Zeiss Lens Photos and Discussion
/forum/topic/1009161/195

1       2       3              195      
196
       197              225       226       end

carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15814
Country: Germany

In fact, I find that the 85P has a bit of the same look as the 35/2 Sonnar on the RX1...



Samuli Vahonen
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Total Posts: 1595
Country: Finland

wfrank - enjoyed P1800 shots
carstenw - I agree the Scania photo not very interesting, but very enjoyable rendering from 85P

----------------------------------------------------------------------

As "explained" earlier I got Sony 24-70 for shooting from boat. Autofocus was real joy to work with, and focus was spot on every shot (I was really doubtful shooting so long time only with manual focus). Also image stabilization works quite well, thou it seems to struggle oddly sometimes (not always) at 1/50s and 1/60s.

In addition to photographing from boat I did "test" lens few times on firm ground. Seems quite OK, but being f/2.8 with rather small lens barrel (=vignetting & crappy bokeh on corners --> in practice for me this is f/4 lens, I try to avoid larger apertures). Corners are soft at 24mm and 26mm, but 28mm it's ok. It's very good (almost ZE quality) from 35mm to 55mm, and at 70mm it's not as good as I would like it to be. I think overall image quality is quite good compromise for having autofocus.

#1 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 2.8/24-70 @ 35mm, f/4, 0.6s, Zeiss polarizer (see fugly bokeh even at f/4 on top left corner)


#2 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 2.8/24-70 @ 40mm, f/4, 1/3s, Zeiss polarizer - I personally like rendering @ this distance very much, very "Zeissy" - thou usable f/2.8 (like in ZE 2/35, ZE 1.4/50 and ZE 2/50) would be nice to have


#3 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 2.8/24-70 @ 35mm, f/4, 1/8s, Zeiss polarizer


#4 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 2.8/24-70 @ 35mm, f/4.5, 1/60s - in this shot f/4.5 was needed to mask the fuglyness in the bokeh


--
Samuli



Mescalamba
Registered: Jul 06, 2011
Total Posts: 3206
Country: Czech Republic

Looks like you are mastering your A850 post-processing. What you used for RAWs? Colors seems quite Sony-ish, so Aperture?

Btw. I think bokeh is rather ok on f2.8? (sharpness not tho )

About that SSS not working well on 1/50 or 1/60, thats rather norm for in body stabilisation from Sony (and KM before, my KM-7D does have same issue at 1/25 and 1/30).

Like your pics..



Fly amanita - colors and bit of contrast from Replichrome Kodak Portra 400+ (Frontier). Since Fuji S5 Pro is probably incapable of producing life-like colors I settled with simply tweaking them to be different.

Different variant in Fujifilm dSLR thread (or whatever name that one has ).

Edit: Replaced with invisibly sharper version.



Ronny _Olsson
Registered: Jun 24, 2012
Total Posts: 2473
Country: Sweden


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



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 2968
Country: Sweden

Thanks guys!

- - -

Splendid colors and unbelievably vivid Ronny.

And Mesca, nice mushroom there.

Samuli, always interesting read. And images. They look very Samulian Zeissy to me (in the best positive sense). And thanks for the word fuglyness.

I've missed your Sony road and it would be interesting to learn where you're heading. I am pretty fed up with Canons zero movement on the sensor scene. Any interest for the Sony A7(/r)? I already wet my feet going NEX so it feels like a logical step though I hate the NEX handling. I am sure the A7 is a bit better but speaking about UI I'll miss the OVF.



Bifurcator
Registered: Oct 22, 2008
Total Posts: 9299
Country: Japan

Mescalamba wrote:



Pick that sucker and send it to me... I'll pay shipping!!!



Mescalamba
Registered: Jul 06, 2011
Total Posts: 3206
Country: Czech Republic

Heh, what would you do with it? Its probably gone by now. There was small one next to it, but I didnt payed attention to the shutter speed, so I ended just with slightly blurry ones..



Well, its a glass taken with another glass (C/Y 50/1.4 MM). Just fooling around.



Samuli Vahonen
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Total Posts: 1595
Country: Finland

Mescalamba wrote:
Looks like you are mastering your A850 post-processing. What you used for RAWs? Colors seems quite Sony-ish, so Aperture?

Aperture. Sony colors are very hard to make look like Canon - or how I did see the actual scene. If I have time and interest I may want to try Sony's own software (if such exists).

Mescalamba wrote:
Btw. I think bokeh is rather ok on f2.8? (sharpness not tho )

In center of image - yes. On last 5-8mm of image circle - no. Way too small lens to be real f/2.8. Sharpness - hmm, have to admit that I didn't get good understanding about that since photos were useless (due to bokeh) at f/2.8, so I have shoot almost all photos f/4-8. Also lens seems to be stronges between 30mm and 55mm, below 30mm or above 55mm for sure it's not great at f/2.8 - even at f/4 there is quite clear difference between midrange of the zoom vs. far ends of zoom range.

Mescalamba wrote:
Fly amanita - colors and bit of contrast from Replichrome Kodak Portra 400+ (Frontier). Since Fuji S5 Pro is probably incapable of producing life-like colors I settled with simply tweaking them to be different.

?? I think the colors are life-like, if you wouldn't have added blue tint to dark parts of image. At least if it's the same mushroom I have in my mind (Fly amanita is "family" name of some mushrooms - I assume this was Amanita Muscaria, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanita_muscaria )




wfrank wrote:
I've missed your Sony road and it would be interesting to learn where you're heading. I am pretty fed up with Canons zero movement on the sensor scene. Any interest for the Sony A7(/r)? I already wet my feet going NEX so it feels like a logical step though I hate the NEX handling. I am sure the A7 is a bit better but speaking about UI I'll miss the OVF.

My "Sony road" is just for boat shooting, where I need AF - and now after shooting few times from boat I'm also sure that for such use I need zoom as well - no matter how calm it is, the damn boat is always on the move. AF (no liveview==>AF only for me) and Zoom don't make shooting enjoyable process for me - I prefer the relative slow working with 5DmkII&Liveview&sturdy tripod(+Photoclam Multiflex geared ultra-accurate but very "slow" head) AND high quality Zeiss primes. But that is not an option for boat shooting. Of course I tried 24-70 on dry land few times this summer, but it's only because it was new for me and I needed some "tripod time" to evaluate the lens.

I might be minority here, but after all I'm pretty happy to 5DmkII sensor. At some point I was considering upgrading to D800E, but selling all lenses is so big effort that I ended up staying with 5DmkII. Good thing about 5DmkII is that they are dirt cheap, and I personally benefit really much from shooting with 2 bodies - e.g. last Saturday I was shooting with 1.4/35 and 1.4/85 after finally getting 72mm polarizer, and it was really enjoyable just to drop camera bag to ground and change camera and I had different focal length in few seconds (well, about a minute if counting time to change polarizer from lens to other - lesson learned: don't take 2 lenses with same filter thread...).





Some photos from lake Aurejärvi (in Parkano and Ylöjärvi, Finland), from 29th May 2013. First two photos present kind of photos I what to achieve by shooting from boat. 3rd one is just ordinary boring wide angle landscape.

#1 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 2.8/24-70 @ 30mm, f/4, 1/400s


#2 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 2.8/24-70 @ 60mm, f/4, 1/250s


#3 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 2.8/24-70 @ 24mm, f/8, 1/80s, ISO 200 - 24mm can be used, as long as corner blurriness is hidden like in this shot and center is quite OK @ f/5.6-8


--
Samuli

EDIT: corrected type, thousand might still be hidden in the post...



Mescalamba
Registered: Jul 06, 2011
Total Posts: 3206
Country: Czech Republic

I remember some of these pics.

Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Mescalamba wrote:
Looks like you are mastering your A850 post-processing. What you used for RAWs? Colors seems quite Sony-ish, so Aperture?

Aperture. Sony colors are very hard to make look like Canon - or how I did see the actual scene. If I have time and interest I may want to try Sony's own software (if such exists).


Sony Image Data Converter - yes it exists. Not great. And SilkyPix has about same colors too and if you dont need per-pixel lvl of perfect sharpness its rather decent compromise. Maybe colors from that are actually better. Some portrait masters praise it for colors. But obviously, thing is that you dont need that much per-pixel sharpness in portrait as in landscape.

Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Mescalamba wrote:
Fly amanita - colors and bit of contrast from Replichrome Kodak Portra 400+ (Frontier). Since Fuji S5 Pro is probably incapable of producing life-like colors I settled with simply tweaking them to be different.

?? I think the colors are life-like, if you wouldn't have added blue tint to dark parts of image. At least if it's the same mushroom I have in my mind (Fly amanita is "family" name of some mushrooms - I assume this was Amanita Muscaria, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanita_muscaria )


Actually I thought "Fly Amanita" is just this specific variant. And yes, its Amanita Muscaria (I have that bit of text in Fujifilm dSLR thread, along with different version of this pic).

Heh, Im glad that it seems a bit "real" but it really isnt. It looked quite different in person (that shroom is much brighter and contrastier red). I think that it looks bit more "normal" exactly thanks to those color profiles from Replichrome. Color tints are part of them. Supposedly it mimics film look and colors. I just use it for nice colors (to me). Sometimes it produce at least some tones quite right and suprisingly bit more "real" than normal S5 Pro profiles.

I guess its just cause nobody really cared to profile S5 Pro right. With good color profile I suspect its rather good in this aspect (not saying it doesnt make nice colors, but most converters make either wierd colors, or Fuji stylized ones, neither of these are real). Compared to A850 or A900 color separation, its a bit of joke..



Samuli Vahonen
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Total Posts: 1595
Country: Finland

Mescalamba, languages are weird - I'm not biologist but according to my mushroom book (and wikipedia) in Finland we call the Amanita family of mushrooms "Kärpässienet" (direct english translation "Fly Amanitas" - 's' in the end for blural), and there are tens of different mushrooms on this "family" of mushrooms, one of them being Amanita Muscaria. In English people seem to call one of the Amanita family of mushrooms "Fly Amanita".





Not necessarily nice photo, but "maniac bokeh" makes this worth posting for me - Contax S-Planar T* 2.8/60 @ f/2.8 - the boleh is so crazy that I actually like it...


--
Samuli



Mescalamba
Registered: Jul 06, 2011
Total Posts: 3206
Country: Czech Republic

I think this "maniac bokeh" is actually Planar signature. My 50/1.4 does something very similar at 1.4, just less contrasty and more diffused. Pretty much completely gone at f2.

I sorta like it too. Exactly how you put it "its so crazy that its nice".

As far as mushrooms go, Im usually sticking with latin. Just wasnt sure everyone would know which one it is..
Even tho it doesnt look like it, mushrooms are actually my favorite subject (sometimes even favorite meal ). I hope I will have some decent gear for shooting these more often in the future.



Samuli Vahonen
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Total Posts: 1595
Country: Finland

Mescalamba wrote:
I hope I will have some decent gear for shooting these more often in the future.

Depends of course size of mushroom, but I have liked most Contax Distagon T* 2.8/28 for mushroom photos. Not sure if I like new Zeiss lenses for mushrooms - Makro-Planar T* 2/50 isn't bad, but if going to that long focal length then I guess I would anyway prefer Contax S-Planar T* 2.8/60.

Not mushrooms but few "vertical landscapes" inspired by twoeye's shots on various threads.

Contax S-Planar T* 2.8/60 @ f/8, 1.3s, ISO 100, Carl Zeiss T* Circular Polarizer


Contax S-Planar T* 2.8/60 @ f/2.8, 0.6s, ISO 100, Carl Zeiss T* Circular Polarizer


Contax S-Planar T* 2.8/60 @ f/8, 4s, ISO 100, Carl Zeiss T* Circular Polarizer


--
Samuli



rji2goleez
Registered: Jun 24, 2003
Total Posts: 4667
Country: United States

Finally taking out my EOS converted CZ 85/1.4. I love this lens and have to use it more often.



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 2968
Country: Sweden



Samuli Vahonen wrote:

Contax S-Planar T* 2.8/60 @ f/2.8, 0.6s, ISO 100, Carl Zeiss T* Circular Polarizer

--
Samuli


Nice series.

Have you done any Macro with that lens, meaning insects or similar and if so is it a good lens for such things?



Gary Clennan
Registered: Mar 29, 2007
Total Posts: 5162
Country: Canada

Bifurcator wrote:
Mescalamba wrote:



Pick that sucker and send it to me... I'll pay shipping!!!



No more zoomers for you BIF!!



Samuli Vahonen
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Total Posts: 1595
Country: Finland

wfrank wrote:
Nice series.

Have you done any Macro with that lens, meaning insects or similar and if so is it a good lens for such things?

Thanks. I don't shoot much macro stuff. Many years ago I did and as far as I remember long lens would be good for insects etc. Back then I shoot insects with Canon 180L and Canon 100mm (old and L-versions). With 60mm one would need enormous skill and patience. So if you try to do something like this, then I think 100mm and longer lenses are better choices.

I prefer to show surroundings of insects - even to extend that I experienced few years ago quite a lot with Contax Distagon T* 2./28mm+extension rings (example (I think I posted this one at 2009 or 2010 to Fred Miranda)).

Example (apologies for reposting, I'm pretty sure I posted this at 2011) with S-Planar T* 2.8/60 @ f/4:


Technically at 1:1 this is clearly best lens I have ever had (Canon non-L & L 100mm, 180L, ZE MP 2/100&2/50 with tubes and/or extender, Pentax 100mm f/4, and maybe some others did go to 1:1). Contrast is never as deep as with ZE/ZF-lenses, but as far as I see it's just matter of post processing slider positions to fix. However I personally rarely want to shoot such big magnification, the DOF is so narrow that it's very hard to present anything well.
--
Samuli



Sirfishalot
Registered: Dec 23, 2004
Total Posts: 3549
Country: United States

A little more fall color from Seattle.
Planar 100/2 MMJ on Canon 1DX.

JayT






rico
Registered: Jul 13, 2003
Total Posts: 3873
Country: United States

Nice, Jay. I can't wait to digitally deploy my P100 MMG on the new Sony A7r. My current FF sensor (1Ds) has mirror-box interference.



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 2968
Country: Sweden

Thanks a lot Samuli.


rico wrote:
Nice, Jay. I can't wait to digitally deploy my P100 MMG on the new Sony A7r. My current FF sensor (1Ds) has mirror-box interference.


yes, nice sirfish. Yes that is a great lens, works on the 5D2 (me got MMJ too). I believe I am going A7 rather than the r but we'll see.



Ronny _Olsson
Registered: Jun 24, 2012
Total Posts: 2473
Country: Sweden

Crosspost from HD-thread

Zeiss Makro-Planar T * 50mm f / 2 ZF.2 Vivitar Nikon AT-3/AI Extension Tube 20mm by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr



1       2       3              195      
196
       197              225       226       end