Very enjoyable thread! And while I would not over-rule you determination to go for the 135, I find myself (even with the 21 and 50P) that the 100 is in a class all its own - more of everything Zeiss - could not pry it out of my hands!
The jury (me, myself and I) are still out on the 100 v.s. 135.
Along with the 21, the 100 on the ZE/ZF/ZM threads are the 2 lenses which I've really enjoyed the images from (most frequently anyway - the images overall on this thread are generally of excellent quality).
Although my preference over the years has been for 135mm I'll wait until there's more data available on the web.
No rush anyway at this stage as the 135 is still in short supply - and the funds will have to be accumulated anyway.
Also very happy with my 35 F2 too.
Very nice thread My favorite is the 21 2.8 and I deeply regret selling it. The 35 f/2 is also a fine lens with a lot of character but I need AF at that FL so I let it go. Now I got the 25 2.8 and will see how that works, heard great things about it from fellow FMers. Will definitely buy that 21 2.8 again, what was I thinking!
What do you guys think of the 50 1.4 ZF? I am contemplating buying this lens.
The 50 Planar is a deeply problematic lens, but also probably my favourite ZF. If you take the time to learn its strengths and weaknesses, you can do fantastic work with it. I should add that for wide open, close up work this really isn't the right lens. Starting at 3-5m it gets really interesting, and it can also be used close up, but then stopped down.
carstenw wrote:
The 50 Planar is a deeply problematic lens, but also probably my favourite ZF. If you take the time to learn its strengths and weaknesses, you can do fantastic work with it. I should add that for wide open, close up work this really isn't the right lens. Starting at 3-5m it gets really interesting, and it can also be used close up, but then stopped down.
Thanks for the feedback Since you have both, would you recommend the MP better? I have sold my 60 2.8G so the MP is also tempting for close ups. What matters to me is character (contrast, pop) over sharpness.
I considered the 24 F2 also but it seems stronger in the near to middle distances (from what I've read) and I wanted more for landscape vistas - why I chose the 21 instead.
I have the 60 F2.8 Micro as well but have never really liked it - not sure why - just doesn't 'gel' with me.
The 50 MP was on my shortlist but some suggested the 60 F2.8 was as good if not better for general purpose use.
Would appreciate Carsten's suggestions on this.
Then there's the Zeiss 85 from which there are some excellent images on these pages.
Of the Zeiss offerings the 21/100 followed by the 85 I find provide the most compelling IRO produced images.
But the 85 has a 'bad rap' in some quarters - mostly I guess because of the 'measured performance' but I don't believe that image impact can be reduced solely to numbers.
Ultimately I guess that the 'ease of MF' would be a deciding factor and the Zeiss lenses seem to vary in this respect (again from what I've read). Mis-focus has got to be the biggest curse in any image capture.
hijazist wrote:
Thanks for the feedback Since you have both, would you recommend the MP better? I have sold my 60 2.8G so the MP is also tempting for close ups. What matters to me is character (contrast, pop) over sharpness.
I prefer the 50P for almost all things, but for close up, the 50MP is much better. The 50MP also has an unusually "fat" depth of field, aperture for aperture, and this can be useful for some things, like portraits. I would say that the 50P has more character. The 50MP is a bit sterile.
Just to conclude this entry, my 135 APO arrived today (courtesy of B&H). First impressions are extremely favourable (in fading light).
So now I've added the 21 F2.8 and 135 F2 to my 35 F2.
Just like to thank everyone for their helpful comments and those that post such memorable pictures on this forum with Zeiss lenses. You have made my lens choices much simpler and more fruitful than they have been previously
Now if only I can improve my artistic prowess enough to do full justice to these lenses....
carstenw wrote:
The 50 Planar is a deeply problematic lens, but also probably my favourite ZF.
While I don't have too much to compare with, this is my impression as well. It's a bit odd that while 50P does have undeniable issues, it's still makes me so happy to go out with.
My favorite is the 21 2.8 and I deeply regret selling it. The 35 f/2 is also a fine lens with a lot of character but I need AF at that FL so I let it go. Now I got the 25 2.8 and will see how that works, heard great things about it from fellow FMers. Will definitely buy that 21 2.8 again, what was I thinking!