This topic is in the 2015 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2015Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
p.29 #1Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
This is a first for me - I just ordered the Loxia 21 brand-spanking-new from Adorama, a huge step for someone who's never purchased a brand new piece of photo gear in their life 
We'll see how soon it arrives.
I fell for the ergonomics, image quality and system integration of the other two Loxia and hope the 21 continues the course. It had better be clearly superior to my FD 20mm...
We'll see how soon it arrives.I fell for the ergonomics, image quality and system integration of the other two Loxia and hope the 21 continues the course. It had better be clearly superior to my FD 20mm...
Jan 19, 2016 at 05:31 PM
p.29 #2Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
BenjaminSmith wrote:
This is a first for me - I just ordered the Loxia 21 brand-spanking-new from Adorama, a huge step for someone who's never purchased a brand new piece of photo gear in their life We'll see how soon it arrives.
I fell for the ergonomics, image quality and system integration of the other two Loxia and hope the 21 continues the course. It had better be clearly superior to my FD 20mm...
Congrats on the new Loxia. It will complement your 35/50 very nicely.
This is a first for me - I just ordered the Loxia 21 brand-spanking-new from Adorama, a huge step for someone who's never purchased a brand new piece of photo gear in their life
We'll see how soon it arrives.I fell for the ergonomics, image quality and system integration of the other two Loxia and hope the 21 continues the course. It had better be clearly superior to my FD 20mm...
Congrats on the new Loxia. It will complement your 35/50 very nicely.
Jan 19, 2016 at 05:57 PM
p.29 #3Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
How does the Loxia 21/2.8 compare to the old ZM 21/2.8? I'm thinking about colours, rendering and the feel of the images, more than sharpness.
Jan 19, 2016 at 07:17 PM
p.29 #4Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
Is it a firm conclusion that the A7RII is not a good mate with Canon TSE lenses because the movements degrade the image too much?
Jan 19, 2016 at 07:57 PM
p.29 #5Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
A lot of people use the TSE lenses to great effect. You do need a flocked adapter, though. Those without flocking will suffer from reflections due to the large image circle.
Jan 19, 2016 at 09:07 PM
p.29 #6Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
Jack Thompson wrote:
Is it a firm conclusion that the A7RII is not a good mate with Canon TSE lenses because the movements degrade the image too much?
Tilting and shifting degrade image quality particularly towards the corners. This was not very apparent when I was shooting with the 22MP Canon 5D Mark III but it's much more noticeable with the 5DS and A7RII bigger MP sensors.
Even a 1 degree tilt or a 5mm shift will soften the corners to a great degree especially when making big prints.
Combining movements makes matter worse. Stopping the lens to f/16 seems to bring the corners to acceptable levels but diffraction becomes an issue.
I used the TS-E 17, 24 and 90 lenses for many years but unless there is an optical upgrade to the current versions, I won't be using them on high megapixel sensors. BTW: They work fine without movements but then, what's the point.
Is it a firm conclusion that the A7RII is not a good mate with Canon TSE lenses because the movements degrade the image too much?
Tilting and shifting degrade image quality particularly towards the corners. This was not very apparent when I was shooting with the 22MP Canon 5D Mark III but it's much more noticeable with the 5DS and A7RII bigger MP sensors.
Even a 1 degree tilt or a 5mm shift will soften the corners to a great degree especially when making big prints.
Combining movements makes matter worse. Stopping the lens to f/16 seems to bring the corners to acceptable levels but diffraction becomes an issue.
I used the TS-E 17, 24 and 90 lenses for many years but unless there is an optical upgrade to the current versions, I won't be using them on high megapixel sensors. BTW: They work fine without movements but then, what's the point.
Jan 19, 2016 at 09:57 PM
p.29 #7Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
A short update concerning my lens and my review: Zeiss checked the lens and confirmed, that it is decentered. They sent me a completely new and optically checked (by the service in Oberkochen) copy that I will recieve within the next days. Looking forward to finish the work and to compare it to my nFD 20mm f/2.8 (I guess the Loxia will smoke it, but I want to see by how much)!
@Fred Miranda: Thank you for comparing it to the FE 16-35mm, it matches with my experiences although I don't have my FE 16-35mm anymore (sold it to buy the Loxia).
@Fred Miranda: Thank you for comparing it to the FE 16-35mm, it matches with my experiences although I don't have my FE 16-35mm anymore (sold it to buy the Loxia).
Jan 20, 2016 at 04:31 AM
p.29 #8Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
Fred Miranda wrote:
Tilting and shifting degrade image quality particularly towards the corners. This was not very apparent when I was shooting with the 22MP Canon 5D Mark III but it's much more noticeable with the 5DS and A7RII bigger MP sensors.
Even a 1 degree tilt or a 5mm shift will soften the corners to a great degree especially when making big prints.
Combining movements makes matter worse. Stopping the lens to f/16 seems to bring the corners to acceptable levels but diffraction becomes an issue.
I used the TS-E 17, 24 and 90 lenses for many years but unless there is an...Show more →
Fred have you done any careful tests comparing the tse 17 with software correction of the 16 end of the zoom? I did some a while back and my result was inconclusive (tse a bit better, and 16 suffers a bit from the plane of focus not being parallel to buildings if pointed upwards) but concluded need more testing. Like to figure it out before next European shoot because great not to have to take the TSE in the luggage if it's a wash!
Another thing I'm keen to find out about is the relative resolution of the 17 tse shifted and the new Voigt 12mm cropped, which should produce exactly similar perspectives, the question being whether the loss due to cropping is better or worse than the loss due to shifting ( a lit will depend on just how sharp these lenses are across the frame)
Jack Thompson wrote
Is it a firm conclusion that the A7RII is not a good mate with Canon TSE lenses because the movements degrade the image too much?Even a 1 degree tilt or a 5mm shift will soften the corners to a great degree especially when making big prints.
Combining movements makes matter worse. Stopping the lens to f/16 seems to bring the corners to acceptable levels but diffraction becomes an issue.
I used the TS-E 17, 24 and 90 lenses for many years but unless there is an...Show more →
Fred have you done any careful tests comparing the tse 17 with software correction of the 16 end of the zoom? I did some a while back and my result was inconclusive (tse a bit better, and 16 suffers a bit from the plane of focus not being parallel to buildings if pointed upwards) but concluded need more testing. Like to figure it out before next European shoot because great not to have to take the TSE in the luggage if it's a wash!
Another thing I'm keen to find out about is the relative resolution of the 17 tse shifted and the new Voigt 12mm cropped, which should produce exactly similar perspectives, the question being whether the loss due to cropping is better or worse than the loss due to shifting ( a lit will depend on just how sharp these lenses are across the frame)
Jan 20, 2016 at 05:37 AM
p.29 #9Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
Helloes,
New member here. Allthough I have been following the board for years. I am also the star trails -guy who reported the issue to Lloyd and RawDigger guys.
I have to report my recent experience here with 24mm ts-e mk2. Sony a7r2 with mb4-T fails miserably - even without any movements the frame corners are being smeared. But on 5Dsr this does not happen! The lens is usable fully shifted by stopping down to f/8 - f/11 region depending on the image. Also on a7r1 there are lot less issues. The 42MP sensor is not playing well with the canon design or there is something really wrong with the MB concept.
Edit: Fotodiox Pro adapter is even worse than mb4. Fotodiox completely messes up frame edges.
New member here. Allthough I have been following the board for years. I am also the star trails -guy who reported the issue to Lloyd and RawDigger guys.
I have to report my recent experience here with 24mm ts-e mk2. Sony a7r2 with mb4-T fails miserably - even without any movements the frame corners are being smeared. But on 5Dsr this does not happen! The lens is usable fully shifted by stopping down to f/8 - f/11 region depending on the image. Also on a7r1 there are lot less issues. The 42MP sensor is not playing well with the canon design or there is something really wrong with the MB concept.
Edit: Fotodiox Pro adapter is even worse than mb4. Fotodiox completely messes up frame edges.
Jan 20, 2016 at 07:02 AM
p.29 #10Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
Hello,
Can an expert answer this for me?
Why will some of you be interested in a 21 prime over a zoom like 16-35 for landscapes?
Won't you be more constrained by just a single focal length?
I don't shoot landscapes but i am really curious to know...sometimes guys sell their zooms to get a prime...what could be the reason for it?
Is it that framing with a 16 ir 18 or a 21 is not much different?
Apologies for a very basic question.
St
Can an expert answer this for me?
Why will some of you be interested in a 21 prime over a zoom like 16-35 for landscapes?
Won't you be more constrained by just a single focal length?
I don't shoot landscapes but i am really curious to know...sometimes guys sell their zooms to get a prime...what could be the reason for it?
Is it that framing with a 16 ir 18 or a 21 is not much different?
Apologies for a very basic question.
St
Jan 20, 2016 at 09:20 AM
p.29 #11Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
Couple reasons. First primes are faster which in turn gives you the speed needed for astro work for one, another reason most primes lenses are very good one or 2 stops down so in turn by F4 it will just outperform a F4 zoom right out of the gate. Primes in general at F5.6 are at there optimum aperture F4 zooms about F8 or F9. Outside of that its really the performance in the corners primes will always be better. Lastly there is not many zooms that are truly on the level of the primes. Most zooms there will always be focal lengths that are just not performing very well. Take Sonys 16-35 F4 great until about 24mm than it fades off from there to 35mm which 35mm is the worst. In general zooms will never be outperforming primes in just about any focal length. Thats a general statement but usually the case. Zooms are one thing convenient both in lenses packed and less weight to take. Oh and they are a better foot zoom than you. 
I basically hate them but sometimes they are a necessary evil. I actually have 2 now the 24-70 F4 which I only use for PR work and the 70-200 F4 which is actually pretty good but I would much rather have a 200mm 2.8 instead. Im just waiting it out until Sony wakes up.
Now some folks live and die by them but usually landscape shooters avoid them as much as possible. I taught 28 workshops, never been a zoom on one of them. These are landscape workshops
Edited on Jan 20, 2016 at 09:52 AM · View previous versions
I basically hate them but sometimes they are a necessary evil. I actually have 2 now the 24-70 F4 which I only use for PR work and the 70-200 F4 which is actually pretty good but I would much rather have a 200mm 2.8 instead. Im just waiting it out until Sony wakes up.
Now some folks live and die by them but usually landscape shooters avoid them as much as possible. I taught 28 workshops, never been a zoom on one of them. These are landscape workshops
Edited on Jan 20, 2016 at 09:52 AM · View previous versions
Jan 20, 2016 at 09:48 AM
p.29 #12Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
For this lens, size and quality. The 16-35mm is a very good UWA zoom, but it's not perfect. It's got lots of field curvature at the wide end and the corners and edges are good, but not tack sharp. A good WA prime like this will have excellent sharpness even into the corners and a bit faster aperture, all while being significantly smaller and lighter: an often important consideration.
That said, for me, the 16-35mm makes more sense, as I like having flexibility in the UWA range, but I've owned the FD 20mm on my A7 II and have the Fuji 14mm for my Fuji cameras (21mm equiv) and have had great use out of both, so I understand the draw.
That said, for me, the 16-35mm makes more sense, as I like having flexibility in the UWA range, but I've owned the FD 20mm on my A7 II and have the Fuji 14mm for my Fuji cameras (21mm equiv) and have had great use out of both, so I understand the draw.
Jan 20, 2016 at 09:50 AM
p.29 #13Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
Thanks Fred and MJKosi regarding the feedback with the A7RII and Canon TS-E lenses. Like many, I fell in love with these lenses for 20+ megapixel Canon bodies and then moved to the A7R, where they performed well. I will be picking up my A7RII any day now and am coming to the conclusion that for the time being, the wide end of my landscape kit will be comprised of a Loxia 21 2.8 and perhaps the 16-35 F4.
While it is not great news that the A7RII doesn't play well with the TS-E lenses, they were not without their own compromises, and some I will not miss at all. The Loxia 21 appears to be a revelation, in many ways, the lens many of us have been waiting for when the A7 bodies came into being. Plenty to see on the bright side. Thanks again.
Jack
While it is not great news that the A7RII doesn't play well with the TS-E lenses, they were not without their own compromises, and some I will not miss at all. The Loxia 21 appears to be a revelation, in many ways, the lens many of us have been waiting for when the A7 bodies came into being. Plenty to see on the bright side. Thanks again.
Jack
Jan 20, 2016 at 09:57 AM
p.29 #14Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
Primes are often smaller and lighter, along with everyone else's reasons.
I find the visualization easier with a prime. I am used to 21mm, and I know when looking at a scene how the foreground, mid and background will translate and balance once shot, as well as the scene's end points from left to right. With a range like 16, those relationships change, same in the 35 end. So a 16-35 throws me off and I find my compositions and ultimately photos aren't as strong, in addition to being a less pleasant shooting process as I can't pre-see as well.
I find the visualization easier with a prime. I am used to 21mm, and I know when looking at a scene how the foreground, mid and background will translate and balance once shot, as well as the scene's end points from left to right. With a range like 16, those relationships change, same in the 35 end. So a 16-35 throws me off and I find my compositions and ultimately photos aren't as strong, in addition to being a less pleasant shooting process as I can't pre-see as well.
Jan 20, 2016 at 10:03 AM
p.29 #16Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
At this range I find wider than 21 (and often narrower) perspective is often so skewed a specialty lens is needed, like the TS-17. So that extra width on the wide end often isn't that appealing in practical use.
Jan 20, 2016 at 12:05 PM
p.29 #17Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
GMPhotography wrote:
Now some folks live and die by them but usually landscape shooters avoid them as much as possible. I taught 28 workshops, never been a zoom on one of them. These are landscape workshops
This I find a bit hard to believe. 28 workshops and not ONE person has EVER had a zoom lens with them? Considering that the vast majority of landscape work I see in magazines is using zoom lenses, I find that incredibly unlikely. I understand landscape photographers wanting the absolute best image quality, so I would expect there to be a lot of primes in use, but zooms are pretty good nowadays, not like the 80s where almost all zooms were major compromises in image quality. Today, the best primes will still be better than the best zooms, but the difference is more subtle in most shots.
Personally, I use both, but I prefer my UWA to be a zoom for landscape work. When I shoot landscape with primes (which I've done many times), it can be a real hassle to be constantly switching lenses.
Now some folks live and die by them but usually landscape shooters avoid them as much as possible. I taught 28 workshops, never been a zoom on one of them. These are landscape workshops
This I find a bit hard to believe. 28 workshops and not ONE person has EVER had a zoom lens with them? Considering that the vast majority of landscape work I see in magazines is using zoom lenses, I find that incredibly unlikely. I understand landscape photographers wanting the absolute best image quality, so I would expect there to be a lot of primes in use, but zooms are pretty good nowadays, not like the 80s where almost all zooms were major compromises in image quality. Today, the best primes will still be better than the best zooms, but the difference is more subtle in most shots.
Personally, I use both, but I prefer my UWA to be a zoom for landscape work. When I shoot landscape with primes (which I've done many times), it can be a real hassle to be constantly switching lenses.
Jan 20, 2016 at 12:16 PM
p.29 #18Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
Seriously never saw one on my workshops believe it or not but thats the case. Now I taught a lot of medium format workshops too. Honestly outside a very few they all suck in some way. Nikon makes a nice 14-24 and there are some decent 24-70 but these are only recently with Canon and Nikon. Sony upgraded the A mount as well. Now when all three upgrade there 24-70 that tells you something. I would not say the 80s but like maybe 2 or 3 years ago they finally started to get better. People use them because they are very convenient and also lets be really honest here there also lazy too. People do not want to foot zoom. Now sure there are times you can't and why I have one for PR only. I really don't care what folks buy or use thats up to them but I try to avoid them at all costs. No one has ever proved to me at least there great through the range. Only 2 in my life have there been very good but you want to pay 6 grand than you can get one Leica R 35-70 2.8 very rare only 600 hundred made. The Leica R 28-90 as well but these things cost a fortune. I owned them both and frankly it made me nervous to even shoot them they are so expensive. I felt easier shooting 40 thousand dollar backs.
BTW I find that very rude you don't believe what i wrote. Since when or ever do i have a reason to not be honest. Thats annoying. Im here to help people not get my blog, forum, you tube hits better. I have zero reason to be here except to help people.
BTW I find that very rude you don't believe what i wrote. Since when or ever do i have a reason to not be honest. Thats annoying. Im here to help people not get my blog, forum, you tube hits better. I have zero reason to be here except to help people.
Jan 20, 2016 at 12:34 PM
p.29 #19Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
I understand, but given the situation it's a fairly unusual claim, which is why I was assuming it was hyperbole. I didn't mean to imply you were lying, but rather exaggerating for effect. I'll have to take your word on that.
I agree that zooming to frame can be lazy, but using it correctly (setting you position for the perspective you want before even really looking through the lens, then choosing the focal length you want for the AOV) they can be very time saving. Ultra wide zooms I haven't seen one that compares to the very best primes, but I've owned many that will still provide excellent results. Telephoto zooms, on the other hand, are so good today that most of the high end ones easily rival primes in the same range at similar apertures.
I agree that zooming to frame can be lazy, but using it correctly (setting you position for the perspective you want before even really looking through the lens, then choosing the focal length you want for the AOV) they can be very time saving. Ultra wide zooms I haven't seen one that compares to the very best primes, but I've owned many that will still provide excellent results. Telephoto zooms, on the other hand, are so good today that most of the high end ones easily rival primes in the same range at similar apertures.
Jan 20, 2016 at 12:43 PM
p.29 #20Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8
Hyperbole. I dont do that lets make that very clear right now. Had enough going to a gig
Jan 20, 2016 at 12:44 PM