The 35/2.8 is overshadowed, at least here, by the 35-70 (which really isn't as good at 35mm) and the 28/2.8, the 21/2.8 and the 35/1.4. I think that it just isn't all that exotic in specification, rather it is just a very good, standard lens.
BTW, is the 25mm as bad as people / MTF say?
I've got the Contax 28/2.8 and 25/2.8. The 25/2.8 isn't really bad, it's just unexciting compared to the 28/2.8. The 25 is always slightly softer, especially at the edges, and doesn't sharpen up as spectacularly as the 28/2.8 does when stopped down. With the 28/2.8 often available for <$250, the 25/2.8 isn't worth the ~$500 that it sometimes sells for (the only reason I got mine was that I found one at a much lower price). If the 28/2.8, which sets a high bar for image quality at its price and focal length, didn't exist, I suspect the 25/2.8 would have a better reputation.
victorXT wrote:
Can you post a link to the original version? The little boats suffer from some resize or sharpening artefacts.
The boat picture was taken hand held at 1/5s, with some motion blur. So this isn't the best to judge the lens. I just liked it. Here is one that might be more telling about the CZ 35/2.8:
That honda monkey reminds me of the old honda 50 or 60 from the late 1970's. I had a yamaha Mini-Enduro and my friends had a honda. They were a little beefier.
