Steve Spencer
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.3 #1 · Zeiss 85mm 1.4 for Canon | |
Steve Spencer wrote:
We'll see in time, but I suspect that what has happened with this test is that the digital picture tests the lens from a fairly close distance and the lens just performs poorly in this range. If you look at the review of the the ZF version of this lens at 16-9.net, you will see that the ZF version tested did quite poorly between 1 and 2 meters, but was an excellent performer at greater than 2 meters. I would expect the ZE version to show this same characteristic. As more people get this lens I expect this sort of picture to emerge. Many will love the lens if they shoot from farther away, but others will really dislike it if they shoot from close range. This weakness in close range shooting is also to be more or less expected in a lens without a floating element design and perhaps not coincidentally it is in such close range shooting that focus shift problems will be their worst.
cogitech replied:
All quite possibly true, but wouldn't you agree that Zeiss ought to have done better? For the price, and to maintain their reputation, Zeiss should have made this lens perform like a Zeiss.
I think it will perform much like a Zeiss--the C/Y 85mm f/1.4 planar. I'm not sure if that lens performed more poorly at close distances or not, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did as it too did not contain a floating element. Didn't you have this lens? I think I remember reading that you once had this lens and were pretty disappointed with it. For me, however, I think I could live with its poor close range performance and get another lens to cover that type of shooting. I also expect this lens to be an excellent landscape lens, which for me will offset to some extent its weak close range ability. The 85L is almost certainly a better close range lens, but it is not the strongest for landscapes from what I have seen. Every lens has its tradeoffs. For me I think I could live with the tradeoffs with this lens from what I have seen so far, but I may change my mind as reports come in.
Saying all that, would I have preferred that Zeiss would have included a floating element design, perhaps based on their CY 85mm f/1.2 anniversary lens? Sure, but this lens is already quite expensive and I would bet that the more complicated design would have put this lens outside of my price range. Now CY 85mm f/1.2 performance with autoaperture and the price of this lens, now that would definitely be a hit, but perhaps not much of a profit for Zeiss.
|
) and the typical 3D effect and color reproduction of Zeiss. This lens or at least the older Contax version has the typical Zeiss look. Zeiss doesn't always produce the sharpest lenses, but 3 elements are always constant: high micro-contrast, 3D, color.