Yet another 4300 setup

[snikolaev]

Recent thread about 4/300 inspired me to try this one. Meet the Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 4/300:

I adopted it to my Canon 5D using Fotodiox Kiev-66 -> Canon adapter ($30 at eBay). Here is my even more boring garage view:

I have nothig else in 300mm range to compare it with, so I took C/Y Sonnar 2.8/135 and put it on Mutar II extender. Yes, I know, this is not fair, but this is what I have. Below are results, center goes first:
CZJ @f4

Left - CZJ @f5.6, Right - C/Y @f2.8 (effective f5.6)

Left - CZJ @f8, Right - C/Y @f4 (effective f8)

Left - CZJ @f11, Right - C/Y @f5.6 (effective f11)

Left upper corner palm:
CZJ @f4

Left - CZJ @f5.6, Right - C/Y @f2.8 (effective f5.6)

Left - CZJ @f8, Right - C/Y @f4 (effective f8)

Left - CZJ @f11, Right - C/Y @f5.6 (effective f11)

Looks like MF glass is not that bad c&aring to 35mm. Shallower DOF is IMHO a plus too. Yas, it's damn heavy, but if you carry both 35mm and Contax 645, this might be a saving actually - it fits both worlds.

 

[nickser]

Hi Sergei,

It looks great on the camera.

In the post you say

"Left - CZJ @f11, Right - C/Y @f5.6 (effective f11)"

If I'm not mistaken the depth of field is still for a f5.6 aperture lens, but the light allowed onto the film/sensor suffers a 2 stop loss with the 2x convertor, making it 'f11' in light gathering terms. So you should stop down to f11 on the c/y lens as well to compare with the czj.

Paul

 

[snikolaev]

Probably yes. I'm not so strong in optics. However, if I do that, c/y would produce even deeper DOF, right? This is the point - even when I keep it @f5.6, it gives me deeper DOF than czj @f11. May be physical dimensions (diameter of glass?) make the DOF shallower on czj, I don't know. And BTW, see how things got much worse when we go higher than f5.6.