p.3 #1 · CONTAX C/Y CARL ZEISS VARIO-SONNAR T* 28-85mm F3.4-4.0 MM
Yes, for sure prices can be crazy. The OEM "W-1" is the same as the legendary CY 21/2.8 uses and that lens used is MORE expensive than a new ZE (!). I've only seen one replica at ebay (and it's still there) so it is likely you took the same deal.
p.3 #2 · CONTAX C/Y CARL ZEISS VARIO-SONNAR T* 28-85mm F3.4-4.0 MM
wfrank wrote:
Yes, for sure prices can be crazy. The OEM "W-1" is the same as the legendary CY 21/2.8 uses and that lens used is MORE expensive than a new ZE (!). I've only seen one replica at ebay (and it's still there) so it is likely you took the same deal.
Sounds like the same one to me. I saw the hoods going for $110+, so it didn't take long to find an 'alternative' solution.
p.3 #8 · CONTAX C/Y CARL ZEISS VARIO-SONNAR T* 28-85mm F3.4-4.0 MM
I had one when I used c/y system; but one thing that kind of annoyed me was lens creep when pointed down. I'm curious if all samples have this issue (i had two over the years one brand new which did not have creep but i ended up returning it) the used ones I try all had massive creep.
p.3 #13 · CONTAX C/Y CARL ZEISS VARIO-SONNAR T* 28-85mm F3.4-4.0 MM
Five of the eight CY zooms (all vario-sonnars) are just great performers. The apparent duds, and I am reluctant to diss a lens without hearing plenty of feedback from users, are the 40-80, 28-70 and 70-210.
The others are stars at infinity, or a decent distance lets say, with respectable bokeh and wonderful colour. Great at f8-f11 so good for full depth images, where zoom creep is not a trouble. You could probably do something about the creep internally. When/if the 70-200 ZE/F sees the light of day expect it to be just great, it's about time CZ got back into the zoom business for FF.
Shervin, your hound looked tougher in the early photos, but later on he looks much diminished, being in fact a short arse ;=)
p.3 #14 · CONTAX C/Y CARL ZEISS VARIO-SONNAR T* 28-85mm F3.4-4.0 MM
She's a Jack Russel and German Shepherd mix... somewhere a monstrosity was born with that intermixing, but the one I got is just special
I may pickup the 100-300, though it's ridiculously large. The 35-135 turned me off with its MFD of 1.3m... which is just ridiculous, even if it does have a macro function. 80-200 is next on the list as I heard people are getting jack tons of 3D effect from it.
Phil, I also can't wait for the new series of zooms to come out from CZ... they'll be pretty damn special....considering their zooms from over two decades ago are still excellent performers.
p.3 #16 · CONTAX C/Y CARL ZEISS VARIO-SONNAR T* 28-85mm F3.4-4.0 MM
wow, what a bridge image - I missed it earlier, the other is also special. The 28-85 has more impact than the 35-70, higher macro contrast.
shervin, that explains it, the placid grace of the Shepherd together with the alert nature of the Russell. Those claws would not help a wooden floor, lol. The 100-300 is a lens you have to want to use, it's quite heavy but not more than others in the 200mm class (say, Mamiya 200mm, Minolta 200mm, C/N). But you are better served looking at the 80-200, I agree.
carsten and Samuli have posted a lot from that one, it should not be much chop going by the MTF - but images look really good, exquisite colour tone handling and definitely sharp enough. Like so many Contax longer lenses, the consistency across the frame conveys the impression of sharpness and dimensionality, just as Hubert Nasse says it will.
It's light too, would be a good companion to the 28-85mm. If I was looking again, I would look closely at one of these 28-85s maybe above the 35-70, good though it is, but then the low weight really helps in usage. These better midrange CY zooms are fabulous at around 50mm, and have great centres at the wide ends with some drop off off-centre.
p.3 #18 · CONTAX C/Y CARL ZEISS VARIO-SONNAR T* 28-85mm F3.4-4.0 MM
Really like the look coming from that Contax 28-85, I considered getting one but the weight put me off a bit. I'd love to see a comparison with the 35-70/3.4 (which I went for.)
