On another note, the only gripe I have with this lens is the lousy front cap design. The very first day it hit the floor 3 times (carpet). I ended up placing some adhesive foam "mini coasters" on the inside of the lens cap and it provides a lot more retention. Ultimately I will buy a neoprene hood cover and stash the cap.
First day out not so great. Got home with several oof images. Left side is not so great center seems reasonable but probably OOF as well. I think its a focus issue with me depending on AF confirm. I think I will eventually have to upgrade to a newer camera that has a better LCD.
What I suspect happened is what often happens with my 17 and 24TSE. I was past infinity. I was using AF confirm on a tree about 200 yards away and I suspect the contrast was not sufficient for reliable AF confirm. But I already know if the AF can't see it, neither can I.
I shot a series from f2.8 through f8. The f2.8 is sharpest. I should have refocused for each shot.
What worries me about this lens is that I need to focus almost at full rotation (infinity). Not much leeway. It could be that I don't have enough.
ben egbert wrote:
First day out not so great. Got home with several oof images. Left side is not so great center seems reasonable but probably OOF as well. I think its a focus issue with me depending on AF confirm. I think I will eventually have to upgrade to a newer camera that has a better LCD.
What I suspect happened is what often happens with my 17 and 24TSE. I was past infinity. I was using AF confirm on a tree about 200 yards away and I suspect the contrast was not sufficient for reliable AF confirm. But I already know if the AF can't see it, neither can I.
I shot a series from f2.8 through f8. The f2.8 is sharpest. I should have refocused for each shot.
What worries me about this lens is that I need to focus almost at full rotation (infinity). Not much leeway. It could be that I don't have enough.
I found the AF to be unreliable with this lens (on 5D Mark III), because it beeps over a fair bit of turn of the ring. I therefore did not bother MAing it. This lens is best used with Live View. But what a cracker of a lens!
Also: infinity focus is not at the hard stop of the ring.
Hi, mine seems to be at the infinity hard stop. I hope it will still focus in hot weather.
I agree, AF confirm is not reliable. The problem with UWA is that they have so much natural dof that close looks pretty sharp. But we did not buy this lens for pretty sharp.
Live view on a 1DS-mk3 is a joke. I think I can do better with the viewfinder. But after today, I think I have some ways to work.
Have you tired live view AF? My 1ds does not have it but my 50D does. I tried it on other lenses but not with the Zeiss.
Rajan Parrikar wrote:
Ben, yes I use Live View AF sometimes with AF lenses on 5D Mark III. Works beautifully.
Yes, I have heard it is more accurate than regular AF. I am hoping to someday see a landscape/studio camera with a large high resolution detachable viewer that has peaking.
Short of that, a camera that has HDMI output so I can add one. I think all the cameras after the 1DS-mk3 has this now.
Opps, you need af for live view af to work. Not going to help with a manual focus lens.
One from today...forgot how hard it is to find the EXACT center in order to get this shot. I was close, had to adjust a little bit. Guess I need to go back down there and spend a little more time.
carstenw wrote:
There should be a filter at the top of this forum, where you can type in how much you can afford to spend on a lens, and the relevant threads are filtered out...
Brilliant idea. It would also help if posts with new lenses were only allowed to be made by 4 year olds. Allowing posts by photographers with excellent composition and understanding of light and new lenses costing thousands of dollars is directly linked to home mortgage defaults.
Grenache wrote:
Brilliant idea. It would also help if posts with new lenses were only allowed to be made by 4 year olds. Allowing posts by photographers with excellent composition and understanding of light and new lenses costing thousands of dollars is directly linked to home mortgage defaults.
Beautiful work, all.
Now stop it!
Jim
As you all know it's all relative. You just need to put this all in perspective. Owing a very expensive lens means you just have to find a more expensive one as your justification. Let's face it, there are Leica, rangefinder lenses that cost more than the Zeiss 15 Distagon (that's my story and I'm sticking to it).
Another justification (aka, excuse) is to remember how much more square footage can be photographed with a super wide angle versus a long high end telephoto (which costs much, much more). So, on the basis of cost per square foot photographed, this Zeiss is a bargain!
And here is the definite list on which lens has the best price per area although I used the diagonal angular field. I used a swedish site for the price info and then normalized the values so that the 35/1.4 Distagon had a value price/angular field of 100. Although the 15/2.8 value isn't that low it should be said it is by far the most expensive Zeiss ZE lens here in Sweden at least. So enjoy
