nehemiahphoto wrote:
I am tempted to order the Simera-C 50/1.5 and try it on both my modded Sony and native Sony. If it performs worse on stock, I would return to B + H.
Do it!
But it still wouldn't tell us anything about the regular FE version (and by extension, the other mirrorless options). Given Thypoch apparently wouldn't send Bastian FE mount review samples does not leave a good impression, irrespective of whether or not there was a communication misunderstanding between the two parties about possible sensor stack specific optimizations.
Nov 13, 2024 at 03:06 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Interesting kit. A bit big and too clean for me. I never get along with the 40mm either.
I tend to run a 3 lens of 21/35/75 or a 2 lens kit of 24 or 28mm + 50mm (if nature or shooing a show, toss in an 85mm or 90mm).
My lenses are really small—if and when you mod your sensor, you could shave a lot of weight (relative to the kit you outlined by keeping things at f2 and faster). Then again, our needs and preferences vary
Either way, I think you’ll find modding your sensor allows you to shrink down your lenses. Even picking up the same CV’s (21,40 and 50) in m will be a welcome size reduction. A CV 90/2.8 might be a lovely smaller high IQ option to the Loxia 85. Just a thought!...Show more →
I think if I modded my camera, then I would go with an 18/35/75 kit. At 18mm, I think I would like the ZM 18 f/4 if the color cast wasn't too bad on my BSI sensor. Then at 35mm, I know I would like the ZM 35 f/1.4 that I used to have, and at 75mm I am pretty sure I would be happy with the Leica M 75 f/2.4 summarit that I used to have. This 3 lens kit is over a pound lighter than my current kit and I think I would like it more.
I know for architecture, I sometimes like wider than 21mm, but 18mm is almost always wide enough. Currently when I want to shoot architecture I take my Sony/Zeiss 16-35 f/4, but I think I would be happy with just the ZM 18. I do like the CVE 40 f/1.2, and especially so when I crop it about 1.4X and it looks like a 56 f/1.8. Stop it down a bit from there and it makes a great portrait lens, but the axial CA and bokeh at times is still less than ideal. The Loxia 85 f/2.4 is a wonderful lens and I love how it renders, but it's big and bigger than it seems to need to be. I had a Leica M 75 f/2.4 Summarit and it was in many ways very similar and is a lot smaller. I know I would be happy with it as a replacement, but if the Thypoch 75 f/1.4 (that Fred says will be available early next year) turns out to be as nice optically as the 50 f/1.4 and weighs as little as I expect it to weigh, then I might pick that instead. If it performs well on a stock Sony sensor, which is probably pretty likely given it is a 75mm, then I could reduce my kit by half a pound just be replacing the Loxia 85 with it. That might be enough of a size reduction to hold me off modding my sensor for at least a little while.
That said, other than the 16-35 f/4 (which I wouldn't keep if I modded my sensor), the only Sony E mount lenses I would be keeping are longer lenses (85 f/1.4 GM I, Sony/Zeiss 135 f/1.8 ZA, 70-200 f/4 G II Macro, and 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 G). I think all of them may do fine on a modded camera and if that is the case, it might make sense to just get my camera modded.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I am tempted to order the Simera-C 50/1.5 and try it on both my modded Sony and native Sony. If it performs worse on stock, I would return to B + H.
And at that point, it would be even more safe to assume that if they have not bothered to optimize the newly released 50/1.5 you’re probably not getting any of the other cine lenses optimized. Or the stills versions.
Based on my experience with my modified A7CR UT and E-mount lenses (FE 35/1.8 and FE 55/1.8), I believe the corners will shift "inwards" instead of "outwards." This should positively impact the rendering, making the corners appear even more "out of focus." This effect is the opposite of what we typically see with M-lenses on a stock Sony sensor. It might be different with the Simera, but it's worth testing. Please share your results!
A quick hand held portrait at f/2.0. Easier to do at close range, and I think a more appropriate DOF while still maintaining good separation and Bokeh. It is a bit sharper and less dreamy as well. I do think I am focus a bit in front of the pupil in this portrait. I used the range finder and took only one shot rather that rocking through multiple exposures as i normally would in these circumstances.
Still I am very much liking what I am seeing from this lens so far.
1bwana1 wrote:
A quick hand held portrait at f/2.0. Easier to do at close range, and I think a more appropriate DOF while still maintaining good separation and Bokeh. It is a bit sharper and less dreamy as well. I do think I am focus a bit in front of the pupil in this portrait. I used the range finder and took only one shot rather that rocking through multiple exposures as i normally would in these circumstances.
Still I am very much liking what I am seeing from this lens so far.
Great portrait! Although the lens performs great wide open, I agree that at f/2 and f/2.8, there's definitely a noticeable increase in crispness, even at the center.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Based on my experience with my modified A7CR UT and E-mount lenses (FE 35/1.8 and FE 55/1.8), I believe the corners will shift "inwards" instead of "outwards." This should positively impact the rendering, making the corners appear even more "out of focus." This effect is the opposite of what we typically see with M-lenses on a stock Sony sensor. It might be different with the Simera, but it's worth testing. Please share your results!
Yes, my experience too with the GM 24 and others. All this is explained well here, with all sorts of other info. This is still the best written article IMO, even though it’s old now:
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Yes, my experience too with the GM 24 and others. All this is explained well here, with all sorts of other info. This is still the best written article IMO, even though it’s old now:
In the meantime I also received a review sample of the Simera 50mm 1.4.
I haven't fully made up my mind about it yet.
If you are looking for a fast yet close focusing M-mount 50mm this is a really great option.
Contrast is not as good as the Voigtländers though and the mechanical design (while improved over 28 and 35mm) also isn't.
In the meantime I also received a review sample of the Simera 50mm 1.4.
I haven't fully made up my mind about it yet.
If you are looking for a fast yet close focusing M-mount 50mm this is a really great option.
Contrast is not as good as the Voigtländers though and the mechanical design (while improved over 28 and 35mm) also isn't.
E or m mount version?
That article you wrote and linked above is excellent—have linked and referenced multiple times.
Funnny on contrast—that’s what I have been harping about this whole thread. At websized unprocessed, I thought the Lux had more bite WO, but looked close.
Then again, nothing like actually shooting lens is a real world environment.
I will be receiving the Simera 28mm f/1.4 for review soon. I plan to test it using the same methods as with the Simera 50mm, and I will compare its performance to other 28mm lenses.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Funnny on contrast—that’s what I have been harping about this whole thread. At websized unprocessed, I thought the Lux had more bite WO, but looked close.
Then again, nothing like actually shooting lens is a real world environment.
And, agree, I already know the ergo is so-so.
It was challenging to distinguish between the Simera and Leica in the blind tests I posted in this thread. However, when comparing the images side by side at the pixel level, the Leica shows a slight edge in resolution and contrast across the image field, especially at closer distances of 1 to 3 meters.
At infinity, the Leica has an advantage in the center, while the Simera performs better in the mid-field. Therefore, for most images, such as portraits, the Leica will display slightly higher contrast and resolution when shot wide open, but in my opinion, the difference is not very noticeable.
Fred Miranda wrote:
It was challenging to distinguish between the Simera and Leica in the blind tests I posted in this thread. However, when comparing the images side by side at the pixel level, the Leica shows a slight edge in resolution and contrast across the image field, especially at closer distances of 1 to 3 meters.
At infinity, the Leica has an advantage in the center, while the Simera performs better in the mid-field. Therefore, for most images, such as portraits, the Leica will display slightly higher contrast and resolution when shot wide open, but in my opinion, the difference is not very noticeable....Show more →
I think I’ll pick up a copy for myself to try Are you getting a 28 e or m mount version?
Did you try shooting both lenses in dimmer, less contrasty light? Higher contrast light helps lower to mid contrast lenses have more bite.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think I’ll pick up a copy for myself to try Are you getting a 28 e or m mount version?
Did you try shooting both lenses in dimmer, less contrasty light? Higher contrast light helps lower to mid contrast lenses have more bite.
M-mount. I'm really curious to try this one since it's received a lot of praise. I shot in both high and low contrast lighting, and my impressions still hold. It's a modern lens that delivers high contrast and excellent resolution. While it might not quite match the Leica 50/1.4 Lux in the center, the difference is minimal to the point where it's barely noticeable.
This issue isn’t as relevant for mirrorless cameras, but with rangefinder cameras, it’s crucial to get a perfectly aligned copy of the Simera 50. Although Thypoch might pay great attention to alignment, I can’t confirm this since I only tested one copy of the Simera 50, which was perfectly aligned. This is important because the focus throw from 0.7m to infinity is short (shorter than the Leica 50/1.4 ASPH. v1) and when shooting at wide apertures, the depth of field is narrow. Therefore, even a slight misalignment can result in noticeably out-of-focus images.
In the meantime I also received a review sample of the Simera 50mm 1.4.
I haven't fully made up my mind about it yet.
If you are looking for a fast yet close focusing M-mount 50mm this is a really great option.
Contrast is not as good as the Voigtländers though and the mechanical design (while improved over 28 and 35mm) also isn't.
Hi Bastian,
Thanks so much for pointing me to the Simera lenses and sharing my contact with the company! I'll admit, I was a bit skeptical about Thypoch at first, but after checking out their latest Simera 50/1.4, I can definitely see why it's getting all the attention.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Hi Bastian,
Thanks so much for pointing me to the Simera lenses and sharing my contact with the company! I'll admit, I was a bit skeptical about Thypoch at first, but after checking out their latest Simera 50/1.4, I can definitely see why it's getting all the attention.
Nothing to thank me for.
I kept the 28mm 1.4 Simera as I think it renders the nicest bokeh among the fast 28mm M-mount lenses.
When it comes to 50mm lenses there is just such a huge competition which makes it harder to stand out.
Thanks Fred! And I mis-typed. I mean performance of the 50/1.5 on Stock versus modded Sony.
This is a “native” e-mount lens. So going to see if Thypoch is offering a lens that performs best within the mount it’s sold under. Or if it’s not essentially a dummy adapter.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I will be receiving the Simera 28mm f/1.4 for review soon. I plan to test it using the same methods as with the Simera 50mm, and I will compare its performance to other 28mm lenses.
Do you still have the 28 Lux to compare it against? This is the only information missing from Bastian's review.
With the current Thypoch discount I'm tempted to get both the 28 and 50 to compare against the Luxes...
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I have ordered an 50/1.5 Simera-C for e-mount. Would like to see the optical performance of M versus stock* Sony.
Awesome! Looking forward to it. Kind of wish Thypoch offered the cine lenses in other mirrorless mounts as well. I'd be inclined to consider it for Canon RF over M... and chipped would be even better for access to Canon's focusing aids, but would probably be hoping for too much.
rscheffler wrote:
Do you still have the 28 Lux to compare it against? This is the only information missing from Bastian's review.
Sorry, but I’ll test it against the Voigtlander 28/1.5 Nokton (my favorite 28mm so far) and also compare it at f/2.8 to the LLL 28/2.8. I no longer own the 28mm Lux.
That said, I've used the 28mm Lux for a long time and compared it to the Nokton. As shown in the Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5 Nokton review, their performance and rendering are very similar.
