Zeiss 35mm f2 and Zeiss 100 f2 macro

[Steen]

With regards to autofocus settings
I believe the autofocus settings are irrelevant when using Non-CPU manual focus lenses like the ZF lenses.
But you can use the so-called Electronic Rangefinder i.e. the viewfinder focus indicator (green dot) to confirm it when the subject is in focus. See p. 82 in the manual.
And with the Multiselector (joystick button) you can manually select among all the focuspoints after half-pressing the shutterbutton shortly. With the Multiselector Lock (the ring around the Multiselector) you can lock the focuspoint so that you don't change focuspoint by pushing the Multiselector by accident. See about Focus Point Selection at p. 76 - 77.
/Steen

 

[toddbee]

/steen,
thanks for alll the great tips. im going to give them a whirl today.
todd

 

[toddbee]

After receiving the 35 f2. i just couldn't resist. i picked up the 100 f2 this weekend. all i can say is wow. these zeiss lenses are by far the best kept secret in the nikon camp. i simply cannot convey how much depth,sharpness and creaminess the images have. you would be hard pressed to say that they weren't taken with a leica m6/7. incredible

 

[willie_901]

I find the D300 green dot focus indicator works well with a my manual focus AI/AIS lenses. I do use a Katz-Eye spit-circle focus screen on my D200 and the green dot method agrees very closely with the spit-circle method. The D300 finder is brighter and the AF system is more effective than the D200's, so I don't think the Katz-Eye really pays off for the D300 body.

Also, the D200/300/700/3 all have simple and convenient methods to tell the camera what manual focus lens is in use. Once this is set up properly, it takes about 2 seconds to set the camera up after a lens change.

 

[GrahamWelland]

I've been a big fan of the Zeiss ZF glass for a while now and have the 18/3.5, 25/2.8, 35/2 & 50/2. I fully agree about the quality of the glass and great rendering you get from these lenses. Let's also not forget that as manual focus lenses go these feel as good as, if not better than my Leica M glass. Absolutely buttery smooth focus action. :toocool:

The only one that doesn't spank my Nikon lenses is the 18 and that's only because the 14-24 is just so out of this world - it is however a lot more portable. The 24-70 is very versatile but the look of the 35/50 ZF lenses make me leave it on the D3 most of the time.

These make a great combination with the D700 - almost a match made in heaven.

The 100mm has my NAS salivation going at the moment although it may have to wait until after the D3X - the next serious purchase.

 

[asabet]

I recently got the ZF 35, and that lens is an absolute keeper. I like it even more than I liked the 50 makro (which I thought very highly of but sold).

Now I'm trying to decide between the ZF 85 and the Nikon AF 85/1.4.

Sold the 24-70. It's a great lens, better than the Canon 24-70 or 24-105, but it's really big and couldn't match the pop of the Zeiss primes.

 

[Steen]

Amin, I like my ZF 1.4/85 a lot.
I believe I have already once showed you a crop from this shot in the "Photographing the Photographer (D3 Street!)" thread.

Here's a crop illustrating its out of focus rendering and its ability to separate the subject from the background in a very three dimensional way

And an actual pixels crop illustrating its resolving power.

Nikon D300 • Zeiss ZF 1.4/85mm • 1/2000 sec. at f/2.8 ISO 200

 

[asabet]

Thanks Steen, those are great examples. I think I prefer the look of the Zeiss to the Nikon. My indecision is mostly due to wondering how handy autofocus will be.

 

[Steen]

Yes, I agree it definitely is an important point. With my D300 I do miss quite a lot of 85mm and 100mm shots because of misfocusing manually. On the other hand I like to focus manually because it makes me feel like being in control ... and actually photographing again
Many have said it is a lot easier to manual focus with the better viewfinder on D3/D700, and in fact the better viewfinder is the one single factor that makes me want to upgrade at some point.

 

[asabet]

Yes, I agree it definitely is an important point. With my D300 I do miss quite a lot of 85mm and 100mm shots because of misfocusing manually. On the other hand I like to focus manually because it makes me feel like being in control ... and actually photographing again

That's a big part of it for me as well. It's just more fun to do photography manually.

 

[toddbee]

I cant's express how much i am enjoying these lenses. The 35 ZF and 100ZF. I absolutely love the manual focus and feel of these lenses. I recently sold the 24-70 2.8 and don't miss it at all. The pop and look of the zeiss captured images are amazing. My biggest problem is i can never decide if i want the 100 or the 35 on the camera.

 

[innerimager]

I'll join in the love fest. I have the 35/2, 50/2 and 100/2, all fabulous. It's affirming to read about some selling their 24-70 in favor of the primes. I sold a much loved and used 28-70, and resisted getting the 24-70, as I prefer having either the 35/2 or 50/2 as my standard lens on the D3. Having started with Nikon DSLRs, I moved to Leica 2 years ago and came to prefer manual focus and the results of top prime lenses. So when I added a D3, I picked up these Zeiss lenses and love the experience of MF using the electronic range finder. The ability to move the "rangefinder" around by selecting focus points is in fact a definite advantage over traditional RF focusing, especially when narrow DOF is being used. best...Peter

 

[Steen]

Zeiss ZF 2/100, a cactus

Nikon D300 • Zeiss ZF 2/100mm • 1/50 sec. at f/8 ISO 200

 

[woodyspedden]

I've been a big fan of the Zeiss ZF glass for a while now and have the 18/3.5, 25/2.8, 35/2 & 50/2. I fully agree about the quality of the glass and great rendering you get from these lenses. Let's also not forget that as manual focus lenses go these feel as good as, if not better than my Leica M glass. Absolutely buttery smooth focus action. :toocool:

The only one that doesn't spank my Nikon lenses is the 18 and that's only because the 14-24 is just so out of this world - it is however a lot more portable. The 24-70 is very versatile but the look of the 35/50 ZF lenses make me leave it on the D3 most of the time.

These make a great combination with the D700 - almost a match made in heaven.



The 100mm has my NAS salivation going at the moment although it may have to wait until after the D3X - the next serious purchase.

Hey Graham

Don't disagree about the results but make sure that either you or your dealer checks the focus stiffness before accepting the lens. The user variability ranges from "like stirring molasses with a stiff paddle" to "this lens focusses with no troubles at all. I am sure that both are true (and sadly I had the one that begins with Molasses) but you need the one you can trust.

Woody

 

[robmac]

+1 on Woody's comment.

Been there and done that with ZF (the 35 (twice), 50M and 100)and between the wrench needed to turn the focus ring on my 100 and the CA and purple fringing (actually green in my case), with all of them, despite the excellent resolution and bokeh, I gave up and moved on.

This from someone who loves the older CZ and Hassy-Zeiss glass (thus it's not an anti-Zeiss thing) and CV SL glass (thus not an anti-Cosina thing ;>). I'll leave it at that.

That said, if you have good ZF samples and they deliver what you want, all the power to you; that's all that matters.

Also agree on the experience of MF, regardless of lens brand. You're more engaged in the experience and have to slow down and think of lighting angle, DoF placement, etc vs. just snapping away and selecting the best of the mess.

 

[GrahamWelland]

Well I got my Zeiss 100/2 and I'm pleased to say that it's one of the 'buttery smooth' variety vs 'turn with a wrench' model. :thumbup:

I did some tripod resolution testing with it just after I got it last weekend with my D3X and the results were pretty decent. (Ignore the blur from the wind & compression etc).

Full image:

This is a crop from the previous image:

So I'm not too disappointed. I know that I could have shot even cleaner images if the wind hadn't been howling a gale at the time.

Btw, I use Nikon Capture NX2 (these are straight from NX2) and I simply don't get to see any CA even with the Zeiss glass :grin:

 

[fotografz]

I'm a huge fan of the ZF lenses, but perhaps for a slightly different reason.

While I use a pretty full compliment of Nikon glass on a D3 & D700, those AF lenses are primarily for shooting weddings where every shot has to be in focus ... 14-24, 24-70, 50/1.4AFS, 85/1.4, 100/2.8VR Macro, and the incomparible 200/2VR.

But on my F6 shooting true B&W film, it's the Zeiss lenses all the way. The contrast of the Zeiss optics makes B&W really sing. I outfitted the F6 with a split microprism screen and magnifier which increased the speed and focus hit ratio to almost no missed shots even with street shooting. ZF 18, 25/2.8, 28/2 (amazing!), 50/2 Macro(also amazing!), 85/1.4 (stunning!) and 100/2 macro (mine is buttery smooth) ... I have the VC 180/4 APO for tele work. The F6/Zeiss outfit basically replaced my film Leica M & R.

This combination is one of my favorite 35mm set-ups that I've ever used.

 

[Steen]

Marc, would you at some point share your findings and conclusions with us about your new Nikon 1.4/50G AF-S now that we have seen Lars' pictures from his new Sigma 1.4/50, which you have also owned yourself ?
I do like my Zeiss ZF lenses a lot, but now and then autofocus would come in handy and I've been thinking about getting one of those two new 1.4/50 lenses.
Apparently we still have to wait for some new, fast, high end mojo primes from Nikon. So many new high-end cameras (D3X, D3, D700, D300, D90) but no new and fast high-end AF-S primes to replace the very old AF versions. What a disappointing PMA.

 

[Steen]

I've done some sukkulent macro studies lately using the Zeiss ZF 2/100, here are some of the cactuses

all the above images with Nikon D300 & Zeiss ZF 2/100mm​

 

[fotografz]

I've done some sukkulent macro studies lately using the Zeiss ZF 2/100, here are some of the cactuses

all the above images with Nikon D300 & Zeiss ZF 2/100mm​

Wow, if you had told me those were done with a Leica I would have believed it.

To answer your question about the Nikon AFS 50/1.4G. I had the Sigma for awhile, and it's a darned good lens. When the Nikon became available, I got one and afterwards sold the Sigma.

The Nikon is smaller and lighter, and the size really "fits" the D700 perfectly. I noted that the Nikon AFS was a bit quicker. Bokeh on both lenses is very nice ... I slightly prefered the Nikon in this area.

The one thing I did note is that the Sigma tended to Halo the bright whites and specular highlights where the Nikon supressed them better. Things like white type, rim lighting and bright details appear sharper and cleaner with the Nikon. But it's splitting hairs ... the real reason for me was the smaller size and bit quicker AF.