fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1 2

4 … 34 35 end

Archive 2011 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #1 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

wickerprints wrote:
Denoir never has anything negative to say about Zeiss lenses, so you will not get a balanced treatment from him. What is an aberration in a Canon/Nikon lens, is a "special characteristic" of the Zeiss. I have no interest in what he has to say.

As for the PZ tests, the fact that the Zeiss gets "highly recommended" and the Canon doesn't, when their own tests show that they are a lot more similar in image quality than they are different, tells you something about PZ's own biases.

I didn't remember the rating from PZ, I hardly ever look at the rating, it doesn't interst me a bit. You and I and many more agree that conclusions are worthless but you can find information in the single tests if you have a lot of background knowledge and know what you get and what you don't.

May 22, 2011 at 03:52 PM

alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

mpmendenhall wrote:
Color aberrations certainly haven't hurt Zeiss' reputation for rich color and contrast, but I don't think they explain much of it either. There was an interesting single-blind comparison thread posted a while ago on the alt gear forum, and later re-posted on Canon, with side-by-side images taken with equivalent focal length Zeiss and Canon lenses, typically stopped down and near infinity focus (where LoCA is not an issue). On both forums, an overwhelming majority of responders were able to separate the Zeiss and Canon images with 100% accuracy, largely based on perceptions of improved color and contrast. Observations that Zeiss'...Show more →

I was one of those who picked 100% correct in that test.

In particular, I refer to some examples posted by denoir, of bugs that are very small in the frame, and appear with a very rich color palette with Zeiss, but more black, straight and boring with Canon. On such a small scale, color blur from reflections of a shiny bug, spread over a black surrounding, would theoretically look more colorful because of such aberrations. I can't find those exapmles right now.

May 22, 2011 at 03:57 PM

Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #3 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

I'm a long time Canon owner, from FD up through today's EOS.

Lately I've been spending more time in the Alt forums, and seeing some terrific Zeiss images. One of the interesting topics there, and I had a chance to discuss at length with Lars and others, centered on the ZE 100MP and the Canon 100L.

I've only recently started buying Zeiss lenses to augment my Canon glass as I try to "up my game" image-wise. So far, I bought the ZE 21/2.8 which lives up to its reputation as an ultra-sharp (or "uber-sharp") lens better than any of my extreme WA Canons, admittedly by a small margin, but an improvement. I have yet to try it in twilight situations, where I hope to improve my edge sharpness of point light sources and other details.

I also bought the well regarded ZE 35/2, and yes, the image quality is very good. I don't think Canon has a 35mm that can match it at the moment.

Following these good results, recently I reached back to purchase a Contax/Zeiss 80-200/4 T* manual focus/manual aperture. It has been outstanding so far. Personally, I'm happy to have it over my previous 70-200L IS original version.

The only Zeiss I've returned was the 50/1.4, due to focus shift in mid-range apertures. Otherwise, it was very nice, and I was sorry to see it go -- I sold my Canon 50/1.4 EF to get part of its cost.

That being said, the previous discussion was about those macro lenses. A that time, I had only recently bought the 100L, and I was not about to change unless the Zeiss lens was substantially better for my use. After lengthy (and cordial) discussion, I decided the 100L was far beyond my minimum needs and it offered features the Zeiss did not, in 1:1, AF, IS, and most of all, price. But the Zeiss still intrigues me, and there is certainly a lot to be said for the build quality.

I'm very comfortable and happy with the 100L's IQ, features, and handling.

I don't think it is fair to categorically claim Zeiss owners are zealots and fanboys. There is certainly a lot going for the line of lenses, past and present. Optical and mechanical quality is top-notch.

I'm not getting rid of my Canon glass, per se, especially not my "L" lenses. So I'm nobody's fanboy.

It is rude to deride people like denoir/luka/akul as unenlightened shills simply because they are enjoying the Zeiss brand and enthusiastically sharing their results. Everyone is welcome to take all these views and images with a grain of salt, including, and maybe especially, mine.

May 22, 2011 at 04:29 PM

wickerprints
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #4 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

Gunzorro wrote:
It is rude to deride people like denoir/luka/akul as unenlightened shills simply because they are enjoying the Zeiss brand and enthusiastically sharing their results. Everyone is welcome to take all these views and images with a grain of salt, including, and maybe especially, mine.

The truth is the truth--it is not rude to state a fact based on observed behavior, no matter how unpleasant it may sound. Some time ago, someone did a test of several fast 50mm primes, including the Zeiss 50/1.4 Planar, and the result was not favorable for this lens. But he just kept making excuses for the softness and low contrast, saying this is what a portrait-optimized lens is supposed to look like at close subject distances. Then he claimed it would be super sharp at infinity focus, when the other lenses wouldn't be. If it had been any other brand, he would've dismissed its performance as unsatisfactory.

Yes, people are just "sharing their results"--but the way many Zeiss fanatics do that "sharing" implies a great deal of smugness about other brands. It's tiresome to constantly have to hear their post-hoc justifications. It's a lot like having to listen to your evangelical nutcase distant cousin at some family gathering incessantly preaching about saving your eternal soul. I've seen beautiful results with all kinds of lenses, Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Pentax, Minolta, Olympus, Leica, and yes, Zeiss. But it is the PHOTOGRAPHER that deserves the credit, not the lens.

May 22, 2011 at 06:27 PM

M Vers
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

Lars Johnsson wrote:
But if you accepts the test chart in the review. Then you have to accept his conclusion of it also

I'd much rather go by actual physical evidence that I can see with my own two eyes than by someone's verbal description...in fact if we went by some people's words the Zeiss would be a significantly better lens than the 100L when in reality it's not.

May 22, 2011 at 06:54 PM

dancam
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

First I will say that I do not own the ZE 100. But, I do have the 100L as well as the ZE 50MP and ZE 21. The Zeiss lenses definitely wow you right out of the box with their build quality and feel. I was also extremely impressed with the wide open sharpness and punch that they have. One thing that did surprise me is that the ZE 50MP shows a fair amount of CA wide open. This does disappear by about 2.8-4.0 but, I wasn't expecting it. Not a big deal for me though since I'm using them stopped down, but it's there. I ended up deciding to go with the 100L because at the time I felt that with the FL having AF and IS would be nice for anything other than landscape shooting. My primary purchase reasons for the other ZE's was for landscape purposes. I'm not really interested in macro. However, macro lenses usually tend to make good landscape lenses due to their flatter field, lower distortion, and sharpness. The 100L does perform quite well for my use. Image quality is excellent. All of the other lens performance qualities are also excellent. However, and this may sound stupid, it is strictly designed to be an AF lens with MF capabilities. Meaning, the focus precision you can get with a ZE 100 just isn't there. I am finding this to be the biggest difference between Canon and Zeiss lenses. IMHO, you'll find that your shooting style and subject matter will dictate which lenses are better as opposed to actual image quality.

Dan

May 22, 2011 at 07:14 PM

bobbytan
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

This is a significant point in the days when there is no live view. With live view, you know when you have achieved precise focus, so it's not as critical to have a long focus throw for manual focussing, unless you are focussing off the viewfinder.

dancam wrote:
However, and this may sound stupid, it is strictly designed to be an AF lens with MF capabilities. Meaning, the focus precision you can get with a ZE 100 just isn't there. I am finding this to be the biggest difference between Canon and Zeiss lenses. IMHO, you'll find that your shooting style and subject matter will dictate which lenses are better as opposed to actual image quality.

Dan

May 22, 2011 at 07:37 PM

Sp12
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

wickerprints wrote:
The truth is the truth--it is not rude to state a fact based on observed behavior, no matter how unpleasant it may sound. Some time ago, someone did a test of several fast 50mm primes, including the Zeiss 50/1.4 Planar, and the result was not favorable for this lens. But he just kept making excuses for the softness and low contrast, saying this is what a portrait-optimized lens is supposed to look like at close subject distances. Then he claimed it would be super sharp at infinity focus, when the other lenses wouldn't be. If it had been any other...Show more →

Just a heads up, the Zeiss 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 are portrait optimized. They have pronounced spherical aberration at close focus distances below F2 that grows rapidly as you progress away from the plane of sharp focus. Gives you sharp eyes with smooth skin and backgrounds, but I hate it because of how limited they are compared to say, the 35-70/3.4 or the Sigma 50/1.4. Oh yeah, or the Zeiss 50 Macro.

May 22, 2011 at 07:40 PM

ontime
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

Wow, lots of bickering over basic human behavior. It's pretty obvious people spend a lot of time and effort constructing post-hoc justifications for high-end purchases where similar, cheaper equivalents exist. Marketing does this as well (and rather effectively). If this phenomenon didn't exist, then nor would higher tiers of products exist where only marginal functional advantages are found.

Both lenses allow you to take pictures at this specific focal length. The difference between them is generated by our complex value system. It's just the way we are.

At any rate, wickerprints is correct in his assessment. I'm not the hugest fan of psychology, but we've got thousands of experiments to prove these justifications exist.

May 22, 2011 at 08:33 PM

bobbytan
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

It's not unlike comparisons between the luxury Japanese brands of Lexus, Acura and Infiniti vs Mercedes, BMW and Audi. Truth of the matter is the Japanese brands perform just as well as the German brands (for less money) although those who own the German brands will insist that their cars drive better.

May 22, 2011 at 08:42 PM

wickerprints
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

bobbytan wrote:
It's not unlike comparisons between the luxury Japanese brands of Lexus, Acura and Infiniti vs Mercedes, BMW and Audi. Truth of the matter is the Japanese brands perform just as well as the German brands (for less money) although those who own the German brands will insist that their cars drive better.

What's all the more ironic is that unlike the CP cine lenses, the ZE and ZF lenses are manufactured by Cosina in Japan, under the Zeiss brand. They're not actually made by Zeiss in Germany, just "supervised" by them, which just means they approve the processes and controls.

May 22, 2011 at 08:47 PM

picfox
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

Truth of the matter is the Japanese brands perform just as well as the German brands (for less money)

you can't be serious about your comment

Have you ever drove or owned one of the top German cars? you just forgot to mention Porsche and compare it with eg. Infinity

So far OoT

May 22, 2011 at 09:50 PM

mpmendenhall
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

wickerprints wrote:
What's all the more ironic is that unlike the CP cine lenses, the ZE and ZF lenses are manufactured by Cosina in Japan, under the Zeiss brand. They're not actually made by Zeiss in Germany, just "supervised" by them, which just means they approve the processes and controls.

I doubt you'll find many alt fanatics these days on FM that would be disgruntled to find out (if anyone didn't already know) that Cosina made their Zeiss lenses. With Cosina's own Voigtlander SL APO lenses having reached "cult" status, I don't think there is much negative stigma or doubt about Cosina's ability to turn out top-notch optics; the Zeiss designs/processes are just "icing on the cake" of an already reputable lens manufacturer.

May 22, 2011 at 10:08 PM

trumpet_guy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

I wish the rhetoric where toned down in this thread, but I do think it is worth
questioning our brand allegiances from time to time. I'm a bit of a trumpet nut and
the same thing happens when brands of trumpet are discussed in the forums. This is
the nature of discussion forums.

I recently acquired the 100L macro and have been very pleased with it so far. I also
own a number of C/Y Zeiss lenses and have been very happy with them. I look at them
as complimentary to my Canon glass.

Actually, it was the EF-S 60mm macro that alerted me to just how good a Canon macro
lens could be. The 100L macro has a lot of the same character, as far as I can tell --
meaning that it's closer to Minolta or Leica than it is to Zeiss in color response and
overall look. In a world without financial limits, I'd have the Canon and the Zeiss.
Given the limits I have, the Canon's features and 1:1 capability trumped the Zeiss'
f/2 performance for me.

Carry on with the discussion..............

May 22, 2011 at 10:33 PM

bobbytan
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

Porsche? Who said anything about Porsche? Now you are comparing the Zeiss lenses to Leica. Different league, and different price levels.

picfox wrote:
Truth of the matter is the Japanese brands perform just as well as the German brands (for less money)

you can't be serious about your comment

Have you ever drove or owned one of the top German cars? you just forgot to mention Porsche and compare it with eg. Infinity

So far OoT

May 22, 2011 at 10:34 PM

bobbytan
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

Yup ... and the later-day C/Y lenses were mostly made by Yashica in Japan including the legendary Distagon 21. The Japanese knows how to make good lenses, as they know how to make good cars.

mpmendenhall wrote:
I doubt you'll find many alt fanatics these days on FM that would be disgruntled to find out (if anyone didn't already know) that Cosina made their Zeiss lenses. With Cosina's own Voigtlander SL APO lenses having reached "cult" status, I don't think there is much negative stigma or doubt about Cosina's ability to turn out top-notch optics; the Zeiss designs/processes are just "icing on the cake" of an already reputable lens manufacturer.

May 22, 2011 at 10:39 PM

J.D.
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #17 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

kevindar wrote:
is it my imagination, or is the 100 2.8 SI easily as good in side by side comparisons?
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=728&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=674&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

This is a very interesting comparison. Two similarly specced lenses from totally opposite ends. The Zeiss seems to have better resolution and the Canon seems to have better contrast. At that f stop, I'd find it hard to pick a winner.

Just MHO.

May 22, 2011 at 11:10 PM

Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #18 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

M Vers wrote:
I'd much rather go by actual physical evidence that I can see with my own two eyes than by someone's verbal description...in fact if we went by some people's words the Zeiss would be a significantly better lens than the 100L when in reality it's not.

So how much have you used the Zeiss lens then? A lot I suppose because you comment about this lens in every thread here

May 23, 2011 at 12:36 AM

Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

wickerprints wrote:
The truth is the truth--it is not rude to state a fact based on observed behavior, no matter how unpleasant it may sound. Some time ago, someone did a test of several fast 50mm primes, including the Zeiss 50/1.4 Planar, and the result was not favorable for this lens. But he just kept making excuses for the softness and low contrast, saying this is what a portrait-optimized lens is supposed to look like at close subject distances. Then he claimed it would be super sharp at infinity focus, when the other lenses wouldn't be. If it had been any other...Show more →

Yes I agree that the Zeiss Planar 50/1,4 is not good wide open or close to that. But that lens has nothing to do with the 100 MP lens

May 23, 2011 at 12:39 AM

Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #20 · Digital-Picture review ZE 100 MP lens

May 23, 2011 at 12:42 AM

1 2 3 4 … 34 35 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 … 34 35 end