View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 3223 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Thu May 18, 2023 3:24 pm Post subject: QBM or C/Y Carl Zeiss Sonnar 80mm f/2.8 |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
The QBM mount and C/Y mount Sonnar 80/2.8's have different lens schemes. Any reason to chose one over the other? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pabeu
Joined: 25 Apr 2018 Posts: 72
|
Posted: Thu May 18, 2023 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pabeu wrote:
I guess you are talking about the 85s instead of 80.
The C/Y has an additional fifth element in the back group. From what I have read, this is for better aberration correction and corner performance.
So far I have used the QBM one on APC and it is very sharp with pleasent rendering.
Not sure if the C/Y premium is worth the extra price (they usially go for a little bit more).
The contax G 90 might be in the middle if you can live with the slightly worse haptics the fancy adapter brings. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 3223 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Thu May 18, 2023 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
Oops, yes I mean 85mm.
I think I’d probably prefer the 85/2.8 over the 90mm for exactly the reason you mention. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kiddo
Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1273
|
Posted: Thu May 18, 2023 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kiddo wrote:
i dunno why, but for some reason the 85mm FL is just harder to get for good money and the fastest ones like 1.4 reach same amount (or more) as ZF or ZE mount (same aperture). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1663
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2023 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
I use my 85/2,8 QBM with my Sony FF and it's really sharp, with nice colors and contrast.
If you can be happy with the F/2,8, I tell you, go for it.
MFD is 85 cm. Nothing special but average. I think you can live with that.
The CA is very thin wide open. I did not find any at f/4. So it's CAlo. Easy to fix anyway.
It's a little and light lens.
I compared it with the Sony 85/1,8 FE mount. The last is faster and so sharp. More contrast perhaps. But a bit more STRONG CA.
I used only one day the sonnar c/y. When I had a Sony aps-c. So I can't say anything about the corner rendering in FF.
My two cents for the QBM. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pabeu
Joined: 25 Apr 2018 Posts: 72
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2023 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pabeu wrote:
There is a Rolleinar version with HFT coatings that is said to be the same as the CZ in QBM mount. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1663
|
Posted: Sun May 21, 2023 1:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
pabeu wrote: |
There is a Rolleinar version with HFT coatings that is said to be the same as the CZ in QBM mount. |
The rolleinar is the same as mamiya sx and color dynarex AR. All made by mamiya. 4/4 lens. Not 5/4 like the c/y . But similar to the sonnar hft 4/4
Rolleinar and color Dynarex AR were made for QBM and the SX for M42 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|