Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

ZF Lenses Moded by Duclos

Guidofilippi said:
I also think that´s the reason... it´s the kind of defect video cameras have always had.
Guido
Click to expand...

Its a small defect in the lens as it's trying to focus all the colors together. It has nothing to do with the camera being video or the sensor.
 
It does appear to be minor chromatic aberration. What you are seeing is light of different wavelengths being subjected to different degrees of refraction when it passes through the lens. Consequently, the lens is not able to bring the light of different colors into focus at the same point on the film plane. Chromatic aberration is most obvious in the shorter wavelengths and is why you are seeing the purple fringe or the violet end of the spectrum. This is also exaggerated by a larger aperture.
 
Matthew Duclos said:
It does appear to be minor chromatic aberration. What you are seeing is light of different wavelengths being subjected to different degrees of refraction when it passes through the lens. Consequently, the lens is not able to bring the light of different colors into focus at the same point on the film plane. Chromatic aberration is most obvious in the shorter wavelengths and is why you are seeing the purple fringe or the violet end of the spectrum. This is also exaggerated by a larger aperture.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification Matthew. I was just going off a definition I found.
 
Lens Tracking

Lens Tracking

I should clarify my statement that I have had issues with the lens "tracking"with Nikon primes. When you pull focus on some of my Nikon prime lenses there is a slight "zoom" in the image which is referred to as breathing. Added to this effect is a slight shift both vertically and horizontally in the images position. So if I was filming a test chart it would move up and down and side to side as I pulled focus. The amplitude of this effect varies from lens to lens from good to bad. This poses no issue for stills photographers but not so good for cine shooters.

My question is has anyone noticed or checked their ZF lenses for Tracking issues? I am hoping the ZFs are better than the cheap glass and the older Nikon primes.

Tom Gleeson
 
Tracking with most still lenses will be directly related to age. An older beat up Nikkor will have a lot of play in the helicoid. A new ZF or relatively new MF Nikkor will have minimal tracking error. Unlike cine primes which are designed to have their helicoids sprayed with a reapply-able enamel, all manual focus (non-IF) still lenses will eventually start to have tracking problems. They should still give you years of service first though, at least if they're new or nearly so when you got them.
 
That's so bizarre, I never knew primes could breathe! I thought that was only a zoom lens issue because of a difference in mechanics or something. Thank you all for educating me!
 
This phenomenon is known as breathing. Tracking refers to centering on a zoom, meaning that if you place an object dead center in the frame while zoomed in it should remain "on track" and stay dead center throughout the focal range. In reality no zoom on the planet is perfect in this, but it is important to get it to a very tight tolerance.
 
Mitch Gross said:
This phenomenon is known as breathing. Tracking refers to centering on a zoom, meaning that if you place an object dead center in the frame while zoomed in it should remain "on track" and stay dead center throughout the focal range. In reality no zoom on the planet is perfect in this
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct about the definition of tracking.
But I'll have to disagree with the part about no zoom being perfect. ;)
Stop by some time.
 
The ZF lenses are very nice. Its very difficult to compare such a wide range of lenses.
But the ZF lenses are some of the nicest still lenses Ive seen.
"Similar" Nikon primes would be the old AIS lenses. And they are excellent manual lenses, but they are old and slightly out-dated.
 
(r)yan said:
I've shot alot with still lenses and they just are flatter in their depiction of images.
Click to expand...

Do a side by side test sometime with the same lighting and color correction.

Here's one:
http://www.ryanewalters.com/page2/files/cab173dd2420de896dd27c0dace7dc61-15.html

http://www.ryanewalters.com/downloads/ZeissTest/REW-ZeissLensTest-Results.pdf

I seem to remember someone posting a Master Prime on RED vs. a Sony EX1 and half the people couldn't pick the master prime. It was a steadicam shot I think... but still.
 
The Nikons that I used before these lenses captured some really nice images. But using them on a narrative shoot was a little of a pain in the ass. Mainly its the mechanics of the Nikons that I don't like and that most AC's hate. You can work around it if you practice with them a lot. The Zeiss ZF lenses are just better quality.
 
I just want to confirm that the ZF 50 F1.4 is the worst ZF... by far... there is no sensor problem... the lens is crap... I have one and I want to sell it... the problems are up to F2.8 1/2... If I compare the performance of the ZF 28 F2, to get the same performance in CA I have to have the 28@F2 and the 50@F4... a much better choice is the ZF 50 F2 macro... more expensive but a reference lens... the 85 F1.4 is not that bad, its actually a good lens... but 50 F1.4 ohhh my god...

my 2 euro cents...
 
Evangelos Achillopoulos said:
I just want to confirm that the ZF 50 F1.4 is the worst ZF... by far... there is no sensor problem... the lens is crap... I have one and I want to sell it... the problems are up to F2.8 1/2... If I compare the performance of the ZF 28 F2, to get the same performance in CA I have to have the 28@F2 and the 50@F4... a much better choice is the ZF 50 F2 macro... more expensive but a reference lens... the 85 F1.4 is not that bad, its actually a good lens... but 50 F1.4 ohhh my god...

my 2 euro cents...
Click to expand...

Hahaha...
Please tell us what you really think of the 50mm 1.4
Yes, it is the worst of the ZF line. But as you said, the Macro 50mm is worlds better. One of the nicest still lenses ive seen this side of the bench.
 
Going from the Nikon 50mm f~1.8 to the Zeiss ZF 50mm f~1.4, the Zeiss is way better. I never really used my Nikon 50mm because it was just a pain in the ass to shoot with. I've heard good things about the Zeiss ZF 50mm f~2 and maybe I'll get it down the road. But I wanted the 1.4 aperture and that's why I went with the cheaper 50mm.
 
I guess a set with the 50 f2 would be a nice solid package if you don't require 1.4f all too often in the 50mm flavor... you get your macro in there and macro on a 50mm isn't too short and you could get some very nice macros added to your set of tools... though just to be fair, 1.4f over 2f is also a very nice and powerful tool to have available.

Would a little light on the subject (is that you Andrew?) help diminish the CA? I guess not from what I gathered from Matthew's explanation. But it doesn't hurt to ask.

Of course a little more light would also mean being able to stop down more, which would definitely help, so long as you are not stuck on getting super shallow DoF for the particular shot.

Andrew, it would be spectacular if you added little clips showcasing how much/little breathing these puppies give ya on a stop to stop pull.

Thanks for the explanations posted guys.
 
USlatin said:
I guess a set with the 50 f2 would be a nice solid package if you don't require 1.4f all too often in the 50mm flavor... you get your macro in there and macro on a 50mm isn't too short and you could get some very nice macros added to your set of tools... though just to be fair, 1.4f over 2f is also a very nice and powerful tool to have available.

Would a little light on the subject (is that you Andrew?) help diminish the CA? I guess not from what I gathered from Matthew's explanation. But it doesn't hurt to ask.

Of course a little more light would also mean being able to stop down more, which would definitely help, so long as you are not stuck on getting super shallow DoF for the particular shot.

Andrew, it would be spectacular if you added little clips showcasing how much/little breathing these puppies give ya on a stop to stop pull.

Thanks for the explanations posted guys.
Click to expand...

I believe the reason the CA is kind of bad on the 50mm is because of the windows in the back. I'll try and shoot some footage of the lenses going through focus here shortly. I don't have my brother to model for me but I'll make something work.
 
Cool... please do I really can't tell how much is due to the window being so hot, or the effect of the blinds, etc.. and I imagine the 50mm is still extremely useful at 1.4f so long as you avoid maxing out the potential for CA... which I guess you sort of did in that shot, right?
 
I have the ZF 50 f/2 and it is indeed a beautiful lens.

I am tempted to get the cheaper 1.4 as well for when I'm working in no light.

The 85mm 1.4 is a Godsend for low light C/U, but too long for most of the spaces I work in for general use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top