So far, I am not impressed at all by the shots taken during the first two days of the exercise. But that doesn't make the other shots I've seen taken with Touits less impressive.
dennishh wrote:
Is anyone following the Zeiss Photo Challenge? The more images I see the less I want to buy the lens, am I being to picky? They don't post shutter speed, camera used or f stop. http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/?p=3883 This new marketing approach my hurt more than it helps.
Maybe you're disappointed that you were not selected to be a contestant and are stuck as an arm-chair quarterback.
corposant wrote:
Maybe you're disappointed that you were not selected to be a contestant and are stuck as an arm-chair quarterback.
Do you actually think the images that they posted are of the optimum quality and professionalism that a client like Zeiss should have to represent their new product line? We've all have seen images that are much better than these that do represent the product. I suppose by expressing my opinion about images you have the right to attack my point of view, well you don't. I'm more than happy to hear your intellectual argument expressing your point of view. Please explain to me how the composition, lighting and photographic technique is so exceptional with these images?
I've seen enough great images from this lens (and thanks for the Imatest Roger!), that I'm not wasting any more time looking at photos taken by others. I've got my order in, I'll try the lens myself and keep it or sell it after I've put it through my paces. I figure the most I would lose is $100.
While I don't particularly like the Photochallenge thingie I think there've been enough really good images posted with the 32mm to show it's a good lens. I would like to see more with the 12mm - I haven't been nearly as thrilled with it, but that could just be my limitations rather than the lens.
What Zeiss and the others are trying to do is take photography to 'everyman'...they would actually want to promote images that would not find their way anywhere near a gallery to be classed as 'winners'.
It's an activity for the mass of photographers (i.e. everyone these days) rather than an elite, for a maker of fine lenses. You do see some good work in their newsletters sometimes however.
We generally have to wait until someone with the refined sensibilities of the FM Alt house style gets their eager hands on a great new lens before we go over the minutiae and eventually pass some kind of judgment. That is the purpose of the huge image threads here -
RCicala wrote:
While I don't particularly like the Photochallenge thingie I think there've been enough really good images posted with the 32mm to show it's a good lens. I would like to see more with the 12mm - I haven't been nearly as thrilled with it, but that could just be my limitations rather than the lens.
there are very few photographers that can consistently take good images with an 18mm imho. there are also relatively few photographs that benefit from such a wide angle of view.
it doesn't have any competition for it's focal length so i'm sure it's great for what it is.
dennishh wrote:
Do you actually think the images that they posted are of the optimum quality and professionalism that a client like Zeiss should have to represent their new product line? We've all have seen images that are much better than these that do represent the product. I suppose by expressing my opinion about images you have the right to attack my point of view, well you don't. I'm more than happy to hear your intellectual argument expressing your point of view. Please explain to me how the composition, lighting and photographic technique is so exceptional with these images?
Well, are you criticizing the quality of the photos on their own, or their use in the marketing campaign?
If it's the latter, philip_pj already started to make my argument. Zeiss is a storied name in the scientific, industrial, and medical fields. They approach clients who buy medical equipment far differently than they would consumer products, who are unsurprisingly listed last on Zeiss' product list. The reason I think people find the Photo Challenge so unusual is because Zeiss has try to approach consumers who own "enthusiast" camera systems to convince them to buy their products. Even the contestants in the challenge are carefully chosen: a fashion pro photographer from Asia, a European photographer who chases individual projects around the world, a young travel/cultural photographer, and a 100% amateur who works as a software engineer (sound familiar?). They represent lots of different types of photography, cultures, ages, and experience levels.
If Zeiss were creating a marketing campaign for their new uber-expensive SLR lenses, I can understanding wanting to carefully cull A-Portfolio level images to demonstrate to a professional it is worth the cost, with all the technical data a FMer would want to see. In this situation, they have to make the lenses approachable to somebody who bought a camera for less than $1,000. The challenges lend themselves to the images an enthusiast might expect to create if they are on vacation. In short, they are not exceptional images, because that's not what Zeiss believes will sell these lens to their expected audience.
Now, if it's the former, and you just don't like the images whatsoever regardless of context (which is how your initial post sounded - somewhat like sour grapes), that is different all together.
"Well, are you criticizing the quality of the photos on their own, or their use in the marketing campaign?"
What I said is "The more images I see the less I want to buy the lens, am I being to picky? This new marketing approach my hurt more than it helps."
It's beyond me how you can read this statement as a criticism! It was simply a statement that I was not in any way convinced by these images to spend $1000 on a 32mm lens. I was much more convinced by all the previous samples that were posted by other people. What goes go through my head when I look at this campaign is that my Sigma or iPhone is good enough, why do I need to pay a thousand dollars for a lens. I was questioning the marketing approach and asking for other people's opinions, I was not asking for your snide remarks. I still have not heard what you think of these images other than your blind defense of these photographers. I also don't agree with your assessment of what market Zeiss is going after with this contest. I highly doubt that the enthusiast market would consider a $1000 plus lens in the first place. So like I said, I think this series of competitive images are not helping convince anyone that the Zeiss lenses are superior. The photo journalistic approach to these images is a good idea but it is not being done well enough to sell me a Zeiss lens.
Where the hell are all the shots? All I can find are those four wrinkled people as finalists
That said, I'm starting to have serious doubts about the 32's rendering - I just don't see "it" like I do some other Zeiss / Leica lenses, but maybe I need more samples (anyone with a link of other entries?)
In fact, I just withdrew my Pany GX1 from the B&S -- I'd rather keep it than let it go for a little over $150, and I can slap the m43 PL 25/1.4 on it if I want to see photos with "it" rendering.
Anyway, more samples would be great, show me how stupid I am for not finding the other photos
For someone who actually lives in Bangkok, I do find the images in the photo challenge very amateurish and uninspiring, no matter what lens they use. It's the photographers.
agreed, I've seen heaps better from Edward.
I remember Oly did sth similar with the first Pen, I submitted a portfolio and I got picked. It was disastrous
they sent us the cameras and set us up in a private group on fickr to submit drafts so they could pick the best. Problem was, the also activated the discussions and all that people did was bashing the camera. In the end they went in and deactivated it
On the other hand the end customer didnt see any of that, they only saw the best photos, so I dont know maybe the campaign was successful in the end.
cputeq wrote:
Where the hell are all the shots? All I can find are those four wrinkled people as finalists
That said, I'm starting to have serious doubts about the 32's rendering - I just don't see "it" like I do some other Zeiss / Leica lenses, but maybe I need more samples (anyone with a link of other entries?)
The best Touit shots I've seen (32 &12) are on Lloyd's site, which is unfortunately subscription and you probably won't want to deal with that. Bottom line is that those shots (on the Nex 7) are pretty convincing to me.
They ship today, who is first cab off the rank? lol. I mean apart from those guys on the Zeiss site that so riled Dennis.
sebboh, ultra wides with no 'final image' distortion can take pretty compelling images - interiors especially. Not your thing I know..but you can get a lot of a room into the frame with some interesting juxtapositions..not bad for many intimate landscapes too a la Zeiss 15mm support group thread. 21mm used to seem wide to me, not any more.
philip_pj wrote:
sebboh, ultra wides with no 'final image' distortion can take pretty compelling images - interiors especially. Not your thing I know..but you can get a lot of a room into the frame with some interesting juxtapositions..not bad for many intimate landscapes too a la Zeiss 15mm support group thread. 21mm used to seem wide to me, not any more.
they are certainly useful for interiors. i definitely felt 28mm wasn't wide enough shooting shots to sell my condo. much like product shots, i don't really find interior shots terribly interesting or likely to be enduring. my thoughts on ultra wide angles are similar to mr. johnston's: http://photo.net/columns/mjohnston/column57/
i've only seen about 3 or 4 landscape pictures in my life taken with lenses wider than 21mm that i didn't think would be better with a narrower field of view. they're are great for creating horribly exaggerated perspective and making boring scenes look unnaturally dramatic. i personally don't care for those types of pictures myself, and i realise this is just my own personal preference. the fact remains that most photographers (myself included) are unable to compose an interesting picture when given an 18mm lens because the field of view is so foreign.
Sebboh, look at bobu's work. He definitely preferred his 18mm to his 21mm Leica, even though the 21 was a bete rlens and supported filters. Hourses for courses...
