View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Pontus
Joined: 18 Dec 2011 Posts: 1471 Location: Jakobstad, Finland
Expire: 2016-08-25
|
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:05 am Post subject: Hasselblad C Carl Zeiss Sonnar 150/4 on Sony NEX |
|
|
Pontus wrote:
Would I do anything with a Zeiss 150/4 C on a Sony NEX. I found one for 100 euros (filter thread damaged but with hood and caps) and I bet it will go fast. I'm doing some research right now but I would appreciate input from you guys.
What I found out so far:
- there are adapters available, Kipon makes one for example _________________ Follow this link for my FOR SALE list (partially updated 19.11.2015) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Check it, it has leaf shutter or not, surely can't go wrong with a Zeiss lens , question is how useful in your photography. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
The lens is a great lens for medium format, one of the greatest.
I doubt that it would do better on a Nex (or any other small format camera) than a Contax RTS lens though.
Most of the times, when you use a medium format lens on a small camera, the results are a let down compared to expectations.
Companies put most research efforts and made state of the art lenses for the small format, because they had to squeeze the most possible resolution out of a small frame.
With medium format, the format itself makes the difference in quality: no need for super extra lenses.
Example?
Compare a Pancolar 1.8/50 lens small format, with a Biometar 2.8/80 lens medium format. Both are Zeiss Jena so it's possible to make a fair comparison.
Stop both lenses down to f/5.6 and take photos on your nex. The Pancolar will blow the Biometar out. And yet the Biometar is a good lens.
But it simply can't hold the comparison with a good small format standard lens as the Pancolar. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pontus
Joined: 18 Dec 2011 Posts: 1471 Location: Jakobstad, Finland
Expire: 2016-08-25
|
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pontus wrote:
Attila wrote: |
Check it, it has leaf shutter or not, surely can't go wrong with a Zeiss lens , question is how useful in your photography. |
I guess that the leaf shutter would be a bad thing? Because it gets in the way? Or is it a good thing because it's extra and valuable?
Orio wrote: |
The lens is a great lens for medium format, one of the greatest.
I doubt that it would do better on a Nex (or any other small format camera) than a Contax RTS lens though.
Most of the times, when you use a medium format lens on a small camera, the results are a let down compared to expectations.
Companies put most research efforts and made state of the art lenses for the small format, because they had to squeeze the most possible resolution out of a small frame.
With medium format, the format itself makes the difference in quality: no need for super extra lenses.
Example?
Compare a Pancolar 1.8/50 lens small format, with a Biometar 2.8/80 lens medium format. Both are Zeiss Jena so it's possible to make a fair comparison.
Stop both lenses down to f/5.6 and take photos on your nex. The Pancolar will blow the Biometar out. And yet the Biometar is a good lens.
But it simply can't hold the comparison with a good small format standard lens as the Pancolar. |
Thanks for the insight. Btw, I've read lots of conflicting things about how a lens like this would behave with regards to field of view. What would be the full frame equivalent of this lens on an APS-C body? _________________ Follow this link for my FOR SALE list (partially updated 19.11.2015) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Leaf shutter would be a bad thing, the lens would need modification to work.
As Orio says, most mf lenses are of lower resolution than most 35mm lenses. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
trifox
Joined: 14 May 2008 Posts: 3614 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-05-29
|
Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
trifox wrote:
buy the lens
it's fantastic lens .... and 100 EUR is bargain, if shutter works well
.. or I would like to buy it, if you don't want to
1
2
3
tf _________________ Flickr.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
trifox
Joined: 14 May 2008 Posts: 3614 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-05-29
|
Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
trifox wrote:
Pontus wrote: |
What would be the full frame equivalent of this lens on an APS-C body? |
35 mm vs APS-C - 1.6 FACTOR
MEDIUM vs 35 mm - again - 1.6 FACTOR.
So 150mm medium format lens is equivalent to 93.75 mm on 35 mm format
tf _________________ Flickr.com |
|
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
|