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
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Very nice shots, James! Maybe you should get another Zeiss lens?
Chris, I am pretty sure that your lens has a problem, but I think it is always good to think in terms of "proof". I would certainly contact Zeiss, send them the photos, and ask about it. I would not personally be happy with a lens like that.
Thanks for the suggestion Carsten, but that isn't in the cards for me - unless I win the lottery. Thanks to you and Ronny for the kind comments. I'll just image some more of the tens of thousands of film shots I already have, and shooting my current gear.
There are inexpensive ways to shoot Zeiss lenses. The Contax 50/1.7 can be found for $100 or so, for example, and the wonderful ZF 50/1.4 for perhaps $300-400. It depends a bit on what system you use, but getting a Zeiss lens again doesn't have to cost a lot.
carstenw wrote:
There are inexpensive ways to shoot Zeiss lenses. The Contax 50/1.7 can be found for $100 or so, for example, and the wonderful ZF 50/1.4 for perhaps $300-400. It depends a bit on what system you use, but getting a Zeiss lens again doesn't have to cost a lot.
You can also get the Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50/1.8 again for $50 or so.
zhangyue wrote:
Rony, I love the d700's signature color, it is such a great camera which is very hard to find a follower. Hand hold? Or tripod?
Thanks I shot 99.9% handhold .. shooting rarely or never Slow Shutter Speed.. have no filter either .. but it would been fun to try when looking all the great photos with Slow Shutter Speed
It is difficult to find a replacement for D700 .. try to tell myself that I do not need the D800 or D800E
