How good is this lens? Has anyone adapted it to a modern camera? I am especially interested in how well it handles chromatic aberration and how sharp it is.
This is a good to very good lens overall.Not a typical Zeiss with a bit less than average 3D effect and a tad too much CAs,but sharp,vivid colour rendition,compact and small.Does well with FF and APS-C Canons as well as all NEXes that I got/'ve had.
Consider also 80-200/4 Vario Sonnar.It is slightly bigger and heavier,but has less CAs at 200mm,focuses down to 1m and has comparable IQ.200/3.5 Zeiss C/Y is the other option,but it excells in producing nasty CAs and I don't recommend it.
Peire wrote:
200/3.5 Zeiss C/Y is the other option,but it excells in producing nasty CAs and I don't recommend it.
There is another Zeiss C/Y option, but it's nothing reasonable. For a light C/Y 200/4, I really enjoy theYashica ML.
P.S. Always love your color redition, Peire.
twald wrote:
How good is this lens? Has anyone adapted it to a modern camera? I am especially interested in how well it handles chromatic aberration and how sharp it is.
By today's standards it does not handle chromatic aberration well. Hence the sharpness is so-so with polychromatic subject matter.
rico wrote:
There is another Zeiss C/Y option, but it's nothing reasonable. For a light C/Y 200/4, I really enjoy theYashica ML.
P.S. Always love your color redition, Peire.
Hi rico,
I thought I'm the only one to like those vivid colours that lift me up.Nice to know there is one more guy in the world like this.
Coming back to yashica 200/4 ML- I got the second copy now.Like the previous one it is comparable IQ-wise to the Zeiss 200/4,but it has lower contrast,can produce stronger CAs and is more prone to flare.A very good lens for the money though.
For a light C/Y 200/4, I really enjoy theYashica ML.