ZE/ZF/ZM Images (Official Thread!)
/forum/topic/860134/841

1       2       3              841      
842
       843              955       956       end

Grenache
Registered: Dec 18, 2008
Total Posts: 1794
Country: United States

Thank you Ronny and Samuli.

Samuli, I wanted to retain the awakening of the day by leaving the foreground darker. The foreground values are 1/3 to 1/2 those of the sky. I did not seek those values numerically but arrived at them for what looked good to me. While I did sample a range of brightness of the foregound, making it brighter substantially changed the mood of the image from serene to Martian.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 14901
Country: Germany

Johnny B Goode wrote:
I was asked to photograph a family today. It was a great day to do so and came away with some fun pictures. As I pulled into my driveway I reached for my camera and bag only to find that I had left the bag at the park. My head began to flood with thoughts of stupidity. Not wasting a moment I threw the truck into gear, dumped the clutch and raced back to the park. An hour and 15 minutes after I had left the park I was fortunate to find my camera bag sitting under the park bench where I had left it. However the jarring trip (I FLEW over bumps, pot holes, and any terrain in my way) had dislodged the intake tube under the hood and my truck and my truck was running rough. Leaving the park I drove a block before needing to stop and refasten the tube. As I went to turn around and get back on the road I came upon a couple rusted gems hidden from the public's view. I stopped, met the owner and was able to snap a few shots before heading back on my way.


Sounds like you had an exciting day

Nice car (maybe).



Samuli Vahonen
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Total Posts: 1459
Country: Finland

Jim, thanks for explanation - artistic preferences are rather subjective and most of us here would shoot same subject completely differently.

Lots of great images on last page - spring is clearly coming
- Wilhelm 35mm renders the old guy very well, loving also the background
- Phil, unluckily you had pretty poor lightning in Venetsia, nice to see 2/35 still managed to bring life to the pictures
- Ronny, the boat shot is really nice, showing 2/35 at it's best
- Johnny, the frontal shot of the rusty firebird is nice - thou I would have shoot it with f/2.2-2.5 range to increase contrast on target and smoothen background (and most likely exposed ~1/3 stop less, at least in post process)



28mm Distagon doesn't seem to be very popular lens. Also I have to admit I don't shoot it very often. It's otherwise nice but due to too small lens barrel (corners too dark and have too much DOF) I can't use it for bokeh shots with larger aperture than f/4. At f/4 bokeh is rather good, but I would hope to be able to use f/2.0-2.8 with this wide lens. Another issue is that this lens makes sensor to do magenta blooming very easily and has quite big CA. But when I manage to go around these issues I really like it's rendering.

At end of March I went out just with 2/28 and 2/35 (I almost always shoot two camera bodies), since during 2013 I want to learn to be better wide angle photographer. This forced me to shoot wide angle (these are wide to me), not sure do I like compositions that much, but hopefully I'm able to improve on those during 2013. At least I have found out that I personally don't like wide angle images, in which camera is tilted to get something into picture. Due to this I try to keep camera on level so that the vertical objects (e.g. trees) in the edges are not leaning towards the center of the image.


#1 Carl Zeiss T* 2/28 @ f/4, 1/640s, 5DmkII @ ISO 100


#2 Carl Zeiss T* 2/28 @ f/8, 1/160s, 5DmkII @ ISO 100


#3 Carl Zeiss T* 2/28 @ f/4, 1/1250s, 5DmkII @ ISO 100


#4 Carl Zeiss T* 2/28 @ f/2.5, 1/4000s, 5DmkII @ ISO 100


#5 Carl Zeiss T* 2/28 @ f/2.2, 1/4000s, 5DmkII @ ISO 100


#6 Carl Zeiss T* 2/28 @ f/4, 1/400s, 5DmkII @ ISO 100


Samuli



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 1628
Country: Belgium

Johnny, you got lucky! Seeing the bag still standing there must have been such a relief.

Some of you might remember me selling a lot of my Zeiss ZE lenses? Well, I've only got the 21 and 50P left and was thinking to just quit using a DSLR.
I recently bought the Fuji 14mm (which is great), but it soon reminded me how much I've always loved my 21mm distagon.
Because of this I've decided sell the Fuji kit and don't abandon the DSLR just yet.

21ZE:


Under the pink clouds by Jochen-B, on Flickr



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 14901
Country: Germany

Very nice shot, Jochen. What was it that you prefer about the Zeiss than the Fuji 14? Did you do some comparison photos?

Great results, Samuli. I like this lens very much, and just try not to put anything in the corners which would look bad if a bit dark and unsharp



Ronny _Olsson
Registered: Jun 24, 2012
Total Posts: 1832
Country: Sweden

Thanks !
Great shot Samuli
Great shot Jochen





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

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

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



Rodluvan
Registered: Sep 01, 2010
Total Posts: 651
Country: Sweden

50P



kwoodard
Registered: Aug 04, 2012
Total Posts: 2381
Country: United States

I am astonished at how clear and crisp so many of the images in this thread are. I probably shouldn't be as my Zeiss binoculars are razor sharp, but still...



Mescalamba
Registered: Jul 06, 2011
Total Posts: 2930
Country: Czech Republic

kwoodard wrote:
I am astonished at how clear and crisp so many of the images in this thread are. I probably shouldn't be as my Zeiss binoculars are razor sharp, but still...


I wont deny that Zeiss lens are sharp, but in certain cases its more about user and his shooting and especially post-processing skill.. Certain threads on FM makes me cry a little, when I see high-end gear literally wasted. Alt corner is sometimes exact opposite, how much ppl can do with so little.. Probably why I like it here.

But yes, Zeiss lens can be razor sharp like nothing else and if they are not, they are at least percieved as sharp.



Rodluvan
Registered: Sep 01, 2010
Total Posts: 651
Country: Sweden

I for one have done less and less editing over the years, in the beginning I got carried away with the possibilities losing sight of content and composition. Don't get me wrong, I shot raw so o/c I do edit, not just like before.
I hate sounding like a dull fanboy, but usually Zeiss characteristics do carry their own, they don't need much pushing or tweaking, they are strong and sublime (!) at the same time.

In another forum someone said he preferred the nikkor 1.2/50 Ai(s) to the 50P because it was sharper at 1.4...........
Of all the characteristics of a lens, the possibilities they hold, the beauty they paint and people are still blinded by sharpness (and at one aperture, at that). *sigh*



kwoodard
Registered: Aug 04, 2012
Total Posts: 2381
Country: United States

Mescalamba wrote:
kwoodard wrote:
I am astonished at how clear and crisp so many of the images in this thread are. I probably shouldn't be as my Zeiss binoculars are razor sharp, but still...


I wont deny that Zeiss lens are sharp, but in certain cases its more about user and his shooting and especially post-processing skill.. Certain threads on FM makes me cry a little, when I see high-end gear literally wasted. Alt corner is sometimes exact opposite, how much ppl can do with so little.. Probably why I like it here.

But yes, Zeiss lens can be razor sharp like nothing else and if they are not, they are at least percieved as sharp.


What always makes me sad to think about is in 1992, I was offered a Nikon film camera and a suite of Zeiss glass as a graduation gift. I had the option of the kit or cash (whatever could be received for the sale of the kit). I took the cash as I hadn't done any photography in a bunch of years. If memory serves, all the glass was the fastest available for each respective focal length. 28, 35, 50, 85 and 100. I received $2000 to go towards a car, I think even then, the seller was robbed.

Some day I think I will get one to go with my MF kit of old Nikon/Nikkor lenses.



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 2732
Country: Sweden

Samuli, The CY 28/2 also called "Hollywood" is my current dream lens. If I had the ZE I imagine I use it all the time.

Fantastic boat Ronny
Fantastic car Johnny B (#1)

Distagon 35/1.4. It looks better when I move slightly away from the screen. How odd.



dubaiphil
Registered: Jun 10, 2009
Total Posts: 811
Country: United Arab Emirates

Piazza Del Notturno, Bologna - D700 + 2/35



dubaiphil
Registered: Jun 10, 2009
Total Posts: 811
Country: United Arab Emirates

Piazza De La Mercanzia, Bologna

A 9 shot square pano in another piazza - D700 + 2/35



Samuli Vahonen
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Total Posts: 1459
Country: Finland

Mescalamba wrote:
Certain threads on FM makes me cry a little, when I see high-end gear literally wasted. Alt corner is sometimes exact opposite, how much ppl can do with so little..


I want to try the average-Joe crappy processing!!!! How it's done? JPGs directly out from Lightroom and upload to crappy photo sharing site? Please advice if someone has clue how they make their images look so bad. (honest request not troll)

[I'm not sure how much is needed, just loaded yesterday first image to facebook and it looks pretty crappy compared to JPG-file on my hard drive, even colors went worse.]


wfrank wrote:
Samuli, The CY 28/2 also called "Hollywood" is my current dream lens. If I had the ZE I imagine I use it all the time.


Hmmm, I doubt C/Y version has anything to do with the ZE/ZF version. PDFs:
Contax Distagon T* 2/2.8 C/Y8 - 9 lens elements, 8 groups
Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2/28 Z* - 10 lens elements, 8 groups

MTFs curves are little similar but new one has much more contrast. Also there are some major differences on the lens elements shapes if you compare them.


wfrank wroteistagon 35/1.4. It looks better when I move slightly away from the screen. How odd.


Hmmm, too late to anymore start macpro, but it works same way on my laptop screen - weird.

Samuli



Johnny B Goode
Registered: Jan 15, 2012
Total Posts: 434
Country: United States

Not a bad suggestion Samuli Vahonen. Thanks for the compliments. Maybe the story was a bit TMI but my emotions were running high.



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 1628
Country: Belgium

carstenw wrote:
Very nice shot, Jochen. What was it that you prefer about the Zeiss than the Fuji 14? Did you do some comparison photos?


Thanks Carsten.
I did shoot some quick comparison photos and they confirmed what I was already seeing/feeling. They're actually quite close. The fuji is really good, especially the very low distortion. However, the lens/x-trans sensor doesn't give me the same microcontrast. The Zeiss' microcontrast looks more natural and reacts better to resizing IMHO.



dthrog00
Registered: Jan 30, 2012
Total Posts: 216
Country: United States

Lots of great shots, but Jochen's pink sky image and wfrank's abandoned bike stand out. The bar is set quite high in this thread!

Dave



Mescalamba
Registered: Jul 06, 2011
Total Posts: 2930
Country: Czech Republic

Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Mescalamba wrote:
Certain threads on FM makes me cry a little, when I see high-end gear literally wasted. Alt corner is sometimes exact opposite, how much ppl can do with so little..


I want to try the average-Joe crappy processing!!!! How it's done? JPGs directly out from Lightroom and upload to crappy photo sharing site? Please advice if someone has clue how they make their images look so bad. (honest request not troll)

[I'm not sure how much is needed, just loaded yesterday first image to facebook and it looks pretty crappy compared to JPG-file on my hard drive, even colors went worse.]

Samuli


Facebook is sure way to kill any good quality photo. When I post there, its just link to Tumblr or Flickr. Well and I have profile pic, yea thats about it.


How to make bad processing.. hm, lets see.

JPEGs out of camera, thats sure. Best choice would be something older from Sony. If WB is wrong, let it be. Then try to use worst downsizing algorithm you can find. Yea it needs to be sharper, so sharpen that output with large radius high sharpening. Then maybe compress photo a bit more.

Should be enough and if not, kill it with 256 color mode!

Colorblinds and shaky hands get advantage.. thats sure. And never forget to NEVER correct horizont, or CA, or distortion.. or anything. Its perfect out of camera, isnt it?

Well and there is always Instagram..

kwoodard wrote:

What always makes me sad to think about is in 1992, I was offered a Nikon film camera and a suite of Zeiss glass as a graduation gift. I had the option of the kit or cash (whatever could be received for the sale of the kit). I took the cash as I hadn't done any photography in a bunch of years. If memory serves, all the glass was the fastest available for each respective focal length. 28, 35, 50, 85 and 100. I received $2000 to go towards a car, I think even then, the seller was robbed.

Some day I think I will get one to go with my MF kit of old Nikon/Nikkor lenses.


That would make me cry a bit.



Mescalamba
Registered: Jul 06, 2011
Total Posts: 2930
Country: Czech Republic

wfrank wrote:
Samuli, The CY 28/2 also called "Hollywood" is my current dream lens. If I had the ZE I imagine I use it all the time.

Fantastic boat Ronny
Fantastic car Johnny B (#1)

Distagon 35/1.4. It looks better when I move slightly away from the screen. How odd.


Small screen maybe? Nice pic..

C/Y 28/2 mm.. funny, only lens that made me think about Canon camera (cause its only FF that can take AE variant). One of my dream lens too..



1       2       3              841      
842
       843              955       956       end