture though), not to mention the few months of waiting time.

No need for a destructive Conurus conversion, you can mount the lens on a Sony A7 with a Kipon C/N to Sony-E adapter.

The Sony A7 / A7R / A7S series is really a dream made true for the vintage glass amateur...

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
no AF with the Kipon adapter.. if you want this, get "Fringer's full auto Contax N-Sony E adapter"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFYUm5TxGNY

This one also works with NAM-1 for Contax 645.. Kipon doesn't


PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Tedat wrote:
no AF with the Kipon adapter..

Hey, we're on MFLenses... We don't need no stinkin' AF! Wink

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ok accepted... but the Kipon adapter still doesn't work with NAM-1 which means no Apo-Makro-Planar T* 4/120 for the NEX/A7 Wink


PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I use Metabones Leica R to Sony E mount adapter for my Leica R lenses. For my C/Y lenses, I am using a Rainbow Image C/Y to Sony E mount adapter, about $12 on eBay, the Metabones is still on the way. The in-expensive Rainbow adapter works fine on my Sony A7R. But I like the quality and tightness on the mounts of the Metabones adapter. Smile


PostPosted: Fri Jan 12, 2024 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Today I got a nice copy of the Vario-Sonnar 3.3-4/28-85mm which had been sitting in a local photo store for months. Since I have both the Zeiss CY 3.5/70-210mm as well as the later CY 4/80-200mm, and since both these CY tele zooms are relly good, I always had been lusting for either a Zeiss CY 35-70mm or the CY 28-85mm. Today I couldn't resist any more, especially since the lens looks like new and had a 82mm UV filter protecting its front lens.

Earlier on I already had been comparing this CY 3.3-4/28-85mm with the slightly slower (but aspherical) Minolta AF 3.5-4.5/28-85mm. At infinity, and using 24 MP FF cameras, the lenses have a comparable perfomance level when it comes to resolution, contrast and CAs. The Minolta probably has stronger vignetting, and distortion-wise I haven't compared the lenses yet. Close range performance as well as bokeh are to be tested later, too.

The built quality and handling of the Zeiss CY 3.3-4/28-85mm is really good, although not as outstanding as the (Germany made) Zeiss Vario-Sonnar CY 3.5/70-210mm: There is slight wobbling when focusing and zooming, even though the lens doesn't seem to have seen a lot of use. A similar slight wobbling can be felt on my Minolta MD 35-70mm and 28-85mm zooms, too.

On the Zeiss CY 28-85mm the MFD for all focal lengths is 0.6m. Compared to the Canon nFD 4/28-85mm (0.9m), the Minolta MD 3.5-4.5/28-85mm (0.8m), the Nikoor AiS 28-85mm (0.8m) and the Yashica ML 28-85mm (1.7m) that's much more useful, especially for reportage purposes. Unlike all the other zooms mentioned, the Zeiss does not have an additional macro mode, probably to ensure the necessary mechanical precision and optical performance demanded by Zeiss. It will be interesting to see how all these lenses perform when compared side-by-side.



S


PostPosted: Fri Jan 12, 2024 11:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
Today I got a nice copy of the Vario-Sonnar 3.3-4/28-85mm which had been sitting in a local photo store for months. Since I have both the Zeiss CY 3.5/70-210mm as well as the later CY 4/80-200mm, and since both these CY tele zooms are relly good, I always had been lusting for either a Zeiss CY 35-70mm or the CY 28-85mm. Today I couldn't resist any more, especially since the lens looks like new and had a 82mm UV filter protecting its front lens.

Earlier on I already had been comparing this CY 3.3-4/28-85mm with the slightly slower (but aspherical) Minolta AF 3.5-4.5/28-85mm. At infinity, and using 24 MP FF cameras, the lenses have a comparable perfomance level when it comes to resolution, contrast and CAs. The Minolta probably has stronger vignetting, and distortion-wise I haven't compared the lenses yet. Close range performance as well as bokeh are to be tested later, too.

The built quality and handling of the Zeiss CY 3.3-4/28-85mm is really good, although not as outstanding as the (Germany made) Zeiss Vario-Sonnar CY 3.5/70-210mm: There is slight wobbling when focusing and zooming, even though the lens doesn't seem to have seen a lot of use. A similar slight wobbling can be felt on my Minolta MD 35-70mm and 28-85mm zooms, too.

On the Zeiss CY 28-85mm the MFD for all focal lengths is 0.6m. Compared to the Canon nFD 4/28-85mm (0.9m), the Minolta MD 3.5-4.5/28-85mm (0.8m), the Nikoor AiS 28-85mm (0.8m) and the Yashica ML 28-85mm (1.7m) that's much more useful, especially for reportage purposes. Unlike all the other zooms mentioned, the Zeiss does not have an additional macro mode, probably to ensure the necessary mechanical precision and optical performance demanded by Zeiss. It will be interesting to see how all these lenses perform when compared side-by-side.
S


I have the one in the center- the Nikkor.
Other than a quick few rudimentary test scenics with it, I have not done much with it, which is sort of normal for me.
It certainly was a better performing lens than I had been expecting, and came in pristine condition.
Looking forward to what you find with it compared to the others...

-D.S.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2024 1:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Doc Sharptail wrote:

Looking forward to what you find with it compared to the others...

-D.S.


Those mid-range zooms are notoriously difficult to compute. I wasn't aware of that fact until I personally met with the (then) head of optical computations of Sony camera lenses, back in 2010. He told me that constructing an excellent f2.8 "normal zoom" was much more difficult than e. g. a 2.8/16-35mm or a 2.8/70-200mm zoom! That's mainly because the lens designer - when designing a "normal zoom" - has to choose from two options:

1) main (master) lens positive, front element negative - thus basically a retrofocus wideangle design
2) rear element negative, front element positive - basically a tele lens design

If you choose 1) the "normal zoom" will be unsatisfactory in the tele range (and become huge as soon as go too far into the tele range)
If you choose 2) it's nearly impossible to get a decent performance below about 30mm

Therefore todays f2.8 "normal zooms" all are type 1), and don't go beyond 70mm. In fact the modern "24-70mm" zooms usually are 67mm or so at the "long" end. Not really "long" indeed!

Most of the above zooms are typ 1) too. Only exception is the Yashica which is type 2) and therefore has a MFD of 1.7m.
All vintage MF 35-105mm lenses I'm aware of are type 2 though, and have a relatively long MFD (usually 1.5m or so). Also the Minolta AF 4-4.5/28.135mm is type 2); to get a decent performance at the short end it was artificially limited to f4 at f=28mm (the aperture doesn't open completely at f=28mm).

S


PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2024 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
... It will be interesting to see how all these lenses perform when compared side-by-side.



S


Today I finally have compared the aove lenses at f=28mm, f=50mm and f=85mm (results will be publlished later), but before going into all those images I would like to share a few images I took today, plus some comments on the Zeiss CY Varion Sonnar 3.3-4/28-85mm.

Usually when I'm travelling I walk around with a fast 2.8/16-35mm plus a fast 2.8/70-200mm zoom. The corresponding weight - nearly 3 kg including a FF DSLR - is considerable. While I also have a 2.8/24-70mm zoom (wich in reallity is mor a 25-67mm indeed), I never found it "sufficient" for my purposes. Quite a few people adore also the good old 35-70mm zooms, but they really don't appeal to me since I can easily replace it with a fast 1.4/50mm. So how di I feel walking around with a relatively slow vintage 28-85mm such as the Zeiss Vario Sonnar?

First thing is checking the focal range. Surprisingly it feels somehow "brader" to me than the 24-70mm (or, in reality, 25-67mm). While 28mm isn't that wide these days, it nevertheless is a different story than 35mm. And 85mm is visible "narrower" than the 67mm i know from my Sony/Zeiss Vario Sonnar 2.8/24-70mm. Look at these two images, taken from the same spot:




The difference is quite obvious and much more as with a 35-70mm lens (which usually is something like 37-67mm in reality). Here another one (at F085mm first, then f=28mm, both taken from the same standpoint):



We'll not talk about corner resolution today (that will follow), but at f=28mm the Zeiss has lot's of CAs which are obvious even in these 1 MP images (800x1200px). Here's a 100% crop from the borders of 24 MP FF image - firstout, then with CA correction in PP:


Luckily they usually can be corrected in post processing, modern lenses are far better in this respect. Otherwise the images form the CY 28-85mm look surprisingly clear for a vintage zoom, and certainly much more clear than with my Canon nFD 4/28-85 or my Yashica ML 3.5-4.5/28-85mm. The Minolta 28-85mm (both MD as well as AF) is almost as good in this respect as the Zeiss, and the Nikkor AiS 28-85mm is somewhere in between Zeiss/Minolta and Canon/Yashica. Since these old zooms have som many lenses and a rather complicated zoom mechanism, some of the perceived dullnes of the Canon and the Yashica may well be caused by some slight fogging of the lens surfaces. I simply don't know, but the Zeiss looks much crisper than the Canon nFD (more on this tomorrow).


PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2024 8:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 Like 1 Like Dog Wonderful example photos!!!


PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2024 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Now let's look at the center resolution, wide open, at different focal lengths. Here are the tree images first:




This is a 100% crop from the center of the image at f=28mm and wide open (f3.3):


Apart from the CAs (clearly visible even though the crop is only slightly off the image center) there's nothing to complain about for sure.

Now the 100% crop at f=45mm, and still wide open:

Again quite a few CAs (lateral and longitudinal), but very good resolution and contrast. And that's where the Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 28-85mm shines: good contrast. Again, more on that tomorrow.

And finally at the long end - where the Zeiss "really shines", according to some users (again 100%crop from 24 MP FF):


Lots of detail again, and no problems at all with the strong light sources in the image!

OK - "no problems with strong light sources ..." - that's true also at f=28mm. Here's the next image, taken at f6.3 (but those at f3.3 of f11 don't look different). It's the "Rathaus" of Lucerne (local town parliament and government):

Surprisingly clear image again, in spite of the strong contrast and the light sources directly in the image.

Just beyond that building, close to the "Reuss" river, are those arcades. In summertime they are full of tourists of course, but right now Lucerne is a sleepy small town, calm and pretty much empty. Zeiss CY 28-85mm at 85mm/f4 (wide open):



Finally two images of the "Jesuiten-Kirche" (Jesuit's church), one at f=28mm, and the second at f=50mm:



While there are strong light sources inside the frame, there's only one minor reflex at f=28mm, and nothing at f=50mm. Pretty amazing for a vintage 28-85mm zoom!

That's it for today; the comparison of 28-85mmm lenses (Canon nFD / Miinolta MD / Nikkor AiS / Yashica ML / Zeiss CY) will follow tomorrow.

S


PostPosted: Tue Nov 12, 2024 1:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:




While there are strong light sources inside the frame, there's only one minor reflex at f=28mm, and nothing at f=50mm. Pretty amazing for a vintage 28-85mm zoom!

That's it for today; the comparison of 28-85mmm lenses (Canon nFD / Miinolta MD / Nikkor AiS / Yashica ML / Zeiss CY) will follow tomorrow.

S


The nikkor A/I-s 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 surprised me here- especially at 28mm.
I note that mixed reviews abound on this lens, so factor in sample variation, as usual.
Looking forward to your results.

-D.S.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2