Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Leica Buys Sinar  (Read 8046 times)
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1207


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #60 on: November 30, 2013, 01:42:37 PM »
ReplyReply


I can see that smoothness is important for the kind of shooting you do, but many of us don't earn our living by shooting stylished ladies and gentlemen for living. Personally I am mostly shooting landscape as a pastime (earning my income in reactor physics). Some people shoot architecture or food. Needs are different.

Best regards
Erik




I agree that everyone not only has different expectations and sees different things.

The only point I was trying to make is compared to the contax zeiss the phase (non leaf shutter lenses) are 4 times the price and I'd love to see even equal the performance.

The Phase 80mm is a 2.8 the Contax Zeiss f2.0, which makes a big difference.

The Phase 150 is $3,490 the Contax under a thousand.

Then there is the ergonomics.  It takes any photographer about 10 seconds to get use to a Contax with f stops on the lens and a shutter dial. You can swap finders from prism to waist level  and the contax is smooth and substantial.

After 15 years you expect a leap forward and it's not just the Phase mamiya, dslrs have gone the same route of dials and menus to replace analog functions.

Shoot a contax 80mm close up hand held at 1.30th of a second and you'll know what I mean.

It's the same thing with those little m43 cameras I use for video and stills.   Take the olympus em-5 and use an olympus lens.  It's sharp (over sharp for me) medium fast though not crazy fast though autofocuses immediatley and is easy to use.

Though put a lecia or Voigt manual lens on it with a f stop ring and the camera transforms into analog, shoots like analog, looks like film.  Sometimes I think we're answering questions that nobody is asking.

IMO

BC

P.S.  Once again this isn't a dig a any company and obviously contax is gone, gone, though the camera still live on.

What I'm saying is unless there is  a real leap, something you can't do without or have to have to make a certain image, there is no reason to change.

If I needed leaf shutters, I'd look at the DF, well maybe, but I don't need any sync above 250 and can overpower the sun easily with a contax and 2400 watts.





« Last Edit: November 30, 2013, 02:10:59 PM by bcooter » Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8031


WWW
« Reply #61 on: November 30, 2013, 02:33:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

The reason I choose the Hasselblad V for my P45+ were the Zeiss lenses. Not because they are good but because they are affordable and pretty good. I started with a Sonnar 150/4, which was a very good lens. It cost me something like 400$, one fifth of the zooms I use on my Sony's but it matches the Sony zooms in performance, on a DSLR. I felt that if could fit an MF equipment inside a budget of 100kSEK (about 150 k$USD) it would be OK, so the low price of used Zeiss lenses was a major attraction.

My experience of the Zeiss lenses is mixed. Knowing them takes some testing and also learning from mistakes.

I like shooting with the stuff, it's not fast but a nice experience.

Rationally, I feel the Sony is the better equipment. There is one area where Hasselblad/Zeiss/P45+ wins at that is resolution.

DR? Sony wins!
Bokeh? Sony wins!
Sharpness? P45+ wins!
Color? Don't know1 If you like yellowish greens P45+ wins, if you like subtle colours Sony wins.


Why I like to work with the 555 ELD/P45+? I don't know! Perhaps it is because it is well made without being perfect.

I normally walk with the Hasselblad 555ELD and five lenses plus a Sony Alpha 99 and two big zooms. Add to that an RRS Versa 3 tripod and an Arca Swiss 4D head. If I need to cut wave, there is no discussion the Sony comes with me and that is the Hassy that stays home! Why? Because the Sony can handle everything!


Best regards
Erik



I agree that everyone not only has different expectations and sees different things.

The only point I was trying to make is compared to the contax zeiss the phase (non leaf shutter lenses) are 4 times the price and I'd love to see even equal the performance.

The Phase 80mm is a 2.8 the Contax Zeiss f2.0, which makes a big difference.

The Phase 150 is $3,490 the Contax under a thousand.

Then there is the ergonomics.  It takes any photographer about 10 seconds to get use to a Contax with f stops on the lens and a shutter dial. You can swap finders from prism to waist level  and the contax is smooth and substantial.

After 15 years you expect a leap forward and it's not just the Phase mamiya, dslrs have gone the same route of dials and menus to replace analog functions.

Shoot a contax 80mm close up hand held at 1.30th of a second and you'll know what I mean.

It's the same thing with those little m43 cameras I use for video and stills.   Take the olympus em-5 and use an olympus lens.  It's sharp (over sharp for me) medium fast though not crazy fast though autofocuses immediatley and is easy to use.

Though put a lecia or Voigt manual lens on it with a f stop ring and the camera transforms into analog, shoots like analog, looks like film.  Sometimes I think we're answering questions that nobody is asking.

IMO

BC
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad