CV 12mm on X-Pro1 ? :)

dcsang · 07-31-2012

Just curious if anyone has tried the LTM (with M adapter) CV 12mm on the X-Pro 1... interested to find out/hear

Cheers,
Dave

Godfrey · 07-31-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcsang

Just curious if anyone has tried the LTM (with M adapter) CV 12mm on the X-Pro 1... interested to find out/hear

I've not seen any examples, but I have seen examples from the 15mm. They weren't all that good, so I suspect that the 12mm will also not fare very well.

rbelyell · 07-31-2012

there was a recent thread about the 15; there is a new thread about the zeiss zm 25; then there is this thread. it seems to me there is a very real perception amongst the members that there is a serious IQ issue using the xpro and wide RF lenses. i think it would be tremendously beneficial to those who both have this camera and those like me who are thinking of investing in that camera, to perhaps start a sticky for 'pro' and 'con' examples of the xpro and WA RF lenses. this way there is one central spot to which we could all refer to make our judgements about these combos. unfortunately i dont have the expertise to put this together...
tony

dcsang · 07-31-2012

Hmmm.. the 15mm didn't look all that bad - I wonder what people are looking for.. is it the usual suspect (i.e. "corner sharpness")

Cheers,
Dave

dcsang · 07-31-2012

I can provide samples of the Zeiss 21mm (and the 25mm for that matter) - but, as I said above, I wonder what the problem is with "image quality" on the X-Pro1 - the more I hear stuff like that bandied about here, the more I think I'm swimming with the folks from DPReview forums

Cheers,
Dave

rbelyell · 07-31-2012

please do provide samples! the only thing that will counter 'negative press' are positive examples/experience. many times 'negatives' take over the reality. i think many of us want the reality to be different from what we've heard, or what we've seen. folks have had years of looking at striking images with theses lenses used on the M8/M9. i think what folks want--i know what i want--is to see images that are at least comparable to those. so lets see 'um!

n2hhr · 07-31-2012

Here are some samples using this lens....

http://markhilliardatelier.wordpress.com

JayC · 07-31-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by n2hhr

Here are some samples using this lens....

http://markhilliardatelier.wordpress.com

A big decision I am trying to make right now is to sell my m8.2 and lenses (keep m2 and 35), and get the xp1 with 18(14), 35, and the VC12. I would like to use the 12 for real estate photography. I could get rid of my big Nikon d3 as it is overkill for what I need. These example might have just done it for me.

dcsang · 07-31-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbelyell

please do provide samples! the only thing that will counter 'negative press' are positive examples/experience. many times 'negatives' take over the reality. i think many of us want the reality to be different from what we've heard, or what we've seen. folks have had years of looking at striking images with theses lenses used on the M8/M9. i think what folks want--i know what i want--is to see images that are at least comparable to those. so lets see 'um!

ya see.. I don't get where this "negative press" is coming from to be honest. Then again, I'm not surfing this board as regularly as some other folks so maybe I'm missing all this "negative press" - the way I look at it is as follows:
If the image looks good to me.. it's a good image.
I don't go hunting corners for sharpness.
I don't go looking at a digital image at 100% and scouring the frame for any aberrations (chromatic or otherwise

)
I look at it and, if I like it, it's a keeper.

So, if you're looking for images that look just as good as "striking images with theses lenses used on the M8/M9." then I would suggest you get an M8/M9 and use these lenses - otherwise you'll be comparing apples to oranges

Cheers,
Dave

Trius · 07-31-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcsang

I don't go looking at a digital image at 100% and scouring the frame for any aberrations (chromatic or otherwise

)

Cheers,
Dave

Must. Resist.

Dave.

Aberrations.

kzphoto · 07-31-2012

Looks good!

rbelyell · 07-31-2012

mark, ive seen photos with the cv15 and they totally lacked detail and clarity. however, your pictures with the 12 seem quite clear and maintain good detail throughout the frame. does that match your experience? have you any experience with the 15 or othe WA RF lenses? thanks for your post.
tony

scho · 07-31-2012

A couple more with the CV 12 on the XP1. Not that easy to focus, but otherwise no major issues.

dcsang · 07-31-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by scho

A couple more with the CV 12 on the XP1. Not that easy to focus, but otherwise no major issues.

Thanks for these... they look rather nice IMHO - and it seems it's not half bad for a nice uber wide that I can also use on my M7s

Cheers,
Dave

Jamie Pillers · 07-31-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by scho

A couple more with the CV 12 on the XP1. Not that easy to focus, but otherwise no major issues.

How can a 12mm lens be hard to focus?? And for the landscape photos you've provided (nice, by the way), it seems that setting the lens on somthing around 10 to 15 feet ought to have everything from close-up to infinity in focus all day long!

n2hhr · 08-01-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamie Pillers

How can a 12mm lens be hard to focus?? And for the landscape photos you've provided (nice, by the way), it seems that setting the lens on somthing around 10 to 15 feet ought to have everything from close-up to infinity in focus all day long!

It is not hard at all. If I wish to verify focus I turn on the EVF and press the magnify button. But if the truth is to be known, I usually just zone focus and pay attention to the DOF scale. All of the images on my blog post on the CV 12mm are done as zone focus!

I will tell you that I use the Fuji M to X adapter which REALLY helps since it has the ability to correct pin cushion (I set +3), color fringing (none for the CV 12mm) and Corner darkening ( I set +1)

n2hhr · 08-01-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbelyell

mark, ive seen photos with the cv15 and they totally lacked detail and clarity. however, your pictures with the 12 seem quite clear and maintain good detail throughout the frame. does that match your experience? have you any experience with the 15 or othe WA RF lenses? thanks for your post.
tony

Tony, I have not had a 15mm to play with, but have friends who swear by it on the X Pro 1! I am toying with picking one up as they are very reasonable in price!

gdi · 07-31-2012

I have tried it briefly and agree with Mark and Scho. It seems to work well.

rbelyell · 08-01-2012

thank you mark.
tony

gdi · 08-03-2012

Just an update, I was able to take a few quick shots with 12mm on the X-Pro and M9 side by side. The X-Pro shots are definitely passable - but there is some smearing in the corner and side of the image. The M9 has some smearing in the very extreme corners only. This is of course to be expected, but if I didn't have the M9, I would be good with the X-Pro. (But, I guess the adapter - Rainbow- could have something to do with it as well.)

Also, during the same session, I tried the OM-D with the 7-14 Panasonic lens. At the equivalent of 14mm (7mm) the smearing is much better than the X-Pro and almost as good as the M9/12mm. (Not that the OM-D test has anything to do with the 12mm). Really an amazing little setup...

PhotoMat · 08-03-2012

Don't have the CV 12, but I did post a few samples shot with the 15 in this link:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...d.php?t=122190

I included some edge blow ups from one image to show the level of smearing that I encountered. As gdi mentioned in the previous post, I too think that some of the issues that I experienced could be exacerbated by my adapter.

smcclelland · 08-04-2012

New member here but thought I'd add to the conversation as I purchased the CV12mm M-mount a week or two after buying my X-Pro 1 as I didn't find the 18mm wide enough. Below are a few samples taken with the combo using the Fujifilm M-mount Adapter.

F-Stop may not be totally accurate as I'm going off memory since the CV12 doesn't communicate what aperture was used to the camera.

f22 ISO 200 2.0s

f5.6 ISO 800 1/125

dct · 08-05-2012

OK, if this is the "bad" IQ we are expecting from this camera and CV12 or CV15... I can definitly live with it

Trius · 08-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by smcclelland

New member here but thought I'd add to the conversation as I purchased the CV12mm M-mount a week or two after buying my X-Pro 1 as I didn't find the 18mm wide enough. Below are a few samples taken with the combo using the Fujifilm M-mount Adapter.

F-Stop may not be totally accurate as I'm going off memory since the CV12 doesn't communicate what aperture was used to the camera.

f22 ISO 200 2.0s

Too many condos!

smcclelland · 08-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trius

Too many condos!

I've asked Adobe to integrate a Condo Removal brush into CS7 so I can have a clean Toronto skyline shot without having to drive to the other side of the lake.