Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       5       6       7       end
  

Archive 2011 · Followup to zeiss 25 review

  
 
wayne seltzer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #1 · p.4 #1 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


akul wrote:
Wayne - I did not see your photo when I wrote. Excellent shot.

Thanks Luka! Guess you are the only one to comment on it.
I posted it here in this thread to prove that Nikon 24/1.4G has very good IQ wide open at f1.4
and is not a dog 1.4 lens. Also, to show the separation of subject/background at 24mm of a wide subject like the front of a car and how f1.4 really helps here.



Dec 01, 2011 at 02:21 PM
wayne seltzer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #2 · p.4 #2 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


sebboh wrote:
all this is true, but it is mainly because f/2 and f/2.8 lenses are typically designed to be cheap. high end slower lens will usually outperform their faster counterparts at the slower lenses max aperture. these lenses are outliers however, because there isn't much money in making them.



Sebboh, I agree that f2 lens designs have the benefit of usually being smaller, cheaper and better all round lenses for different types of shooting but just not the best at wide apertures like f2. There the f1.4 lens still shine.




Dec 01, 2011 at 02:26 PM
wayne seltzer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #3 · p.4 #3 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


Tariq Gibran wrote:
Except of course with the Zeiss 35 1.4 as compared to the above Samyang!


I still like the ZE 35/1.4 overall IQ over the Samyang but I know we disagree on that one.
Believe me even though I am a huge Zeiss fan I am not happy with what they did with that ZE 35/1.4 and with the new 25/2 as I would have wanted Zeiss to not do the undercorrected SA thing on the 35/1.4 and have it like the old C/Y 35/1.4 which I have and then I wanted Zeiss to make the new redesigned 25 f1.4 to be a leading edge design which CaNikon have and what Samyang maybe doing soon. The old Zeiss 25/2.8 with its harsh bokeh and field curvature at least was very good stopped down for landscape shooting and was cheap enough to be a good value lens. This new 25/2 is in the price range of legends like the 21 and 100 but has faults (FC, dull corners at f8) and is not class leading. To me they have someone forcing them to design to a price point which made this lens a compromise type lens and not a no-brainer, class leader like the 21.



Dec 01, 2011 at 02:41 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #4 · p.4 #4 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


wayne seltzer wrote:
I still like the ZE 35/1.4 overall IQ over the Samyang but I know we disagree on that one.
Believe me even though I am a huge Zeiss fan I am not happy with what they did with that ZE 35/1.4 and with the new 25/2 as I would have wanted Zeiss to not do the undercorrected SA thing on the 35/1.4 and have it like the old C/Y 35/1.4 which I have and then I wanted Zeiss to make the new redesigned 25 f1.4 to be a leading edge design which CaNikon have and what Samyang maybe doing
...Show more

Yep, I agree with your assessment.



Dec 01, 2011 at 02:46 PM
Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #5 · p.4 #5 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


Jorge Torralba wrote:
No one has mentioned that the Canon shot at f2 had the advantage of being stopped down.


Ha-ha!! I thought everyone was being courteous not to point out the ZE only goes to f/2.0!

But, seriously Jorge, thanks for showing the two lenses. Great to see the new ZE 25/2 in action. Looking forward to anything you can do with these lenses or the Nikon.



Dec 01, 2011 at 03:33 PM
philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #6 · p.4 #6 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


Funny how, by and large, members select what they want from the information avaialble, and how little the considered opinions of people who have actually used it (Lloyd Chambers and Jorge Torralba) seem to matter.


Dec 01, 2011 at 03:46 PM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #7 · p.4 #7 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


wayne seltzer wrote:
Maybe someone like Luka(Denoir) who has these M lenses can confirm but I will throw out the examples of M 50/1.4 Lux latest edition vs. its M 50/2 Cron brother and
same for M 35/1.4 FLE latest edition vs. M 35/2.


the 50 cron is an old design and leica has stated they originally intended to make a cron asph as their most perfect 50mm but didn't think people would pay for it. instead they made the lux because they thought people would be more willing to pay if it was f/1.4 (even if the performance wouldn't be as good as the hypothetical cron).

a better comparison would be between two modern asph designs. the 28 cron versus 28 elmarit or 35 lux versus 35 cron come to mind, though i thing the two slower lenses may have been designed to optimize small size versus ultimate iq? the pre aa 90 cron versus 90 elmarit (of the same vintage) is another example of the slower lens performing better at f/2.8. i don't know how modern the current 90 elmarit is or how it compares to the 90 cron aa.



Dec 01, 2011 at 03:49 PM
alundeb
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #8 · p.4 #8 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


Tariq Gibran wrote:
Lloyd/ Digilloyd did just that comparison and the 35 F2 was the winner for detail and contrast at F2 compared to the 35 1.4.


In the same comparison, the Canon 35 F1.4 came out on par with the ZE 35 F2 at F/2 for center detail and contrast. And the ZE 35 F1.4 beats them both for CA. When you stop down beyond F/2.8, the ZE 35 1.4 is the winner in my book for everything except maybe field curvature. And sorry for mentioning a Canon lens



Dec 01, 2011 at 04:46 PM
Edgars Kalnins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #9 · p.4 #9 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


To add to this heated discussion: I wonder if anyone could throw some light on the famous contarex 50mm lenses. They were supposedly built with few budget restrictions and there were 3 versions - 55/1.4, 50/2 and 50/2.8. Which of them is the best performer? I could not resist temptation and bough the middle one with the "cyclope" so my interest is very personal!


Dec 01, 2011 at 05:27 PM
Edgars Kalnins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #10 · p.4 #10 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


After searching the internet I came upon the MTF graphs for the 3 Contarex standard lenses. http://www.imx.nl/photo/zeiss/zeiss/page67.html
Closed down 50/2 seems to be the winner even though the slower 50/2.8 gives better results at lower frequencies. The fast 55/1.4 was, as expected, the best at f1.4 . Of course, these graphs did not compare the lenses at f2 or f2.8, thus they do not serve as a good argument in the dispute.



Dec 01, 2011 at 06:27 PM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #11 · p.4 #11 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


I will throw another few examples:

Zeiss MP50 vs P50 at f2 and above
Zeiss m Planar50 vs Sonnar C 50 at f2 and above
Zeiss m biogon 35/2.8 vs 35/2 at f2.8 and above

In all these cases seems favor to slower lens



Dec 01, 2011 at 07:01 PM
redisburning
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #12 · p.4 #12 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


planar and sonnar comparison doesnt hold because they are fundamentally different designs.

a more apt comparison would be two sonnars (e.g. Nikkor 5cm f1.4 vs f2) or two planars (Lux vs Cron)



Dec 01, 2011 at 07:34 PM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #13 · p.4 #13 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


redisburning wrote:
planar and sonnar comparison doesnt hold because they are fundamentally different designs.

a more apt comparison would be two sonnars (e.g. Nikkor 5cm f1.4 vs f2) or two planars (Lux vs Cron)


Well, My point is there is always priority in design lens, so we can't general say high speed lens have advantage to low speed lens when stop down, vise versa.

In this case both P50, or Sonnar C have different design reason/priority.

The same thing also apply to Leica Noct vs Lux vs Cron.

I am sure we can find tons of example goes to the other direction as well.



Dec 01, 2011 at 08:14 PM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #14 · p.4 #14 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


One interesting not mentioned is the overall image.

When viewing images high resolution full screen and on print on my 27" iMac, some lenses have a certain quality...



Dec 01, 2011 at 08:47 PM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #15 · p.4 #15 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


philber wrote:
Funny how, by and large, members select what they want from the information avaialble, and how little the considered opinions of people who have actually used it (Lloyd Chambers and Jorge Torralba) seem to matter.


Haha, I was thinking the same thing

It seems to me those who trash the lens aggressively and mercilessly either own an expensive alternative (like the Canon or Nikon 24) and feel threatened by the new model, or in the second group some who cannot afford or justify the expense of the new lens so they just trash it. Just human behavior



Dec 01, 2011 at 10:00 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #16 · p.4 #16 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


edwardkaraa wrote:
Haha, I was thinking the same thing

It seems to me those who trash the lens aggressively and mercilessly either own an expensive alternative (like the Canon or Nikon 24) and feel threatened by the new model, or in the second group some who cannot afford or justify the expense of the new lens so they just trash it. Just human behavior


...and then there are others who just want the lens to be better and, with that desire voiced, maybe push Zeiss to be better. Win/ Win for everyone.



Dec 01, 2011 at 10:12 PM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #17 · p.4 #17 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


Tariq Gibran wrote:
...and then there are others who just want the lens to be better and, with that desire voiced, maybe push Zeiss to be better. Win/ Win for everyone.


Forgot this group, because it's very small



Dec 01, 2011 at 11:31 PM
alundeb
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #18 · p.4 #18 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


I want every new lens to be good, and I also want to know if it really is good. The latter is not possible without critisism of dubious tests, and doing so may sound like trashing the lens. Not al all on my part. I own the more expensive Canon TS-E 24 II and don't feel threatened at all. If the ZE 25 F2 is a "better" lens, that would be nothing less than fantastic for all parts.



Dec 02, 2011 at 02:11 AM
ulrikft2
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #19 · p.4 #19 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


edwardkaraa wrote:
Haha, I was thinking the same thing

It seems to me those who trash the lens aggressively and mercilessly either own an expensive alternative (like the Canon or Nikon 24) and feel threatened by the new model, or in the second group some who cannot afford or justify the expense of the new lens so they just trash it. Just human behavior


Or those who fanatically support zeiss no matter what and cannot overcome their confirmation bias regardless of the facts?




Dec 02, 2011 at 02:28 AM
philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #20 · p.4 #20 · Followup to zeiss 25 review


What "facts" do we have, Ulrik? Some shots, reduced in IQ to Internet level, some MTFs, some opinions, and whatever trust one places -or not- in Zeiss expertise. That is a bagful of "facts" -or not-...:-)
As far as I am concerned, for example, the kinds of superlatives used by Lloyd Chambers is very confidence inspiring, since he was far more critical with the ZE 35 f:1.4 than my own standards. So that is my choice of "facts". Which is why I await my 25 f:2.0...



Dec 02, 2011 at 04:27 AM
1       2       3      
4
       5       6       7       end




FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       5       6       7       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.