Zeiss Lens Photos and Discussion
/forum/topic/1009161/189

1       2       3              189      
190
       191              226       227       end

Jorge Torralba
Registered: May 16, 2007
Total Posts: 2493
Country: United States

25mm f2







Grenache
Registered: Dec 18, 2008
Total Posts: 1938
Country: United States

Great colors, Jorge.



Sirfishalot
Registered: Dec 23, 2004
Total Posts: 3561
Country: United States

Planar 100/2 on the 5D Classic:







JayT


carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15968
Country: Germany

Stunning!



Ronny _Olsson
Registered: Jun 24, 2012
Total Posts: 2546
Country: Sweden

carstenw wrote:
Stunning!

+1



Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 100mm f/2 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15968
Country: Germany

Very cool, and especially great colours!



Ronny _Olsson
Registered: Jun 24, 2012
Total Posts: 2546
Country: Sweden

Thank's Carstenw



Sirfishalot
Registered: Dec 23, 2004
Total Posts: 3561
Country: United States

Carsten and Ronny,
Thanks guys. I recently won second place with that shot in a juried art exhibit I've been showing in the last few years.

JayT



ChrisMak
Registered: Sep 11, 2013
Total Posts: 6
Country: Netherlands

Hello all, I just registered to this forum, but have been following this thread for a while. I use four Zeiss ZK lenses on a Pentax K5IIs, and have consequently sold all my other lenses. You could say I love the look and the handling of these modern Zeiss primes. My last buy was the distagon 28/2, and recently I got to use it a lot on a trip abroad. In preparing some 24 inch prints, I noticed for the first time that the right side of the image shows less detail than the left side. Shooting at 5,6/6,3 at infinity, the detail just isn't there any more on the far right side.
Now, of course this is at 100% viewing, and it is not something I can not live with, having the option to further stop down, but the lens just isn't up there with the other Zeiss lenses, e.g. my distagon 35/2. Moreover, I plan to upgrade to FF when Pentax releases it, and it should be more severe on FF.
I sent an email to Zeiss, and they very kindly attached a repair form in the reply, suggesting I send it in. Still, I am uncertain if I should have it serviced, as decentering (which I assume this is), is generally not serviceable, am I right?
Zeiss no longer makes the ZK lenses, so I can not have it replaced.
Has anyone experience with a similar situation?
I dread the idea of the lens away, and taken apart, and having it returned only to see no improvement.
Anny suggestions?
I will post some examples/ crops this evening.
Thanks in advance
Chris



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15968
Country: Germany

Decentering is of course in general possible to fix. You simply replace the parts which aren't right, such as the glass, the housing, etc. I think what you might be referring to is that manufacturers sometimes get a lens in, "fix" something, and it returns still not right. I don't recall having heard Zeiss doing something like that. I would try it out.



photoe
Registered: Oct 22, 2010
Total Posts: 46
Country: Germany

I had once a decentered Planar 1.4/85 and sent it to Zeiss. I bought it used and had no invoice to claim warranty service.
After some emails with explenations and test shots, they fixed most of the decentering and set a precise infinity stop to compensate slight field curvature. I got even test shots from the engineer before and after the adjustments.

I wouldn't hesitate to send the lens to them.



redisburning
Registered: Jul 16, 2011
Total Posts: 1094
Country: United States

send it in.

even if they have to replace the whole thing they have units hidden away specifically in case that happens.



ChrisMak
Registered: Sep 11, 2013
Total Posts: 6
Country: Netherlands

Thanks for your reactions! I'm adding a few samples, because I would like some feedback on the possible decentering of the 28/2. If this really is an outside spec case of decentering, I will of course send the lens to Zeiss. Keep in mind please that this is the performance on an APSC camera (without AA filter).It is not hard to imagine how corners will further deteriorate on FF, although I would probably use a smaller aperture. This was shot at f5.6. I have intentionally not sharpened the images at all!
Thanks again.
Chris

http://




centre crop 100%:
http://




left crop 100%:
http://




right crop 100%:
http://





carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15968
Country: Germany

Yes, that does look off, although you have to be very careful about aligning yourself centrally when taking such a photo. Are you sure you were central, and that the building is perpendicular?



James Markus
Registered: Jul 20, 2005
Total Posts: 4465
Country: United States

Just curious, but I use to own a number of old Zeiss lenses and cameras. Is this thread just for more modern versions? I use to shoot on Zeiss, Exa and Exakta cameras...pre-partition of Germany, and after the partitioning...on film...would photos from them be ok here?



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15968
Country: Germany

This thread is for *all* Zeiss lenses, even Jena lenses, which is actually another company. There is also a pure ZE/ZF thread, if that is all you want to post.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15968
Country: Germany

Chris, one way to rule out alignment issues would be to take a photo which shows that the right is soft, like the one above, and then to turn the camera upside down, put the center in the same place, and take another. If the soft area moves to the left, then that would be proof.



ChrisMak
Registered: Sep 11, 2013
Total Posts: 6
Country: Netherlands

carstenw wrote:
Chris, one way to rule out alignment issues would be to take a photo which shows that the right is soft, like the one above, and then to turn the camera upside down, put the center in the same place, and take another. If the soft area moves to the left, then that would be proof.

Carsten, thank you. I would think that at the given distance to the building, and focussing at infinity, the right side should not be blurred substantially more than the left side, wouldn't you say? Thanks about the tip of turning the camera around, I will try that, although my own consideration is, that my 35/2 doesn't exhibit any right side blurring of this type, so that should also rule out the possibility that the camera is faulty. Plus, I keep seeing this same sharpness inconsistency between left and right in many shots with the 28/2. My main question is now: is it outside spec. for this lens, and is it likely I will get the lens back considerably improved? We are after all pixel peeping, but printing at 20+ inch is going to reveal it.

Chris



James Markus
Registered: Jul 20, 2005
Total Posts: 4465
Country: United States

Thanks for the reply, Carsten.

I looked at page one of this thread again, and noticed the Zeiss Ikon lens adapted to a Canon mkII with a plastic body cap - brilliant, yet I've got a sick feeling in my stomach too. Sold all my old glass and cameras about 10 years ago.

I shot both of these in 1973....a little over forty years ago.

Colorado Ghost Town...I believe it was named Alma. Exa 1a with a Zeiss 50/2.8 50mm Jena Lens (had 12 iris blades). Kodak Panatomic-X asa 32 film. (graininess due to post processing)







This one got me trouble with a Yellowstone park ranger, for stepping over a guard rail for a better angle. Exakta RTL-1000 with a Carl Zeiss Pancolar 50/1.8 50mm Jena Lens - from a series of lenses called "Zebra" lenses made in Dresden East Germany. Kodak Ektachrome 64 asa film.







carstenw wrote:
This thread is for *all* Zeiss lenses, even Jena lenses, which is actually another company. There is also a pure ZE/ZF thread, if that is all you want to post.



Ronny _Olsson
Registered: Jun 24, 2012
Total Posts: 2546
Country: Sweden

Great set James


Carl Zeiss 1.4/85 ZF by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr



1       2       3              189      
190
       191              226       227       end