A personal remark is to get rid of all watermarks, intrusive logo-names etc, often in strange colors covering substantial parts of the shot. It degrades viewing experience of the images, and if image itself is small reduces to zero. Choose another place where you want to market you stuff, this Forum is for inspiration an generous transfer of knowledge/learning as far as I am concerned.
The short answer is I'm not sure. I've had the Nikon for about 6 months or so, the Contax only about a month. I normally shoot stopped down (around f/11) and it is really tough to choose one.
The Nikon is weaker in the very deep corners, but better on the edges. The Contax is sharper in the center, and better in the very deep corners. Also, it there may be some field curvature on the Contax as it seems to have more DoF closer to the camera.
The Contax has more contrast, but the Nikon has more nuanced and vibrant color. The Contax has slightly less CA, but using PN I think the Nikon cleans up better from a sharpness perspective. The Nikon has less distortion, although the Contax isn't bad. The Nikon is a tad shorter from a true FL perspective.
The Nikon has floating elements, so it's very close focusing.
I actually took both lenses on my hike through Ricketts Glen. So far I've picked more of the Nikon shots as winners. This is the first time I've been so conflicted over lenses. The Nikon I have was good enough for me to sell my Canon 28mm f/2.8 IS. I'm probably going to keep both the Nikon and the C/Y Zeiss.....and I have to figure out some rhyme or reason on using one over the other. They're both so good.
I've seen more "magic" from the Nikon, but maybe that's just because I've had it longer and I've had more opportunities to shoot it.
And on a side note to Helena, I love your waterfall shot...between the lighting and the action conveyed in the water, it's a really nice capture.
-Tim
carlsote1 wrote:
Tim - Which 28mm f2.8 do you prefer? Nikon AIS or the Contax?
Another excellent set of captures, and that was just one afternoon... Evidently, I loved them all .
So I finished the evening session of the Fiesta. I already missed the Glows twice in a row, such luck...
are there any well regarded manual longer focal length minolta/rokkor lenses that work well with the a7? I'm thinking in the 85-135 range that would be good for portraits. i guess even up to 200 would work for me.
Beautiful images Phillip - I walked many of those hills - brought back some great memories - thanks
So many excellent images in this thread - simply amazing - sets the bar to aim for
fantastic shots phillip! you're doing a lot of great landscapes with that MD 35/2.8, makes me think you should just sell half your gear and get an rx1.
sebboh wrote:
fantastic shots phillip! you're doing a lot of great landscapes with that MD 35/2.8, makes me think you should just sell half your gear and get an rx1.
35mm is a great focal length, no doubt and the RX1 has a phantastic lens, is very small and a super handy camera.
BUT even used it still runs at about 1500€. I will think about it again when it is around 1000€, the beautiful thing about my lenses is that they don't loose value, they get more expensive. This makes justifying emptying my bank account for lenses much easier, than for a camera which will loose 500€ in a year.
.
