![]() ![]() $600 is another matter entirely, at least in my budget. ![]() My guess is no, but if you can get 90% of the performance of a modern lens for what amounts to essentially a "sunk cost", well that might be worth doing. The question is, will they be better enough to surpass modern lenses with modern coatings and (this is the nail in the coffin) the assistance of the camera body correcting distortion / CA / falloff, etc. That's better than the typical film era FF lens. The reviews I've seen (P645 75mm f2.8 in my case) show the medium format lenses to be already good wide open, and peaking around F4 before diffraction starts taking its toll. Personally, I'd drop $35 or so on a dumb adapter and try it out in manual focus mode first, assuming you have an aperture ring.Īlmost any medium format lens by a major manufacturer is probably going to be better image quality than FF lenses from the film era. ![]() ![]() I guess it depends on which Sony lenses you have (whether they duplicate the focal lengths of the Contax lenses), what you shoot, what your budget is, and whether you need good native EyeAF-capable AF as opposed to only acceptable AF. So what I am trying to figure out is would I be likely to see any significant difference in image quality using the Contax 645 lenses on the A7RII compared to Sony lenses like the Sony Zeiss 35mm f2.8, since if not I would obviously be better off saving my pennies to spend on more Sony glass in future instead of an adapter, what do you reckon? But USD600 is not small change and I already have a couple of good Sony lenses. Just read a very positive review of the Fringer C645 to Sony E-mount adapter that costs about USD600 and apparently perfroms quite well on the A7RII with acceptable (though not blazing) phase AF, lens metadata transfer etc. I have a couple of very nice Contax 645 lenses and an A7RII. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2023
Categories |