DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Contax ND

ADOBE RAW PLUG-IN:

Is the ND the only camera with individualized sensor profiles, or do the EOS 1Ds and others also have them? If not, this could add an unwanted level of difficulty in getting the ND supported.

DUST SPOTS:

During my New Zealand trip, I ended up with dust spots on two occasions for a total of 40-50 shots from my 1200+ shots. Once, the spots went away by themselves (when I discovered them they had already gone away), and the other time I used my squeeze blower.

So far I have found getting rid of the spots in Photoshop a breeze, although in the kind of shots I tend to take sometimes you couldn't see them
happy.gif
.

BATTERY DRAIN:

I had a question for the people who are getting ludicrously bad battery life, as opposed to just plain bad, like me (I ended up getting around 120 shots per charge). Are you using 645 lenses with the NAM-1 adapter? I recall reading in some N1 threads that the adapter tends to drain batteries.

85mm/f1.4:

A question for Marc, if I recall that you have or have tried the 85mm/f1.4 N-mount. Any comments pro / con in comparison with the 645 80mm/f2? I'm leaning to the 85 for the extra f-stop (and if the NAM-1 battery drain is true, add that), although it appears from the specs the 80mm/NAM-1 combo may be more compact and lighter.

My ND Gallery:

http://improbablystructuredlayers.net/

Here's a link to my web site where I have around 180 ND images. They're under the Beauty link, all except the first section are ND shots.

Cheers,

DJ
 
DJ, If you already have a 645 and 80/2 then getting the N-85/1.4 is very expensive. That said, I have both. But I'm a speed freak and will always go for the fastest choice first. Both produce beautiful images. The 85/1.4 is bigger and a bit heavier. The 645 lenses I use most on the ND are the 120/4 Macro and 140/2.8. The 140/2.8 is important because there is no prime N lens in that focal length. They need a 135/2 N or 180/2.8 for this camera and the N1.
 
> Marc wrote,

DJ, If you already have a 645 and 80/2 then getting the N-85/1.4 is very expensive. That said, I have both. But I'm a speed freak and will always go for the fastest choice first. Both produce beautiful images. The 85/1.4 is bigger and a bit heavier.

Marc,

I also have both, and additionally I have the 24-85 N1 zoom. I am not sure I would buy the 85/1.4 again. Of course, it gives you speed that the other lenses dont have, which is presumably the primary reason to buy it (although there has been some suggestion that the larger image circle of the 80/2 will not produce as sharp an image in 35mm), but I have found the extra speed very difficult to use. If you open the lens to 1.4, there is almost no depth of field, and my attempts to use the 1.4 in dark settings (a jazz band at night) have been dismal failures because I cannot get sharp enough focus. I suppose another important use of the lens would be portraits in good light. There you could get sharp focus and good bokeh. I havent tried that yet.

As to sharpness, at this point I cannot tell any difference between the 80/2, the 85/1.4 and the 24-85. If I had only the N1 and not a 645, I think I would choose the 24-85, which is just as sharp, has quite pleasant bokeh, is lighter, and is a good all purpose lens.

Bill Lafferty Pittsburgh
 
Bill, 1.4/85 is absolutely indispensable in studio when you need to do focusing in dim light. 24-85 is much darker, especially at 85mm. Even if you use f/16, focusing wide open gives you the sharpest picture.
Using this lens for reportage work is difficult, as you have pointed out. That's what 2.8/17-35 is for. Even though it is two stops slower, it allowes much longer handheld exposures and much larger DOF at the same aperture.
 
Bill, in very dim situations I often shoot in, like wedding receptions, I've found my hit rate grows higher by manually focusing. I use the one time focus button to get in range and finish up manually by concentrating on the eyes of the subject. I'm not sure I'd agree that the 24-85 is as sharp as the 85/1.4 when at equal apertures. Stop the 85/1.4 down to f/4 and compare them. I think you'll be suprized. And your notion to shoot in brighter conditions will reveal the wonderful qualities of the 85/1.4 when shot wide open. Take a look in the Gallery >search>fotografz> open the cowboy and cowgirl talking at the fence picture. That was shot with an 85/1.2 @ f/1.2
 
Marc, Bill and Irakly - thanks for the feedback. I currently don't have any 645 lenses, nor the NAM-1 adapter, so it's all from scratch. I do have the 24-85 and 70-300, both of which I love, but I need something for available light, and I'm not all that fond of the 50mm perspective. In my RTS days I used the 85/1.4 and 35/1.4 the most. I will probably go with the 85, though not right away. My bank account needs to replenish - I don't like stuff sitting on my credit card
happy.gif
.

BTW, Lexar just announced 40x CF cards, which should help considerably with the challenged buffer. Here's a link:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0302/03022501lexar40xprocf.asp

Cheers,

DJ
 
Wouldn't that be an oversight! I wonder if we can get a statement from Contax either way. I'll try and see, but I won't hold my breath for an answer.
 
From the Press Release:

"Write Acceleration cards also function in standard mode in cameras that do not support Write Acceleration."

which means we won't get the WA benefit, but we'll get the 40x which is the bulk of the improvement, good enough to make it worthwhile.
 
Back
Top