frezeiss wrote:
These talks and comparison of Z 35 f/2 vs f/1.4 doesnt look good for my finance. I do find the rendering of the faster lens to be more elegant but the f/2 would have to suffice, for now
Reza, so which one you like most? Its hard to judge from your pictures, they seem to be fine already no matter what lens.
All from Z 35 f/2..
frezeiss, really love those! I'd like to defend 35/2 as well - I don't think it's so bad one would definitely need to switch ('upgrade', I believe, is the wrong wording in this particular case) to 1.4 version, no matter how good the new one is. Just a different animal, in my opinion.
@ Reza. The area is called Bayah, 250 km west from the capital. Secluded beach which is excellent for long exposures. Too bad I didn't have the time to wait until sunset.
That's what I've been telling my self. A good thing I'm still trying to plug a hole in my wide angle with either the Z 18 or 21. Haven't desided yet, the 21 sure looks fabulous but at $ 1800 and 82 mm filters.. That's a lot of pain
@Nickson, actually I am very very satisfied everytime I take a shot with the f/2 and see no valid reasons to buy the new f/1.4 version. Its only an itch to try new lenses
Hi guys, it seems like my 35 1.4 has suffered CA quite a lot. Also when capturing some lighting sources (noel tree with lights), it has too many 'ghost' especially in close / medium distance. Is this normal and how to fix is ? Thank you very much.
Thanks, Akul! love the blur and 3D of your second shot..so natural and lifelike
A little OOT, I see you're a Nikon shooter, do you have the 85 G? I'm wanting a fast AF lens that is very good and renders a little more like Zeiss. I thought the new Nikkor N lenses is what I'm looking for.
Lieutenant - I did not see your post when I posted. Very nice capture. I like the light of the #1, but really like the texture on the #2
frezeiss - Well, short answer is no. From Nikon, I have 24-70, 70-200, AFD 501.4, AI-S 105/f2, AI'd 55 micro f3.5. I saved up for 85G, but it has been out of stock forever at B&H. Actually when I went to B&H two weeks ago, decision was between ZF 35 1.4, and the Imported version of 85G. (That was probably part of the reason why I was compelled to 'justify' my decision on picking up 35/1.4. ) If they had genuine USA version, I was going to get the 85G instead. As I already have 35/f2, it was the logical choice. However, I was not willing to do the Import version, and I did not want to wait for 85G any more, as I already waited for a year. Store sample of 85G I tried was really a good lens, and one day, I might get that lens. However, if the rumored 85 1.8G comes out early next year, and if it is as good as the 50 1.8G's recent reputation, then I might just get the 1.8G for AF.
nickson wrote:
frezeiss, really love those! I'd like to defend 35/2 as well - I don't think it's so bad one would definitely need to switch ('upgrade', I believe, is the wrong wording in this particular case) to 1.4 version, no matter how good the new one is. Just a different animal, in my opinion.
I agree. Up to now I have not seen a reason to switch. Of course the 35/2 can't shoot @1.4, but I hardly shoot wide open with the 35/2 at this moment, so for me it is not a problem. The other differences are very very minor and are only visible with a very thourough investigation.
