buggz2k wrote:
Question for all:
I recently lost, was stolen, my C/Y Zeiss 35/1.4
I now have insurance monies, and wanting to definitely replace it.
Do I get another C/Y MMJ, or, do I get the new ZE?
Has anyone ever had both at one time?
I would love to hear from someone who has had both.
This is to use on my 5DMkII, which NEVER infinity focus on ANY adapted lens, of ANY mount.
Yes, I've used many types of differing adapters in the same type mount.
My condolences. The question "Has anyone ever had both at one time?" may be a stopper, I havent.
But FWIW, I would not get a ZE. Besides the mythical CY character edge, there's price, size, manual aperture (future proof, can be used on future mirrorless FF's + feel), design, can be used on a analog Contax (which I myself intend to try). Maybe more. The only advantage I see with the ZE is that EXIF records the aperture used. But I use my either WO (or almost) or F/8 so I know anyway. And you have the best CY platform available as far as I am concerned, the 5D2.
Regarding infinity there should be at least two ways to fix it. Somewhere here there's a thread here which explains a procedure about that below the rubber focus ring there should be 3 (I think) screws that should be loosened and then you can either be sloppy and make sure focus passes infinity, or be methodical and adjust so the end means optimum focus at infinity.
When I asked Leitax about infinity for their conversion they told me "yes". But they cant be sure really, in case someone already tampered with those screws.
And then there's adapter thickness, but it seem you've given up that/tried "all" (?).
I would go for C/Y too but I dunno anything about either lens. In my case it would be all about price, manual aperture control, and the legacy aspect (build, parts, etc.) of the C/Y which would initially attract.
Bifurcator wrote:
I would go for C/Y too but I dunno anything about either lens. In my case it would be all about price, manual aperture control, and the legacy aspect (build, parts, etc.) of the C/Y which would initially attract.
I have used the ZF.2 so little that I cannot claim to have any experience, and I have never used the Contax, but I am super-interested in these lenses and have greedily absorbed everything I could find on them. As far as I can tell, the main differences are that the ZF.2/ZE is contrastier and sharper wide open, and that the Contax has maybe a smidgen more magic and 3D.
carstenw wrote:
I have used the ZF.2 so little that I cannot claim to have any experience, and I have never used the Contax, but I am super-interested in these lenses and have greedily absorbed everything I could find on them. As far as I can tell, the main differences are that the ZF.2/ZE is contrastier and sharper wide open, and that the Contax has maybe a smidgen more magic and 3D.
carstenw wrote:
I have used the ZF.2 so little that I cannot claim to have any experience, and I have never used the Contax, but I am super-interested in these lenses and have greedily absorbed everything I could find on them. As far as I can tell, the main differences are that the ZF.2/ZE is contrastier and sharper wide open, and that the Contax has maybe a smidgen more magic and 3D.
wfrank wrote:
All the drool comes from the smidgen? :-)
carstenw wrote:
Yep, I guess so If the Contax could be adapted for Nikon, I would probably already own one.
carstenw wrote:
That's the 35/2. He now has the ZF.2 35/1.4.
Indeed I do and I'm very pleased with it so far... except for the weight.
Just as I predicted from what I saw in other peoples photos with this lens, it shares some characteristics with the 50/1.4.
Good choice. Here's a little something from the MMJ and the other day. And I agree to what Makten states, it shares a lot of style with the 50/1.4, just harder to find something doing that at a wider FL. "Doing what?" you may ask. I think I am going to call it the smidgen from now on.
From the 35/1.4 CY thread, it seems quite difficult to take a poor image with it.
It's a workaround for use on Sony, but will have to be done some time. No disrespect for the later version, but a very different look, the old one seems to produce exquisite images, and has its own character...which is the essence of alt lenses.
If the Contax could be adapted for Nikon, I would probably already own one.
