A
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!
Nothing makes more sense that being eos mount. Exciting, very. 16 or 21 mp possible for new Canons this fall (besides 1Ds3). Match this camera to gaijin glass. Marriage made in heaven. :toocool:
Eduardo
Eduardo
johnastovall
Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
:thumbs:Yes, it must be!!
Just wonder if they'll do any of the Contax N zooms?
Just wonder if they'll do any of the Contax N zooms?
Last edited:
Stuart Richardson
Active member
How disappointed will you all be if it is Zeiss Exakta? Kidding kidding...
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Or for there own camera. LOL
jonoslack
Active member
Olympus E series of course :ROTFL:
Arne Hvaring
Well-known member
It will require a substantial redesign of the aperture mechanism from fully manually activated to electronic. Maybe that's why it took them so long. A 2/50 Macro on my 1DsIII would be tempting. Let's hope you're right 
I have a 50/2 enroute (Nikon mount nat). I will be the ZF line's last attempt to impress (think many of the line are over-priced re: performance). Got a good deal on a demo, so if I like it and stay Canon, I'll swap it for a ZE copy (assuming ZE is what common sense would dictate..)
JimCollum
Member
have you tried the 100/2 MakroPlanar yet? I've played around with it and it rivels the Hassey 110/2, with the added benefit of being a macro lens
I've owned the 35/2 (twice) and the 100/2.
35/2 - probably the 2nd best after (if it lives up to rep re: CA correction) the 50/2. Sharp, etc, etc - nice bokeh BUT like most of the ZF line prone to PF and not as well-corrected for CA as one would hope. That said, a clean USED 35/2 goes for under $700 which is pretty good. I know Arne H had at least one bum copy of the 35 ZF, but mine, mechanically were fine.
100/2 - Sharp as hell, but will PF and more prone to CA at wider apertures than $1500 price, IMHO, would justify (the CV 125 APO and a used Leica 100 macro are the same $$ or less and just as sharp with true APO behavior).
Like some other users of the 100/2, my copy had a focus ring that was the stiffest I've ever experienced - twisting it was like trying to stir wet cement with a stick. Popflash indicated that the 100's focus ring is the top compliant they get about the ZF line. If the 100 was APO and mechanical QC was better it would be a barn burner.
The Hassy 110/2 is sweet (need to re-acquire one) and while not APO by any means has that 'old school' Zeiss mechanics, etc that make it so (justifiably) respected.
Depending how Photokina shapes up re; new offerings from Zeiss and CV, and if I make a switch to Nikon I may look at a used 35/2 again or 28/2 for more up-close interior shots - as much as the 28 can show some nasty CA in the classic tree branches against backlighting situations.
I have the CV 90/3.5 and 180/4 APOs and for the $$$ (under $500 ea) they're are barn burners vs what I think Zeiss/Cosina is asking for some of the ZF units. Cosina managed to put APO correction, uber-sharp performance and creamy bokeh in three of their 'bargain' SL lenses (90, 180 and 125 - at original price); there is no reason wny Zeiss/Cosina could/should not have done the same.
Maybe my expectations are too high, but for what is likely just over a $1000 average price per ZF lens.....
35/2 - probably the 2nd best after (if it lives up to rep re: CA correction) the 50/2. Sharp, etc, etc - nice bokeh BUT like most of the ZF line prone to PF and not as well-corrected for CA as one would hope. That said, a clean USED 35/2 goes for under $700 which is pretty good. I know Arne H had at least one bum copy of the 35 ZF, but mine, mechanically were fine.
100/2 - Sharp as hell, but will PF and more prone to CA at wider apertures than $1500 price, IMHO, would justify (the CV 125 APO and a used Leica 100 macro are the same $$ or less and just as sharp with true APO behavior).
Like some other users of the 100/2, my copy had a focus ring that was the stiffest I've ever experienced - twisting it was like trying to stir wet cement with a stick. Popflash indicated that the 100's focus ring is the top compliant they get about the ZF line. If the 100 was APO and mechanical QC was better it would be a barn burner.
The Hassy 110/2 is sweet (need to re-acquire one) and while not APO by any means has that 'old school' Zeiss mechanics, etc that make it so (justifiably) respected.
Depending how Photokina shapes up re; new offerings from Zeiss and CV, and if I make a switch to Nikon I may look at a used 35/2 again or 28/2 for more up-close interior shots - as much as the 28 can show some nasty CA in the classic tree branches against backlighting situations.
I have the CV 90/3.5 and 180/4 APOs and for the $$$ (under $500 ea) they're are barn burners vs what I think Zeiss/Cosina is asking for some of the ZF units. Cosina managed to put APO correction, uber-sharp performance and creamy bokeh in three of their 'bargain' SL lenses (90, 180 and 125 - at original price); there is no reason wny Zeiss/Cosina could/should not have done the same.
Maybe my expectations are too high, but for what is likely just over a $1000 average price per ZF lens.....
Stuart Richardson
Active member
What is PF?
As for the 110/2 -- the best thing about it is that it covers 6x6 rather than 35mm. On 6x6 it looks and feels like the 75/1.4 summilux, only sharper and with better tonality. Bokeh is even.
As for the 100mm f/2 ZF -- I liked it a lot. I agree that it had a bit too much CA, but that was mostly wide open. Stopped down to f/2.8 or f/4 and it is was pretty much gone. The only other thing I did not like is that it focused backwards -- Nikon manual focus is a real pain in the ass for that reason. I am sure the Canon version won't have that, so no worries there.
As for the 110/2 -- the best thing about it is that it covers 6x6 rather than 35mm. On 6x6 it looks and feels like the 75/1.4 summilux, only sharper and with better tonality. Bokeh is even.
As for the 100mm f/2 ZF -- I liked it a lot. I agree that it had a bit too much CA, but that was mostly wide open. Stopped down to f/2.8 or f/4 and it is was pretty much gone. The only other thing I did not like is that it focused backwards -- Nikon manual focus is a real pain in the ass for that reason. I am sure the Canon version won't have that, so no worries there.
PF - purple (and, on occasion, green) fringing (used on 1Ds2)
Should have the 50/2 on Tuesday, looking fwd to seeing how it stands up - there is every indication that (in part due to rumored ED glass) it should be impressive. Was reluctant to purchase after my prior experience, but price was right, so decided it was worth a spin around the block.
Should have the 50/2 on Tuesday, looking fwd to seeing how it stands up - there is every indication that (in part due to rumored ED glass) it should be impressive. Was reluctant to purchase after my prior experience, but price was right, so decided it was worth a spin around the block.
Arne Hvaring
Well-known member
Rob, I'm looking forward to get your impressions of the 2/50 ZF, reportedly this is one of the top performers in the new Zeiss line. For Nikon I don't need it since I have an outstanding Ais 2,8/55 Micro Nikkor, but I've been missing a 50 macro with auto stop-down for Canon since I sold the (rather bland) 2,5/50 Canon Macro.
I have btw a quite good 2/35 ZF Distagon now, not sure if it really outresolves the D3, but microcontrast and colours seem excellent.
I have btw a quite good 2/35 ZF Distagon now, not sure if it really outresolves the D3, but microcontrast and colours seem excellent.
What the ZFs provide for me is that 3D feel and wonderfully consistant Zeiss color ... that, and the tactile feel and look of the build quality justify the price IMHO. None of my V/Cs, while great for the money, deliver those same qualities. If Zeiss would deliver a 180 or 200 ZF I'd be all over it to complete the collection.
Arne
Lens SHOULD be here today. Glad to hear you finally got a nice 35/2 after he issues you had.
I actually just sold a Nikon 55 micro - was nice enough lens, but just didn't do anything for me. I think sometimes you just take (or don't take) to a lens.
Marc,
The ZF's do have that older Zeiss 3D effect in many cases, consistent color, etc. I just wished, for the $$$, they'd focus on using more ED glass and would tighten-up the mechanical QC -- it's FAR better than say Canon's, but could still use some tweaking.
Without a doubt part of the 'designed for a price point' aspect of the CVs is the build-quality and 'feel' vs ZF. It's good, but lack IF and just not as smooth and sophisticated as the Zeiss line. That said for 1/3 or 1/2 what some ZF units cost, I'll sacrifice some handling aspects for given their optical performance. If they were closer in price and I didn't 'need' APO....
I'd be very surprised if you didn't see Zeiss/Cosina expand the FL range of the Z_ lines.
As for ZE - the more auto-stop down lenses we have for Canon the better. It finally gives us 'easy' alternatives and might help kick Canon in the ass to get their lens QC act together.
Lens SHOULD be here today. Glad to hear you finally got a nice 35/2 after he issues you had.
I actually just sold a Nikon 55 micro - was nice enough lens, but just didn't do anything for me. I think sometimes you just take (or don't take) to a lens.
Marc,
The ZF's do have that older Zeiss 3D effect in many cases, consistent color, etc. I just wished, for the $$$, they'd focus on using more ED glass and would tighten-up the mechanical QC -- it's FAR better than say Canon's, but could still use some tweaking.
Without a doubt part of the 'designed for a price point' aspect of the CVs is the build-quality and 'feel' vs ZF. It's good, but lack IF and just not as smooth and sophisticated as the Zeiss line. That said for 1/3 or 1/2 what some ZF units cost, I'll sacrifice some handling aspects for given their optical performance. If they were closer in price and I didn't 'need' APO....
I'd be very surprised if you didn't see Zeiss/Cosina expand the FL range of the Z_ lines.
As for ZE - the more auto-stop down lenses we have for Canon the better. It finally gives us 'easy' alternatives and might help kick Canon in the ass to get their lens QC act together.
Like I said, my ZFs all have been stellar QC (except the 18's hood is too tight) ... and I'd hazard a quess that if the ZFs had been ASPHs & APOs they'd be more than I'd want to pay for manual focus lenses on a digital camera. New Leica Rs are all over 3K ... some well over that ... which is more than I'd want to pay that's for darn sure.
ZFs are a decent compromise IMHO ... in most cases, better than Nikon Primes, MUCH better than Canon W/As ... so a decent value to get that Zeiss pop and color. The V/C are also a great value ... but to my eye lack the certain something ... so for me were a waste of money since I used them once ... lauded their ability for the money ... then rarely or never used them again :banghead: That is something I really need to stop doing.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
I'm lost on this. Is this confirmed or rumor. Links
Robert Campbell
Well-known member
A teaser on the Zeiss site; ZE lenses are coming, but what does the E represent? Canon EF? Olympus E System? Or what else?
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Olympus is my bet