Zeiss 100mm

[vieri]

Not to say a 14-24 or 24-70 would not be nice to have but I am trying to avoid big again plus I believe and still do Primes will will be better than zooms. But I am open to be wrong on that and the new Nikon zooms may prove that theory wrong.

Hello Guy, I am also a prime kinda guy, my Nikon kit as far as primes is:
- 10.5 f2.8 fisheye;
- 35 f2;
- 50 f1.4;
- 85 f1.4;
- 105 f2 DC;
- 105 f2.8 macro VR;
- 180 f2.8;

while zooms are:
- 14-24 f2.8;
- 70-200 f2.8 VR;

However, since the 17-35 & 28-70, Nikon WA & standard zooms have been better than 2.8 primes in equivalent range (18, 20, 24, 28; the 35 f2 is a very tough one to beat IMHO); as the 14-24 got better than the 17-35 (and is better than the 14 f2.8 at 14mm) and the 24-70 better than the 28-70 - do your math... Of course, this doesn't count where and if speed is an issue, of where DOF control is important: 24-70 wouldn't be able to beat 35 f2 or 50 f1.8 - 1.4, or the fantastic 85 f1.4 in this case. As well, if one is willing to give up AF those Zeiss are looking very sweet, very likely (I didn't try them) sweeter than the new zooms.

Other than that, I'd go with 14-24 + 24-70. Two lens, do it all - they are big, especially the 14-24 is a huge bugger, but if you have to lug around 4-5 lenses instead, the advantage is pretty much gone; not to mention, much less lens change, much less dust problems.

Just my .02 of course.

 

[harmsr]

Guy,

Glad that you got the 28 ZF. Like we talked, I think it is better than the 25 both technically and the rendering style we like. Although the 35 is a little better technically, I really like how the 28 renders better and like the gap to 50 better.

Best,

Ray

 

[harmsr]

Vieri,

The new zooms are really great and basically as good as the Nikon primes, although only 2.8 aperture.

If you can deal with MF primes, you really should look at the Zeiss ZF lenses.

I have the following kit for my D3:

24-70/2.8
70-200/2.8 VR
1.7 TC
28/2.0 Zeiss
50/2.0 Macro Zeiss
105/2.8 VR Macro or 100/2.0 Macro Zeiss (I own the Nikon but am being loaned the Zeiss this weekend, so we will see soon which one stays. Unfortunately for my wallet, I suspect the Zeiss will move in.)

The ZF lenses do perform better even the new zooms, which is why they have a home in the kit.

However, the majority of my shooting can be covered just carrying the 24-70, 70-200, 1.7 convertor, and an SB-800 flash. That actually works out to a very reasonable size kit.

Best,

Ray

 

[vieri]

Vieri,

The new zooms are really great and basically as good as the Nikon primes, although only 2.8 aperture.

If you can deal with MF primes, you really should look at the Zeiss ZF lenses.

I have the following kit for my D3:

24-70/2.8
70-200/2.8 VR
1.7 TC
28/2.0 Zeiss
50/2.0 Macro Zeiss
105/2.8 VR Macro or 100/2.0 Macro Zeiss (I own the Nikon but am being loaned the Zeiss this weekend, so we will see soon which one stays. Unfortunately for my wallet, I suspect the Zeiss will move in.)

The ZF lenses do perform better even the new zooms, which is why they have a home in the kit.

However, the majority of my shooting can be covered just carrying the 24-70, 70-200, 1.7 convertor, and an SB-800 flash. That actually works out to a very reasonable size kit.

Best,

Ray

Hello Ray,

indeed I can deal with MF primes - my being a Leica shooter is a good proof of that, I think - and indeed I have been keeping all these ZF lenses under close watch for quite a while now. However, I use my D3 - D300 gear either in the studio (agreed, MF would be fine here, and the ZF 85 looks oh so sweet!) or for low light shooting like concerts, events, and the like, and there AF + the 70-200 VR are a huge help; if not needed, I would just go with my Ms and Leica glass, I guess. Overall, I am very happy with my Nikon kit as it is; the ZF 100 macro looks great but is only a 1:2 while the Nikkor is 1:1, as good as the Nikon 85 f1.4 is the only ZF that I am seriously thinking about is the 85. But then again, I would have to drop AF which I need for events and the like - I know, I'll end up owning both...

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Hello Guy, I am also a prime kinda guy, my Nikon kit as far as primes is:
- 10.5 f2.8 fisheye;
- 35 f2;
- 50 f1.4;
- 85 f1.4;
- 105 f2 DC;
- 105 f2.8 macro VR;
- 180 f2.8;

while zooms are:
- 14-24 f2.8;
- 70-200 f2.8 VR;

However, since the 17-35 & 28-70, Nikon WA & standard zooms have been better than 2.8 primes in equivalent range (18, 20, 24, 28; the 35 f2 is a very tough one to beat IMHO); as the 14-24 got better than the 17-35 (and is better than the 14 f2.8 at 14mm) and the 24-70 better than the 28-70 - do your math... Of course, this doesn't count where and if speed is an issue, of where DOF control is important: 24-70 wouldn't be able to beat 35 f2 or 50 f1.8 - 1.4, or the fantastic 85 f1.4 in this case. As well, if one is willing to give up AF those Zeiss are looking very sweet, very likely (I didn't try them) sweeter than the new zooms.

Other than that, I'd go with 14-24 + 24-70. Two lens, do it all - they are big, especially the 14-24 is a huge bugger, but if you have to lug around 4-5 lenses instead, the advantage is pretty much gone; not to mention, much less lens change, much less dust problems.

Just my .02 of course.

Well I like the Zeiss for the look too but your right I could go 2 zooms and call it a day. If I did I would get the 24-70 and sell the 17-35. I'm just going to go with this setup for awhile and see how it goes. I'm done at the moment buying gear. Still need to get the D3 and my 50 pre- asph for my M8. Overall I lost 4 Leica lenses in this pairing done. I will be left with a perfect kit though CV 12, Leica 21, Leica 28 Cron , 50 pre-asph and 75 cron all great lenses that preform very good.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Here is a quick Zeiss 50 shot at 5.6 and 1/30 th ISO 400 . I am processing these files 18 inches wide for the client, there 100 meg files. This looks very nice on screen . Not a great shot but the quality is there.

 

[robmac]

Woody - as per my post of page 1 of this thread, there has been a lot of sample variation and customer complaints (to vendors) with the 100 re: focusing stiffness.

After I had a chat with Lloyd Chambers, he is going to add an addendum to is ZF collection review indicating such. His sample, as are many, was as smooth as silk.

It was rumored to have been 'fixed' with new production runs, but the one I returned was a new run - and intolerable for anything but fine-tuning focus and/or slow and deliberate work.

Talking to some other users with the same issue, it does NOT appear to get better or 'work in'. Just a note - One Finnish user mentioned that in winter his goes from stiff to a stick in cement.

Optically the lens is superb in all aspects (save some CA) , but Zeiss/Cosina need to work on the mechanical/lubricant consistency.

 

[deepdiver]

Shot from yesterday
Nikon D3 + ZF 100/2 F2.8



Andree

 

[PeterA]

MF is still on my radar button, no question. If i could have gone M8 and MF like Jack only and skip the Nikons i would but I do to much commercial work that the Nikons are to hard to avoid. I can't wait for the R10 that is January until they hit the streets and how much for cost of entry is a big question. But if it turns out to be a winner than I will sell the Nikon gear and get the R10. I love Leica gear but you ned to work too and pulling the DMR before the R10 was ready was bad for me and many others . I understand why but too big a gap in time

i will bet you a $500 bottle of Scotch that leica WIL NOT have a new DSLR on the street by January next year...

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Afraid to take that bet Peter you maybe right. LOL

 

[Steen]

Hey deepdiver, yet another beautiful image, and the dark brown indoor background adds a very special effect to the picture.
How do you think the 2/100 Macro compares with the 1.4/85 for your excellent girl-pictures work, with regards to out of focus rendering, and "ease" of focusing ?
/Steen

 

[PeterA]

Guy - I think I will make this a 'standard' site 'challenge test' what do you think?
LOL

 

[deepdiver]

Hey deepdiver, yet another beautiful image, and the dark brown indoor background adds a very special effect to the picture.
How do you think the 2/100 Macro compares with the 1.4/85 for your excellent girl-pictures work, with regards to out of focus rendering, and "ease" of focusing ?
/Steen

Hi Bondo
IMHO I prefer to use 85/1.4 for outdoor pictorial. It's easier to get focus of the subject's eye.
I dunno why, for some reasons, yesterday i had a little bit problem with the focusing (at aperture F2 - Wide Open)
The DOF of ZF 100/2 is very thin...
therefore when I'm using ZF100/2 for outdoor pictorial, i Prefer using F2.8
It's "safer" than F2

Since this is my first time using 100/2 for outdoor pictorial and I haven't check my images from yesterday. i can't comments about the bokeh yet ^^
Tonight i will check all my pictures from yesterday shots.
Then I will post some of them
Let us judge it together

Andree

 

[deepdiver]

Here are some shots that I took yesterday

All of these pictures is 100% original, without any photoshop.
Please be the judge for ZF 100/2 ^.^

Andree

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Andree love to see the 85 1.4 Zeiss and the 100mm f2 in a head to head with bokeh

 

[David K]

Andree,

Lovely shots... especially that first one which really pops. That lens looks like a winner to me.

 

[Steen]

Looks fabulous, Andree.
The woodden plate right behind the sitting girl is out of focus and rendered in a very nice smooth way, while the girl is in focus and isolated from the near background. Makes it very 3-dimensional.
I know many have talked about the smooth rendering of the D3 camera in itself, but this lens also seems to be something extraordinary. I wonder if the ZF 1.4/85 could have done this, I guess you'd need a direct comparison to find out.
I feel convinced I end up buying that lens at some point, but here in Denmark it is pretty expensive. I'll try to wait until I'm on a travel, or at least until after Photokina to see if Nikon comes up with some new fast AF-S primes also. Thanks for sharing, Andree, very nice captures indeed.

 

[KurtKamka]

Very nice, Andree. One thing that I've noticed with both the zf 50/2 and 100/2 lenses is the richness of the colors. I find it very pleasing after spending quite a bit of time with Leica lenses. I also feel like the lenses (especially the ZF100) offer more clarity. Perhaps they provide more micro-contrast? My guess is that it must be similar with the zf 50/1.4 and 85/1.4.

Kurt

 

[KurtKamka]

I mentioned the richness of Zeiss tones in a comment above. The d3 + zf50 and zf100 combination produce very nice browns. Here's an example with the zf100.

Kurt

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Well I agree Kurt and reason I went for the 3 Zeiss lenses . The 50 and 85 1.4 and the 28 f2 showed up today. I just know they have a look that I like and a lot like leica glass. Hopefully i will have the D3 in Carmel when I get there this week and i do have my three Zeiss lenses with me and the D300 so hopefully i can get some 85 mm shots with the D3. I also have all my M8 stuff plus our leica demo kits along. Ton of gear will be on hand for this workshop. Maybe too much which leads to buying stuff. LOL