This topic is in the 2016 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2016Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
p.1 #1Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
It was 12 degrees (Fahrenheit) when I shot these, so don't expect perfection. I had to remove the camera from the tripod to mount the ZE 21 as well as I have to use the extra long foot I put on the Metabones adapter. All of these shots were focused via live view on the face of the building just above the porch roof, except for the Loxia which I focused using the hard stop (to compensate for some forward field curvature.) The ZE 21 was also at the hard stop. On my 5D, 5D II and Metabones III the ZE doesn't have hart stop infinity. On my Metabones IV, it does (or if not then I can't reach infinity.) Similar processing applied to all of them, but some vignetting correction was done to all except the ZE 21. All these were taken with IBIS/OSS off, on a tripod, with the 2 second timer. Processing was done via PhotoNinja 1.2.7.
Sony a7R II @ f/11 (ISO 100)
Loxia 21
Full Size
SooC JPEG
ZE 21
Full Size
SooC JPEG
FE 16-35
Full Size
SooC JPEG
Batis 25
Full Size
Sooc JPEG
The SooC JPEGs will look pretty flat. They are in Adobe RGB which a neutral style and lowered contrast.
-Tim
Sony a7R II @ f/11 (ISO 100)
Loxia 21
Full Size
SooC JPEG
ZE 21
Full Size
SooC JPEG
FE 16-35
Full Size
SooC JPEG
Batis 25
Full Size
Sooc JPEG
The SooC JPEGs will look pretty flat. They are in Adobe RGB which a neutral style and lowered contrast.
-Tim
Feb 14, 2016 at 08:23 PM
p.1 #2Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
They all look good from my point of view. I think we're splitting hairs in this comparison 
Never a bad thing to pick from a good batch.
Never a bad thing to pick from a good batch.Feb 14, 2016 at 08:43 PM
p.1 #3Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
Yes, all top dollar optics here. As I move to wider apertures, I think my ZE 21 and Batis 25 might be a little soft in the lower right hand corner (could be the adapter for the ZE 21.) The Loxia is really small compared to the others, it does vignette the most as well though.
-Tim
james3shin wrote:
They all look good from my point of view. I think we're splitting hairs in this comparison Never a bad thing to pick from a good batch.
-Tim
james3shin wrote:
They all look good from my point of view. I think we're splitting hairs in this comparison
Never a bad thing to pick from a good batch.Feb 14, 2016 at 08:45 PM
p.1 #4Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
Honestly I'd take the zoom. IQ is super close and of course much more flexibility at close to the same weight.
Feb 14, 2016 at 09:01 PM
p.1 #5Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
Actually the ZE 21 has a touch more contrast which does not surprise me. Little less DR
But I agree splitting hairs and we used the best focal length of the 16-35 which is 21mm to 24.
Bottom line you can't really go wrong with any of them.
What really scares me is owned all of them.
But I agree splitting hairs and we used the best focal length of the 16-35 which is 21mm to 24.
Bottom line you can't really go wrong with any of them.
What really scares me is owned all of them.
Feb 14, 2016 at 09:07 PM
p.1 #6Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
I'm going with the Loxia 21, unless Zeiss updates the ZM21 F2.8 in the meantime.
Feb 14, 2016 at 09:09 PM
p.1 #8Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
To me the knock I'd put on the zoom is the foreground depth of field. When shooting this focal length, I often have something in the foreground (present samples excluded) and that would require stopping down further than the other lenses.
-Tim
Feb 14, 2016 at 09:25 PM
p.1 #9Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
On my copy of the Loxia, focus to the hard stop at f/8 and it's bitingly sharp pretty much everywhere. I posted a covered bridge shot which exhibited similar behavior.
-Tim
-Tim
Feb 14, 2016 at 09:27 PM
p.1 #10Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
It seems that the ZE21 does not have color fringing and heavy vignetting. Is this because you are shooting at f8?
This is very surprising since I heard so many bad things about this lens.
And I agree, it seems that we are splitting hairs in the comparison. The zoom really stands its ground against all the other lenses. Amazing.
This is very surprising since I heard so many bad things about this lens.
And I agree, it seems that we are splitting hairs in the comparison. The zoom really stands its ground against all the other lenses. Amazing.
Feb 15, 2016 at 02:51 AM
p.1 #11Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
Much prefer the ZE of the 21s, more faithful color, tone grades and three dimensionality, you pick up visual cues more quickly. The Batis does very well also in this regard, and it's 60 grams oighter and does f2 very well. All are very good. Thanks, Tim.
Feb 15, 2016 at 03:35 AM
p.1 #12Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
The 21ZE stands out to me eyes. Seems to have more 3D pop/contrast that sets it apart.
Feb 15, 2016 at 04:35 AM
p.1 #13Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
The processed version has fringing and vignetting mitigated, download the SooC JPEG as it has all of that stuff turned off.
-Tim
rhawidantas wrote:
It seems that the ZE21 does not have color fringing and heavy vignetting. Is this because you are shooting at f8?
This is very surprising since I heard so many bad things about this lens.
And I agree, it seems that we are splitting hairs in the comparison. The zoom really stands its ground against all the other lenses. Amazing.
Feb 15, 2016 at 04:49 AM
p.1 #14Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
I see green vignetting in the lower left corner of the ZE 21, something that would occasionally would crop up when shooting it on my 5D and 5D II as well. It's also the beast of the bunch due to its size including the adapter.
The Batis is a stretch in this comparison due to the different FL. If it's wide enough for people, then it's a good choice.
Ultimately it's hard to make a "bad" choice depending on what your priorities are.
-Tim
philip_pj wrote:
Much prefer the ZE of the 21s, more faithful color, tone grades and three dimensionality, you pick up visual cues more quickly. The Batis does very well also in this regard, and it's 60 grams oighter and does f2 very well. All are very good. Thanks, Tim.
Feb 15, 2016 at 04:59 AM
p.1 #15Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
Thank you for your efforts, Tim! I am making the move from ZE 21 to Loxia 21 to save weight/ size, the test is very reassuring that image quality will be very similar.
I find the distant background in the left mid frame slightly sharper in the Loxia image than the ZE21 at f/8, apart from that very equal.
I find the distant background in the left mid frame slightly sharper in the Loxia image than the ZE21 at f/8, apart from that very equal.
Feb 15, 2016 at 06:02 AM
p.1 #16Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
Ok in this particular scenario all lenses look very similar, though I personally find the Loxia pics best.
I wonder in which scenarios we would see more differences in IQ between the primes and 16-35?
I wonder in which scenarios we would see more differences in IQ between the primes and 16-35?
Feb 15, 2016 at 06:09 AM
p.1 #17Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
Full disclosure, I purposely focused the Loxia to mitigate field curvature which has some people up in arms. If I focus on the mansion wide open, then stop down, you won't see the same edge performance. I'll try to post those versions tonight at both f/8 and f/11. I wonder if this will affect the lack of 3D that a couple people commented above (compared to the ZE.)
I'm quite pleased with the Loxia, at this point I have no regrets in replacing my ZE 21 with it.
-Tim
twoeye wrote:
Thank you for your efforts, Tim! I am making the move from ZE 21 to Loxia 21 to save weight/ size, the test is very reassuring that image quality will be very similar.
I find the distant background in the left mid frame slightly sharper in the Loxia image than the ZE21 at f/8, apart from that very equal.
Edited on Feb 15, 2016 at 06:24 AM · View previous versions
I'm quite pleased with the Loxia, at this point I have no regrets in replacing my ZE 21 with it.
-Tim
twoeye wrote:
Thank you for your efforts, Tim! I am making the move from ZE 21 to Loxia 21 to save weight/ size, the test is very reassuring that image quality will be very similar.
I find the distant background in the left mid frame slightly sharper in the Loxia image than the ZE21 at f/8, apart from that very equal.
Edited on Feb 15, 2016 at 06:24 AM · View previous versions
Feb 15, 2016 at 06:16 AM
p.1 #18Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
One example is possibly foreground sharpness. In the FE 16-35 shot, I focused on the front of the mansion above the porch. Notice that the foreground seems softer with the zoom. For my style of shooting, that's a negative.
-Tim
Jon H Richter wrote:
Ok in this particular scenario all lenses look very similar, though I personally find the Loxia pics best.
I wonder in which scenarios we would see more differences in IQ between the primes and 16-35?
Feb 15, 2016 at 06:18 AM
p.1 #19Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
tsdevine wrote:
One example is possibly foreground sharpness. In the FE 16-35 shot, I focused on the front of the mansion above the porch. Notice that the foreground seems softer with the zoom. For my style of shooting, that's a negative.
I can confirm that, I took many images with soft foreground corners in Indonesia last summer because of the lack of time and the AF on the center.
The field curvature of the zoom makes it very tricky to focus. Complicated focusing, zoom and AF is not a good combination for me.
One example is possibly foreground sharpness. In the FE 16-35 shot, I focused on the front of the mansion above the porch. Notice that the foreground seems softer with the zoom. For my style of shooting, that's a negative.
I can confirm that, I took many images with soft foreground corners in Indonesia last summer because of the lack of time and the AF on the center.
The field curvature of the zoom makes it very tricky to focus. Complicated focusing, zoom and AF is not a good combination for me.
Feb 15, 2016 at 06:30 AM
p.1 #20Casual Loxia 21 / ZE 21 / FE 16-35 / Batis 25 Comparison
I would kind of like to see how the 28mm and 21mm converter would have faired. I am not huge on testing, but I loved the 28/2. The 21 converter shocked me with how good it was.
Feb 15, 2016 at 08:31 AM