Thanks Jim and Philippe! I always have mixed feelings when making a photo of something beautiful mankind has built. Is it my good work or their good work? All I did was walk by at the right time, see what the architect intended, and snap the shutter (8 times)...
vallejo wrote:
Humm...Contax is Zeiss also, right? Anyway, this was made with Contax 85mm f2.8 @f4... cannot decide between color or toned BW...what do you guys think?
Andre
Colour!
Yes, Contax lenses are made by Carl Zeiss, even if it doesn't say so
Carsten - Beautiful series of panos. The arch shot gives superb sense of space and its depth. Well controlled dynamic range gives a great tone. Love this shot very much. Gleisdreieck Station stich shows off tremendous detail, which I imagine would be quite amazing with large print. Somehow, though, I love the arches even though there is less detail to show off the high pixel count.
vallejo - I think I prefer the B/W version.
derglman - Love the building shot. In this particular shot, flare did not bother me.
akul wrote:
derglman - Love the building shot. In this particular shot, flare did not bother me.
Glad you like it. But the flare issue with the ZE35/2 is bugging me a lot. The ZE35 is my favorite lens at the moment but it flares so easily and the hood is crap, way too shallow. Does anybody have suggestions for an alternative hood? Does the hood for the ZE50/1.4 fit on the ZE35/2 with the corners dremeled away?
And regarding a comment you made about photographing man-made structures and objects: I hope you can get past that thinking. You are extremely talented at interpreting these subjects. I don't see an artistic advantage to photographing nature or gardens (not saying anything against!) compared to buildings or urban design. We can't all be creators of magnificent edifices -- some of us are left to interpret and appreciate the genius others have in that field. I hope you will do more "urban" work, as you are very talented in that arena. Putting a new view to an often photographed scene or building is an art in itself! This is meant as encouragement, not scolding.
Dergiman wrote:
Glad you like it. But the flare issue with the ZE35/2 is bugging me a lot. The ZE35 is my favorite lens at the moment but it flares so easily and the hood is crap, way too shallow. Does anybody have suggestions for an alternative hood? Does the hood for the ZE50/1.4 fit on the ZE35/2 with the corners dremeled away?
Really? I've never really had a problem with flare and the ZF 35/2. I found it to be excellent in reducing or suppressing flare.
Toothwalker wrote:
Where is the flare, is it the arc near the bottom?
Idle hope. If anything, a UV filter gives you additional flare.
Yes, the arc at the bottom. There is more flare outside the crop. I hope that the UV-filter reduces flare in this case. The front element is very curved on the ZE35/2. I hope that the UV-filter reflects the light that comes in at a very shallow angle before the front element catches it and redirects it to the sensor. Then the black bras ring of the filter should act like a short hood and it should also cover the shiny filter ring at the front of the lens. All this is only a minor improvement but it may do the trick.
@Toothwalker: I really like your image with the 3 lamas!
wow, your Berliner Dom is a very impressive shot, carsten! Love the blue light - just the right amount!
At closer inspection there seems some wide-angle like distortion on the right side - right tower and the radio tower look a bit distorted, and the top of the onion towers seems to be wider apart than the bottom? I wonder what it is caused by? The angle at which you took the picture?
Thanks cyra. It must be the stitching, because the 50MP has no visible distortion, and anyway, after the stitch, it wouldn't be visible... Note that I straightened vertical lines, to see if I would like that, so that might make it look not quite natural, but anything curved wouldn't be from that.
Hello everyone. I just purchased a Zeiss C/Y 50 Planar 1.4 MMJ from Ebay, and was wondering if anyone could give input on this lens verse the other 50 1.4's. I have a 50L and a Rokkor 58 1.2 converted to EOS(although I do need to contact Jim Buchanan about it...)...what are impressions of the Planar 50 1.4 MMJ?
