Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 end

Archive 2008 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

jrn813
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #1 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

Thanks Bill,
The 100mm N' Is A Special Lens, IMO. The Only Reason I Would Use The 180mm,
Is For The Added Reach. If It Was ANYWAY Possible, The Zeiss Would Be My First
Choice. I Am A Firm Believer In The Right Tool For A Given Job. The 180mm Has A Place In
My Kit, It's A Great Lens, Just Not A Zeiss, And All That Can Mean. Luckily I Can Afford A Few
Of These Choices....

100mm Makro (Or Macro, Don't Get Me To Lying)

2012 © jrn813

Sep 09, 2008 at 02:03 PM

Sam N
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

Beautiful shot jrn813, but what's with the capitalization of every word in your post?

Sep 10, 2008 at 10:39 PM

deshojo
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

I have actually done a direct comparison at macro distances between the C/Y Makro Planar, the N Makro Sonnar and the Canon EF.
They were not scientific in any way, just a casual set-up using tripod and mirror lock-up, and going through the apertures with each lens in turn on the same subject.

Both the Canon and Zeiss have more than adequate resolution for the 40D's sensor (and therefore the 1DSIII's sensor, at least in the image centre).
I saw no practical difference in sharpness until f16. the Canon diffracts noticeably here, whereas the Zeiss does not show much diffraction until f22, so arguably one more useable stop.

Colour was nicer to my eyes with the Zeiss, but still very good with the Canon. The Zeiss has better micro-contrast so tonal changes are more smooth and subtle. Again, the Canon does very well, just not quite as good as the Zeiss.

The area where the Canon wins hands down, and the main factor that made me keep the Canon, is its AF. It is so good that when set to centre point AI Focus, it can be used even at 1:1 to track moving insects, or to counter the back and forth sway of hand held shots. The Zeiss was not even close in this department.

One curious difference was in DOF. The Canon had considerably more DOF at each aperture than the Zeiss. Perhaps this is because the Zeiss's higher resolution produces a smaller Circle of Confusion - I'm no expert in optics so other board members may correct me here.
The point is, the extra DOF with the Canon can be very useful for macro work.

When it comes to medium to long distance work, the Zeiss is most definitely superior. Here I think the greater resolution is more apparent, and its narrower DOF can be used to beautiful advantage. The bokeh is more pleasing with the Zeiss too.
The Canon can (as do many Canon lenses) produce a slightly harsh look in the transitional zone from in focus to out of focus.

In conclusion, I would say that if your subjects are animal, and at macro distances, then the Canon would be the best choice. For everything else the Zeiss will produce a richer, smoother, more gorgeous image.
I believe the Canon 100mm macro ranks amongst their finest lenses, and is one of only 4 Canon lenses I own (the 70-200mm f2.8L IS, 300mm f2.8L IS and 600mm f4L IS are the others), my other lenses are all Zeiss.

However, as you already have the Canon 180mm macro, I cannot see any quality advantage in using the 100mm, as I understand the 180mm is optically superior. Perhaps its smaller size and lighter weight may be important to you.

Sep 11, 2008 at 09:48 PM

billsnature
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #4 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

Thank you very much for the very informative reply.

I am extermely interested in the Zeiss lenses (like a moth to a flame?) , but every time I buy one, I do struggle to see the major impact I was expecting. Might be an issue with my subjects, which do tend to be animals, and more subdued colors than any lack of optical brilliance in the Zeiss lenses.

When you same "micro contrast" are you refering to the ability to hold the highlight details in the white petals of teh flowers in this string? Or do you really mean color contrast? I only ask because I have really struggled to be able to hold the levels of details in Johns examples with any of my Canon lenses, and that would be tha main objective of my purchase.

Thanks again
Bill

Sep 11, 2008 at 11:40 PM

edwardkaraa
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #5 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

Micro contrast is directly related to the perceived sharpness of the lens. The way I understand it, it is the ability of the lens to separate adjacent tones. Macro contrast is the lens overall contrast, which can be compensated for with levels or curves. Micro contrast can be enhanced by USM (high radius, low amount). But maybe I got it all wrong

Edited on Sep 12, 2008 at 08:06 AM

Sep 12, 2008 at 08:04 AM

Anden
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

The Canon 100 macro I used to own was very sharp but the bokeh is not very pleasing to my eye

F/2.8 on 5D

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Sep 12, 2008 at 12:28 PM

Anden
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

John R: Fantastic photos!

Why do you start each word with a capital?

A

Sep 12, 2008 at 12:30 PM

Anden
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

One more. 5D f/9

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Sep 12, 2008 at 12:31 PM

jrn813
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #9 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

Over The Years, I Seldom Explained Myself About My Web Typing...
But It's Been Awhile Since I Did, So Here Goes....

I Started The Method, Each Word Capped, As An Assitance To My Very Poor Spelling.
It Helps Me See The Words Clearer. Now, It Has Become Second Nature.. And Hard To Change
Also, Though My Spelling Has Gotten Better, It's Still On The Low Side Of Good!

Thanks For The Comments...

Edited on Sep 12, 2008 at 03:42 PM

Sep 12, 2008 at 03:42 PM

deshojo
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

billsnature wrote:
Thank you very much for the very informative reply.

I am extermely interested in the Zeiss lenses (like a moth to a flame?) , but every time I buy one, I do struggle to see the major impact I was expecting. Might be an issue with my subjects, which do tend to be animals, and more subdued colors than any lack of optical brilliance in the Zeiss lenses.

When you same "micro contrast" are you refering to the ability to hold the highlight details in the white petals of teh flowers in this string? Or do you really mean color contrast? I only ask because I have really struggled to be able to hold the levels of details in Johns examples with any of my Canon lenses, and that would be tha main objective of my purchase.

Thanks again
Bill

Hi Bill,

Micro contrast refers to a lens's ability to record very small changes in contrast and colour. This means that more hues of a particular colour can be captured, and more tones from pitch black to total white.
The fine example posted is exactly the reason that Zeiss lenses are so highly regarded.

My experience is that Zeiss lenses will record more detail throughout the colour spectrum, and in shadows and highlights, providing of course that the exposure is at the optimum level.
This, I believe, is partly due to greater micro-contrast, and partly due to Zeiss lenses' legendary high resolution. Both factors together will contribute to the ability to separate and record minute differences in detail.

Regards,
Matt

Sep 14, 2008 at 10:52 PM

designguy
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

edwardkaraa wrote:
Micro contrast is directly related to the perceived sharpness of the lens. The way I understand it, it is the ability of the lens to separate adjacent tones. Macro contrast is the lens overall contrast, which can be compensated for with levels or curves. Micro contrast can be enhanced by USM (high radius, low amount). But maybe I got it all wrong

Sounds correct to me. My experience with the canon 180mm, is a lens with very high macro contrast and very saturated color. The micro contrast is there but it needs to be pulled out with considerable (fine detail) USM, as compared to say the 135L.

In the past I've questioned the quality of my 180mmL until I changed my processing technique (with just this lens). In dpp I set the contrast to -1, or -2, and I lower the color saturation to a -1. Then I use a contrast mask to enhance edge separation. And then considerable fine detail USM to pull out the acutance of the micro contrast. A photographer I know said that the 180mmL is leaning more towards the qualities to the older (discontinued

) leica 180mm 3.4.

I believe this is opposite of what zeiss is accomplishing with the 100mm. I think the canon 100mm is functioning more along the lines of the zeiss 100, but at a lower resolving power.

Sep 15, 2008 at 03:20 AM

designguy
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #12 · Contax 100mm Makro verses Canon

this is from the canon 180mmL

This image is copyrighted by the owner

This is a very different look from either the zeiss 100 or the canon 100. I think I'll be buying the zeiss 100, when it becomes available in ZE mount...

Sep 15, 2008 at 01:57 PM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end