The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Another (not so) quick comparison: Zeiss 100mm f/2 ZF versus Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO

B

blakeslo

Guest
Realize this post is pretty old but just thought it odd that no one mentioned you were comparing the Leica on a DX size sensor and the Zeiss on the FX D3. So you cant compare corner performance as the Leica is having them chopped off. Thats all, still havent made up my mind between a converted Leica and a Zeiss but either should be wonderful!
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Welcome aboard, blakeslo.
I think Stuart Richardson does mention in his original post that "the DMR is a 1.37 crop" camera. I also mention this factor in my own post # 12 and again in # 14, though I call it a 1.33 crop factor which is slightly incorrect. Stuart is right about the 1.37 crop factor.
Besides Stuart made the same comparisons with two 35mm format film cameras (an R6 and an F6) with similar results, so I have great confidence in his findings and conclusions.
By the way with the Leica R lens you will have to make stop down metering while the Zeiss ZF has an aperture lever coupling which enables it to meter on one of the high end F mount Nikon cameras, that take these so-called AI-S type lenses.
 
B

blakeslo

Guest
Thanks for the welcome, i just left Dpreview as all the armchair photogs moved in and was intrigued by the topics present in this forum.

I thought I read all the posts fairly thoroughly but must have missed the reference to the crop. :rolleyes:

Still on the fence over which to buy but my old Hassy experience has me leaning ever so slightly towards the Zeiss. (Although i wish it was produced in a Zeiss factory... sigh)

I know this might be deverging the post from its original intention but if any of you have good/bad experiences with either I'd love to hear them.

Thanks again!
 
B

blakeslo

Guest
P.P.S> I'll be shooting these on my F100/F5 combo (Yes some still do shoot film ;) as well as my D700) So ill have to convert the Leica to the F mount. Diglloyd has done the same for his sample so i have faith in the conversion.
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
If you are only going to be shooting on Nikon, I think the Zeiss is the better choice (unless you already have the 100mm APO). If the Leica is better, it is not a large difference...at least not large enough to justify the stop down metering, extra cost and slower f/stop. That said, it is a spectacular lens.
 
D

ddk

Guest
I think that the DMR and the D3 resolve very similarly...I don't think either has an edge at base ISO...the differences are more the lenses than the sensors. Unfortunately, it is not possible to test the same lenses on both cameras, so the differences remain elusive.
I humbly disagree with your assumption here. I never owned the DMR but I've use both Kodaks and Nikons extensively including the D3, and under the right conditions, like when took these shots, the Nikon isn't in Kodak's class.
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Well, this was the D3 and DMR shot at the same time at the same subject. I can only trust my eyes and the files...the DMR being 10mp and the D3 12mp. Given that the Kodak was full frame at 14mp (and without AA, right?), I would assume that it would outresolve the D3.
 
D

ddk

Guest
Well, this was the D3 and DMR shot at the same time at the same subject. I can only trust my eyes and the files...the DMR being 10mp and the D3 12mp. Given that the Kodak was full frame at 14mp (and without AA, right?), I would assume that it would outresolve the D3.
You're right about the Kodak Slr/n, like I said I never used the DMR but I assume, maybe incorrectly, that since its still a Kodak chip, the difference in character between the two brands would be the same. I don't think that the difference has to do with the mps but rather with the nature of each chip.
 

Rethmeier

New member
I don't want to be negative here,however it would be obvious that a lens that cost
$4000 would outperform a lens that cost $1500 ?
BTW,I own the ZF 100 and use it on my D3x.
 
B

blakeslo

Guest
"I don't want to be negative here, however it would be obvious that a lens that cost$4000 would outperform a lens that cost $1500 ? BTW,I own the ZF 100 and use it on my D3x."

You are not always paying for quality. Sometimes you pay for a name/heritage, which leica has in spades.

My $2400 D700 out performs many cameras that cost 3x more.

With the leica I feel you are paying a lot for the "Made in Germany" label. Just my two cents... although in a logical world you would be right.

Lazer cut diamonds are free of defects and have better cuts, yet hand ground diamonds fetch much higher prices.

Hand woven quilts etc etc, wonderful thought, but more often then not incorrect.

(Note: I once owned a Hassy 120mm "CB" lens that outperformed my coworkers "CFE" [highest end model] lens but since it was their "CB" [entry level] glass it cost me 1/4 the price)
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
The 100mm apo has been around for many years. I bought mine as a brand new demo with ROM contacts for 1800 dollars. It's retail may be 4000 now, but it was not always that much. I don't think you are paying for the label with the Leica lens...at least not primarily. I think you are paying for the very high materials and labor costs, the apo correction, the large degree of hand assembly and the extensive quality control (which, let's face it, doesn't catch everything, but at the same time it is a huge portion of the cost in a Leica lens...they hand check every lens extensively).
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Zeiss ZF 2/100 Makro web picture .-)


Nikon D300 • Zeiss ZF 2/100mm • 1/640 sec. at f/4 ISO 200
 

David K

Workshop Member
Stuart, thanks for your great effort here. This is the kind of testing I find quite useful... maybe not as scientific as some but it has real world significance.

Lloyd, interesting that you mention the Coastal Optics lens. I recently toured their facility which happens to be only 10 miles or so from my home. I was immensely impressed with their professionalism and the equipment they have at their disposal for lens testing and manufacturing is simply unbelievable.
 

Hacker

New member
Thanks Stuart. I've converted the Leica 100mm, and the ZF 100 has always been on my mind simply because of the faster stop but not an issue with stop down metering as it works well with the D700 or D3(x) cameras. Besides, there is focus confirmation, so I need the advantage to the Zeiss is just the extra stop (price difference aside).

Would you be able to post some pictures of the ZF 100 with the green/magenta fringing?

Cheers,

Stephen
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Hi Stephen,

I did post them...they are in post #2. Glad to hear the 100mm apo is serving you well in Nikon mount. I may change it at some point.
 
Top