philip_pj wrote:
...with all the Canon FF DSLR users (many of whom seem quite excited to spend up bit on white lenses, believing them to be the best thing since sliced bread...

So Philip, what Alts do you suggest I should get to replace my EF 70-200/2.8L IS II and EF 500/4L IS?

Yes I also need some "alt" replacements for my EF 200/2 IS and EF 800/5,6 IS lenses ?

The question is not whether you need alternatives, but whether you want them. If you don't care about AF and IS (they have their utility but don't directly contribute to the aesthetic of images), but attach more importance to pure IQ, Leica may offer something superior to the Canon big whites. Douglas/telyt mentioned in a similar discussion that the Canon 400/2.8 disappointed him, compared to his Leica's.

I have the Mamiya A 200/2.8 APO for the rare occassions when I need better IQ than the 70-200/2.8L IS II can provide. Even then, the A 200 APO is only better in the corners, and not by much. The A 200 APO is even better than the Apo-Telyt-R 180/3.4, which I recently sold.

AhamB wrote:
The question is not whether you need alternatives, but whether you want them. If you don't care about AF and IS (they have their utility but don't directly contribute to the aesthetic of images), but attach more importance to pure IQ, Leica may offer something superior to the Canon big whites. Douglas/telyt mentioned in a similar discussion that the Canon 400/2.8 disappointed him, compared to his Leica's.

There are not any real alternatives for those 400/2,8--600/4--800/5,6 lenses even if you skip the IS and AF
And you can't replace the 400/2,8 with the Leica 280mm f/4 APO as suggested in a couple of threads before

John -- Thank you -- I love seeing these lenses compared. According to what I'm seeing there, the Leica is the winner, but not by a huge margin. The Zeiss 25mm seems to suffer most from CA fringing, but otherwise do well on sharpness and color.

Not to be too picky, but am I right in noticing perhaps the intitial set has the image order transposed? It seems the wider angle 25 is in the middle, not at the end of the series there. Possibly I'm mistaken, but please take a look at the overall and detail shots and let me know.

The 28 and 25 appear different enough in AOV that you might want to keep them both, and off-load all the Oly's and such for now.

Lars Johnsson wrote:
There are not any real alternatives for those 400/2,8--600/4--800/5,6 lenses even if you skip the IS and AF
And you can't replace the 400/2,8 with the Leica 280mm f/4 APO as suggested in a couple of threads before

The Leica APO-Telyt-R 400/2.8, 560/4 and 800/5.6 are not real? Probably not easy to find (or afford), but Leica has made them.

philip_pj wrote:
If CZ strike a high level of market success with all the Canon FF DSLR users (many of whom seem quite excited to spend up bit on white lenses, believing them to be the best thing since sliced bread), perhaps Leica will re-enter the market with their own line of warmed over 'digital quality' R lenses.

Zeiss should buy some decent space in the mainstream photographic press for something similar to denoir's comparison tests, a lot of people in more accepted fora are still ignorant of what is on offer and how easy and affordable buy in actually is, for the cheaper ZEs, at least.

This is why I say that if Zeiss ever feels like making a fabulous 24-70/2.8 AF ZE, watch them go. They should also insist on cross-platform marketing for any Sony lenses in future.

If the mags would publish such promotional material, of course.

The most funny thing is when you imply that the white Canon super teles have bad image quality

Jason_Thames wrote:
I must say, in all of the images you have posted, I really like the R28 images better. I bet I would like them better at 100% as well. That is high praise coming from a Zeiss-o-holic like me, but the R28 is pretty damn special. One day I will find a copy for the right price, and all of my other 28's will be hitting the road...

-Jason

+1

AhamB wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:
There are not any real alternatives for those 400/2,8--600/4--800/5,6 lenses even if you skip the IS and AF
And you can't replace the 400/2,8 with the Leica 280mm f/4 APO as suggested in a couple of threads before

The Leica APO-Telyt-R 400/2.8, 560/4 and 800/5.6 are not real? Probably not easy to find (or afford), but Leica has made them.

Alternative lenses should of course be lenses that you can find and buy without problem. Otherwise they are NOT any real alternatives

Lars Johnsson wrote:

Alternative lenses should of course be lenses that you can find and buy without problem. Otherwise they are NOT any real alternatives

Actually, that litmus test would eliminate many alts folks around here use as many older lenses have become more difficult to easily find recently. When you find them though, they still serve as great alternatives!

Tariq Gibran wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:

Alternative lenses should of course be lenses that you can find and buy without problem. Otherwise they are NOT any real alternatives

Actually, that litmus test would eliminate many alts folks around here use as many older lenses have become more difficult to easily find recently. When you find them though, they still serve as great alternatives!

So how many people here have found and bought these lenses

Lars Johnsson wrote:
Alternative lenses should of course be lenses that you can find and buy without problem. Otherwise they are NOT any real alternatives

That depends entirely on the effort and money you're willing to put into getting them. I didn't suggest they were an alternative for just any person with a Canon DSLR.

Lars Johnsson wrote:
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:

Alternative lenses should of course be lenses that you can find and buy without problem. Otherwise they are NOT any real alternatives

Actually, that litmus test would eliminate many alts folks around here use as many older lenses have become more difficult to easily find recently. When you find them though, they still serve as great alternatives!

So how many people here have found and bought these lenses

I could not say but your statement reads as a generalization. I know I seek out - and buy - a number of alt lenses that are unavailable pretty much anywhere on any given week.

It was not a generalization. It was a reply to this comment that started it:

"If CZ strike a high level of market success with all the Canon FF DSLR users (many of whom seem quite excited to spend up bit on white lenses, believing them to be the best thing since sliced bread), perhaps Leica will re-enter the market with their own line of warmed over 'digital quality' R lenses"


If you should buy alt lenses instead of the long white super-teles like it was suggested. Then you can not sit and wait a few years to maybe get them. Some people actually use their lenses also. Either as their work or hobby.

Lars Johnsson wrote:
It was not a generalization. It was a reply to this comment that started it:

"If CZ strike a high level of market success with all the Canon FF DSLR users (many of whom seem quite excited to spend up bit on white lenses, believing them to be the best thing since sliced bread), perhaps Leica will re-enter the market with their own line of warmed over 'digital quality' R lenses"


If you should buy alt lenses instead of the long white super-teles like it was suggested. Then you can not sit and wait a few years to maybe get them. Some people actually use their lenses also. Either as their work or hobby.

Years? How about a sixty-second search!

http://cgi.ebay.com/LEICA-R-400mm-f-2-8-APO-TELYT-R-Lens-MINT-CASE-/160487131230?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item255dc7485e

http://cgi.ebay.com/Leica-R-1-5-6-800-mm-Apo-Telyt-R-ROM-11842-118-/350460188321?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item51990e16a1#ht_4270wt_1493

Another hornet's nest shaken up. My mistake, I should have used the term 'L lenses' rather than 'white lenses'. Thanks all for leaping to my assistance in understanding Canon lore, such as it is ;-)

Tariq Gibran wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:
It was not a generalization. It was a reply to this comment that started it:

"If CZ strike a high level of market success with all the Canon FF DSLR users (many of whom seem quite excited to spend up bit on white lenses, believing them to be the best thing since sliced bread), perhaps Leica will re-enter the market with their own line of warmed over 'digital quality' R lenses"


If you should buy alt lenses instead of the long white super-teles like it was suggested. Then you can not sit and wait a few years to maybe get them. Some people actually use their lenses also. Either as their work or hobby.

Years? How about a sixty-second search!

http://cgi.ebay.com/LEICA-R-400mm-f-2-8-APO-TELYT-R-Lens-MINT-CASE-/160487131230?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item255dc7485e

http://cgi.ebay.com/Leica-R-1-5-6-800-mm-Apo-Telyt-R-ROM-11842-118-/350460188321?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item51990e16a1#ht_4270wt_1493

And what about reading your own links. At least one of those two will not ship to my continent.
Maybe you should spend more than 60 seconds so you get it right the next time

In any case I would not buy a used lens from China on Ebay. Especially not when it cost $ 10-15k

Truly, one should not judge a lens without having used it for themselves. As for the Canon Super's, they are the Bees Knees! At least the ones I have used are... Now back to your regularly scheduled Leica/Zeiss comparison.

-Jason

Lars Johnsson wrote:
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:
It was not a generalization. It was a reply to this comment that started it:

"If CZ strike a high level of market success with all the Canon FF DSLR users (many of whom seem quite excited to spend up bit on white lenses, believing them to be the best thing since sliced bread), perhaps Leica will re-enter the market with their own line of warmed over 'digital quality' R lenses"


If you should buy alt lenses instead of the long white super-teles like it was suggested. Then you can not sit and wait a few years to maybe get them. Some people actually use their lenses also. Either as their work or hobby.

Years? How about a sixty-second search!

http://cgi.ebay.com/LEICA-R-400mm-f-2-8-APO-TELYT-R-Lens-MINT-CASE-/160487131230?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item255dc7485e

http://cgi.ebay.com/Leica-R-1-5-6-800-mm-Apo-Telyt-R-ROM-11842-118-/350460188321?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item51990e16a1#ht_4270wt_1493

And what about reading your own links. At least one of those two will not ship to my continent.
Maybe you should spend more than 60 seconds so you get it right the next time

In any case I would not buy a used lens from China on Ebay. Especially not when it cost $ 10-15k

The point is that if you are serious about really wanting one of these lenses, you can track it down... and it will not take a year. I have no doubt one could also call around and find one in less than your ridiculous time frame of a year. None of these lenses under discussion are exactly cheap. For some, these lenses are viable alternatives, notwithstanding your personal litmus test.