Very good sharpness, however no guarantee as to actual condition; sold as is. Not so perfect cosmetics. With perfect cosmetics; ask is $900 on the board. I got mine for $825. I have not measured sharpness, but I have no complaints. All things considered, $900 may be a bit high. just my opinion.
RobertLynn wrote:
It is manual focus... Isn't it like 2011 now?
They are made with a different clientele in mind I suppose. That and Zeiss has a contract with Sony that says they can only make AF lenses for Alpha mount.
mf yes, but they are great for video and also for stills if you have skill and patience, or are like me and have been using mf since I was a pup.
The above mentioned cz 35 2 is a gret lens w wonderful iq.
Sharpness is only part of what makes a lens like this great. Color, contrast, blur and the unique signature are what make this lens what it is.
Tom Dix wrote:
mf yes, but they are great for video and also for stills if you have skill and patience, or are like me and have been using mf since I was a pup.
The above mentioned cz 35 2 is a gret lens w wonderful iq.
Sharpness is only part of what makes a lens like this great. Color, contrast, blur and the unique signature are what make this lens what it is.
yes it is.
when I first got mine the vignetting was so strong I thought I broke something. takes some getting use to.
incredibly rich colors.
helimat wrote:
They are made with a different clientele in mind I suppose. That and Zeiss has a contract with Sony that says they can only make AF lenses for Alpha mount.
Really? I'd love to see how that contract stipulates Zeiss production...I'd imagine Zeiss would probably be more profitable by leaps and bounds IF they'd make AF glass for Canon and Nikon. Maybe one of the reason's is that Canon and Nikon won't share their AF algorithm with the Zeiss AF R&D team because they know they'd lose out on a lot of their own lens sales because if Zeiss had AF and produced as good or better results. Conversely, why will they outsource with Sigma, Tamron and other lense makers? Camera body sales...Hand in hand... Just a theory, but hey...Conspiracies come in all shapes and industries...
Lars Johnsson wrote:
A great lens. But the ZE 35/1,4 is much nicer
Maybe the wrong forum to ask in, but how do you find the sharpness wide open? You were not satisfied with the 35L sharpness wide open, and the ZE 35 1.4 has undercorrected Spherical Aberrations and is softer than the 35L wide open. It does not surprise me that you like the new lens, as it has many qualities, but wide open sharpness is in my opinion a weak pont. What is your take on it? This is an honest question.
RobertLynn wrote:
It is manual focus... Isn't it like 2011 now?
Shooting a nice manual focus lens is like driving a nice manual transmission car. You don't use it for the convenience but rather the experience of something different with a finely-crafted machine.
Dec 14, 2011 at 05:06 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
alundeb wrote:
Maybe the wrong forum to ask in, but how do you find the sharpness wide open? You were not satisfied with the 35L sharpness wide open, and the ZE 35 1.4 has undercorrected Spherical Aberrations and is softer than the 35L wide open. It does not surprise me that you like the new lens, as it has many qualities, but wide open sharpness is in my opinion a weak pont. What is your take on it? This is an honest question.
It's rather good wide open (f/1,4). Of course it has a lot of other qualities. And I don't think many people buy it because they like to have the ultimate sharpness wide open. But no other 35mm lens can match the bokeh.
reno.peterson wrote:
Really? I'd love to see how that contract stipulates Zeiss production...I'd imagine Zeiss would probably be more profitable by leaps and bounds IF they'd make AF glass for Canon and Nikon. Maybe one of the reason's is that Canon and Nikon won't share their AF algorithm with the Zeiss AF R&D team because they know they'd lose out on a lot of their own lens sales because if Zeiss had AF and produced as good or better results. Conversely, why will they outsource with Sigma, Tamron and other lense makers? Camera body sales...Hand in hand... Just a theory, but hey...Conspiracies come in all shapes and industries...
Yeah, I don't know why they don't do AF, but Zeiss is definitely profitable and had record gross sales of 4.24b Euro. Of course that's not all ZE/ZF lenses Actually my guess is their efforts for still photography are quite minuscule compared to their output in other areas. I just read a paper that stated they'll add a wider than 18mm and longer than 100mm Compact Prime lens to the CP.2 kit, and likely also a couple zooms. Speculation is at least a 70-200. And, if it's going to be in the CP.2 kit, that means it will likely also appear in ZE/ZF form, since that's what the CP.2 lenses are...
RobertLynn wrote:
It is manual focus... Isn't it like 2011 now?
Yea, all these zeiss and other manual-only lenses really need to step up their game and get into the 1990's... jesus christ, it's 2011 and companies still produce MF-only lenses?
Yeah, it's 2011...perhaps it's time to take off your skirt or JUST DON'T BUY THEM 
