Leica 28 v ZF25 ?
/forum/topic/1004289/1

1      
2
       3       4       5       end

mcbroomf
Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Total Posts: 3575
Country: United States

John, if you like lenses in this FL consider the 28mm Scheider Super Angulon shift lens. I just bought a copy and I may well keep it and part with my Leica.

Mike



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 16163
Country: Germany

The Super Angulon is not meant to be critically sharp in the corners until f/8. Have you tested it yet?



JohnJ
Registered: Jul 09, 2005
Total Posts: 2211
Country: Australia

johnahill wrote:
...
I'm just trying to rationalise this and figure out if it's worth having the money invested in the R28 over the ZF considering it's about twice the cost.


If it were only ever about value then I think we'd all just be using cheap OM lenses. But it's never just about value is it?

Thanks for the comparison. I've been looking for a nice 24 and always wondered if the Zeiss 25 was good enough as the Contax 25 that I used many years ago wasn't (IMHO)!

JJ



johnahill
Registered: Jan 08, 2006
Total Posts: 3390
Country: United Kingdom

carstenw wrote:

Before deciding, you should also go out and shoot what you normally shoot, and make sure that you like the look of the lens you keep.


I've had a few shoots with the R28 but that was before the CLA, one trip done with the ZF and pretty happy with it.

I need to get out and get some real world shoots done with the R28 since it's CLA and now that I have the Novoflex which seems the best so far.

The reason I started these tests was that the Leica has a reputation to live up to. It's known as possibly the best 28mm SLR lens and most folks who have used it rate it as sharp corner to corner wide open.

My initial tests on a flat target showed some fall-off in the corners until f5.6.
I was just trying to quantify the the premium of the R28 and whether it lives up to its reputation.



Ataboy
Registered: Sep 17, 2004
Total Posts: 628
Country: United States

Well, you are comparing some of the best lenses available so it's no surprise they both look great. However, I can clearly see better microcontrast with Leica - just look at how crisp small leaves and the bark details are on the last pair of pictures, compared to relatively mushy look from Zeiss.



mcbroomf
Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Total Posts: 3575
Country: United States

carstenw wrote:
The Super Angulon is not meant to be critically sharp in the corners until f/8. Have you tested it yet?

It's been on a few outings but when I shoot WO it's for selective focusing so the edges and corners are usually OOF. I'll take a few test shots this weekend.

Mike



s23chang
Registered: Jul 17, 2006
Total Posts: 928
Country: United States

well... if you don't plan to shoot at 2.8 to 4, ZF25 does its job from 5.6 and up.
Other than that, I can't tell you how you should invest in your gear.
Personally I shoot at wide open a lot for fixed focal length lens. Otherwise, the zoom lens would do just fine when stop down.



mcbroomf
Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Total Posts: 3575
Country: United States

But I do as I said above. Moreover the SA is a shift lens which the ZF is not.

Mike

Edit, I guess you were responding to John...



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 12901
Country: United States

I would go with whichever focal length you like shooting with the most. Though it's only a seemingly small 3mm, that can be quite a lot in a regards to angle of view with wide angles.



j.liam
Registered: Dec 13, 2009
Total Posts: 2299
Country: United States

Isn't the ZF25 really 25.7mm? Assuming the Leica is in fact 28.0 mm, that doesn't result in a remarkably different FOV.



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 12901
Country: United States

j.liam wrote:
Isn't the ZF25 really 25.7mm? Assuming the Leica is in fact 28.0 mm, that doesn't result in a remarkably different FOV.


Leica lists the 28 as 28.5mm with fov of 75, 65, 46 degrees (diagonal, horizontal, vertical).

Where did you get the 25.7 spec for the Zeiss? If so, that's very interesting. On their spec sheet for the ZF2, they list it as 25mm with fov of 80, 70, 50 degrees respectively. Perhaps Zeiss is not showing the actual focal length?
Anyway, for some, they will be plenty close to interchange, for others, not close enough. I always mentally interchanged the Zeiss 25mm with the 24mm focal length but if it is indeed closer to 26mm, that's relevant since a 24mm lens often will have a diagonal fov of 84 degrees (and a difference from 84 to 75 degrees is fairly noticeable on the wide end).



Specularist
Registered: Jul 12, 2009
Total Posts: 437
Country: France

s23chang wrote:
well... if you don't plan to shoot at 2.8 to 4, ZF25 does its job from 5.6 and up.


I own the ZF Distagon 25 mm, and I would argue that for use at infinity it performs very well at large apertures. Quite possibly better than the Elmarit-R 28 mm, and certainly better than many other prime lenses I've used. Unlike the ZF Distagon 28 mm, for example, it retains fine detail right into the extreme corners at f/2.8.

The Distagon 25 mm has two main weaknesses as I use it: strong astigmatism and overall curvature of field at close focus distances (hard to avoid in a unit-focusing retrofocus lens); and moderately strong lateral chromatic aberration that limits its performance at smaller apertures.

Nice lens nevertheless, with excellent resistance to flare.



Lars Johnsson
Registered: Jun 29, 2003
Total Posts: 33669
Country: Thailand

Tariq Gibran wrote:
j.liam wrote:
Isn't the ZF25 really 25.7mm? Assuming the Leica is in fact 28.0 mm, that doesn't result in a remarkably different FOV.


Leica lists the 28 as 28.5mm with fov of 75, 65, 46 degrees (diagonal, horizontal, vertical).

Where did you get the 25.7 spec for the Zeiss? If so, that's very interesting. On their spec sheet for the ZF2, they list it as 25mm with fov of 80, 70, 50 degrees respectively. Perhaps Zeiss is not showing the actual focal length?
Anyway, for some, they will be plenty close to interchange, for others, not close enough. I always mentally interchanged the Zeiss 25mm with the 24mm focal length but if it is indeed closer to 26mm, that's relevant since a 24mm lens often will have a diagonal fov of 84 degrees (and a difference from 84 to 75 degrees is fairly noticeable on the wide end).


Lloyd Chambers write that the lens is 25,7 in his review



j.liam
Registered: Dec 13, 2009
Total Posts: 2299
Country: United States

Tariq Gibran wrote:
j.liam wrote:
Isn't the ZF25 really 25.7mm? Assuming the Leica is in fact 28.0 mm, that doesn't result in a remarkably different FOV.


Leica lists the 28 as 28.5mm with fov of 75, 65, 46 degrees (diagonal, horizontal, vertical).

Where did you get the 25.7 spec for the Zeiss? If so, that's very interesting. On their spec sheet for the ZF2, they list it as 25mm with fov of 80, 70, 50 degrees respectively. Perhaps Zeiss is not showing the actual focal length?
Anyway, for some, they will be plenty close to interchange, for others, not close enough. I always mentally interchanged the Zeiss 25mm with the 24mm focal length but if it is indeed closer to 26mm, that's relevant since a 24mm lens often will have a diagonal fov of 84 degrees (and a difference from 84 to 75 degrees is fairly noticeable on the wide end).


If you have a subscription to Lloyd Chambers' guide to Zeiss lenses, it's right up there in the first paragraph:

http://diglloyd.com/prem/prot/ZF/publish/25Distagon.html

In his review, the "cheat", as he calls it, is one of the reason he cites why someone might forego the 25 for the 28 because of its less extreme FC up close and the extra stop in comparison.



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 12901
Country: United States

j.liam wrote:
Tariq Gibran wrote:
j.liam wrote:
Isn't the ZF25 really 25.7mm? Assuming the Leica is in fact 28.0 mm, that doesn't result in a remarkably different FOV.


Leica lists the 28 as 28.5mm with fov of 75, 65, 46 degrees (diagonal, horizontal, vertical).

Where did you get the 25.7 spec for the Zeiss? If so, that's very interesting. On their spec sheet for the ZF2, they list it as 25mm with fov of 80, 70, 50 degrees respectively. Perhaps Zeiss is not showing the actual focal length?
Anyway, for some, they will be plenty close to interchange, for others, not close enough. I always mentally interchanged the Zeiss 25mm with the 24mm focal length but if it is indeed closer to 26mm, that's relevant since a 24mm lens often will have a diagonal fov of 84 degrees (and a difference from 84 to 75 degrees is fairly noticeable on the wide end).


If you have a subscription to Lloyd Chambers' guide to Zeiss lenses, it's right up there in the first paragraph:

http://diglloyd.com/prem/prot/ZF/publish/25Distagon.html

25.7mm. In his review, it's one of the reason he cites why someone might forego the 25 for the 28 because of its extreme FC up close and the extra stop.


Interesting. Curious that Zeiss would not state the actual focal length on their spec sheet like Leica does.



AhamB
Registered: Jul 11, 2008
Total Posts: 5253
Country: United States

@Tariq: The ZF25 PDF says 25.7mm, 80.2/80 degree angles.

One small advantage for the the ZF is that it has 9 aperture blades, which gives nice 18-pointed diffraction stars when shooting with the sun in the frame, or night shots with lights in them. The Leica will produce boring 6-pointed stars. When doing close-ups the Leica will also produce hexagons/lines in the bokeh when shot at anything other than wide open.



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 12901
Country: United States

AhamB wrote:
@Tariq: The ZF25 PDF says 25.7mm, 80.2/80 degree angles.

One small advantage for the the ZF is that it has 9 aperture blades, which gives nice 18-pointed diffraction stars when shooting with the sun in the frame, or night shots with lights in them. The Leica will produce boring 6-pointed stars. When doing close-ups the Leica will also produce hexagons/lines in the bokeh when shot at anything other than wide open.


So, the ZF differs from the ZF.2, at least regarding stated specifications.

http://lenses.zeiss.com/photo/en_DE/products/slr/distagont2825.usage.html



j.liam
Registered: Dec 13, 2009
Total Posts: 2299
Country: United States

No, Lloyd's review of the ZF 25 dates from 2007. The ZF and ZF.2 are optically identical.



Specularist
Registered: Jul 12, 2009
Total Posts: 437
Country: France

Tariq Gibran wrote:
So, the ZF differs from the ZF.2, at least regarding stated specifications.

http://lenses.zeiss.com/photo/en_DE/products/slr/distagont2825.usage.html


According to that site, the 21 mm has a focal length of 18 mm and weighs 470 g!

Zeiss' websites and marketing materials have been truly terrible for years. More often than not they make mistakes. They obviously don't think this affects their brand and sales, and hey, maybe it doesn't!

Leica, on the other hand, are admirably accurate and comprehensive in everything they publish. One must conclude these companies are run very differently.



AhamB
Registered: Jul 11, 2008
Total Posts: 5253
Country: United States

That new section of the website just isn't accurate and the numbers have been "massaged" to look more logical to lay persons. On top of that, the specs for the 21/2.8 show the ones for the 18/3.5.

The true technical specifactions should be correct in the data sheets that are available here: http://lenses.zeiss.com/photo/en_DE/service/download_center/current_data_sheets/current_data_sheets_slr.html



1      
2
       3       4       5       end