This topic is in the 2016 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2016Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
p.14 #1Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
It's funny. I owned this lens for almost 18 months. and I probably used it about 3 times. I always would pull my 24-70 out. Now I see this thread and my initial reaction is to re buy it but then I'm sure I would still reach for my 24-70. I guess the big question is will it be the Canon or Sony.
Apr 25, 2016 at 10:13 AM
p.14 #2Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Jannik Peters wrote:
The 1.7/50 is another sleeper. Mine is tack sharp stopped down. I doubt that the Loxia is much sharper.
But I bet it's much, much better at f/2 than the C/Y 50/1.7 is at f/1.7 or f/2. I used to use the 50/1.7 a lot, it was my main lens on the NEX for a few months... Beautiful at f/2.8, but f/1.7 was pretty much only if I really needed to. The situation is better on FF compared to APS-C, though the corners take longer to sharpen up. My Contax G 45mm f/2 blows it away at f/1.7 and f/2, and I'm sure the Loxia would be even better.
The C/Y 50/1.4 is supposed to be somewhat better stopped down. I've got both, but never done any testing. I'm partial to the f/1.7 over the f/1.4.
The 1.7/50 is another sleeper. Mine is tack sharp stopped down. I doubt that the Loxia is much sharper.
But I bet it's much, much better at f/2 than the C/Y 50/1.7 is at f/1.7 or f/2. I used to use the 50/1.7 a lot, it was my main lens on the NEX for a few months... Beautiful at f/2.8, but f/1.7 was pretty much only if I really needed to. The situation is better on FF compared to APS-C, though the corners take longer to sharpen up. My Contax G 45mm f/2 blows it away at f/1.7 and f/2, and I'm sure the Loxia would be even better.
The C/Y 50/1.4 is supposed to be somewhat better stopped down. I've got both, but never done any testing. I'm partial to the f/1.7 over the f/1.4.
Apr 25, 2016 at 10:44 AM
p.14 #3Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Contax 28mm G lens anyone have a opinion
Apr 25, 2016 at 10:47 AM
p.14 #4Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
GMPhotography wrote:
Contax 28mm G lens anyone have a opinion
Lots of them. A7? Modded or unmodded?
Contax 28mm G lens anyone have a opinion
Lots of them. A7? Modded or unmodded?
Apr 25, 2016 at 10:56 AM
p.14 #6Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
GMPhotography wrote:
Contax 28mm G lens anyone have a opinion
I used this on a NEX-7... had to crop out edges when close focus but it had a beautiful rendering in the middle. It wasn't as clinically excellent as the Contax G 45mm F2 but it had a remarkable color profile with enough sharpness that made it a pleasure to use.
Contax 28mm G lens anyone have a opinion
I used this on a NEX-7... had to crop out edges when close focus but it had a beautiful rendering in the middle. It wasn't as clinically excellent as the Contax G 45mm F2 but it had a remarkable color profile with enough sharpness that made it a pleasure to use.
Apr 25, 2016 at 11:01 AM
p.14 #7Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
GMPhotography wrote:
A7rII unmodified
Short answer: unless you're sebboh, it's not worth it.
A7rII unmodified
Short answer: unless you're sebboh, it's not worth it.
Apr 25, 2016 at 11:04 AM
p.14 #8Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
FlyPenFly wrote:
I used this on a NEX-7... had to crop out edges when close focus but it had a beautiful rendering in the middle. It wasn't as clinically excellent as the Contax G 45mm F2 but it had a remarkable color profile with enough sharpness that made it a pleasure to use.
I really loved the G 28mm on my NEX-5R. Even with the field curvature, it was usable for landscapes at f/5.6 or f/8.
On my stock A7, it's basically not usable. Even at f/11, the edges are pretty gross.
I like this lens a lot, and sometimes take it out with the NEX-5R. I'd like to get a Contax G1 just to get some use for this lens - a lot to like, but not on a stock A7.
GMPhotography wrote
Contax 28mm G lens anyone have a opinionI really loved the G 28mm on my NEX-5R. Even with the field curvature, it was usable for landscapes at f/5.6 or f/8.
On my stock A7, it's basically not usable. Even at f/11, the edges are pretty gross.
I like this lens a lot, and sometimes take it out with the NEX-5R. I'd like to get a Contax G1 just to get some use for this lens - a lot to like, but not on a stock A7.
Apr 25, 2016 at 11:06 AM
p.14 #9Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Michael,
The 24-70GM covers the 24-35mm very well. It's great through the entire range but at 24, 28 and 35mm, it performs its best. 50mm is also very good starting at f/5.6 and 70mm needs f/6.3 or f/8 for the best corners. Its a really good choice but as you wrote, it's big.
Fred,
Yes, that what it looks like to me. I guess I'm going the 24-70 route. Gotta sell some lenses and get it ordered.
Thanks,
---Michael
Michael,
The 24-70GM covers the 24-35mm very well. It's great through the entire range but at 24, 28 and 35mm, it performs its best. 50mm is also very good starting at f/5.6 and 70mm needs f/6.3 or f/8 for the best corners. Its a really good choice but as you wrote, it's big.
Fred,
Yes, that what it looks like to me. I guess I'm going the 24-70 route. Gotta sell some lenses and get it ordered.
Thanks,
---Michael
Apr 25, 2016 at 11:21 AM
p.14 #10Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
K thanks folks. thats out
Apr 25, 2016 at 11:21 AM
p.14 #11Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
GMPhotography wrote:
K thanks folks. thats out
There is always the Canon 28/2.8IS prime. I don't know...the FE 28/2 has a lot of special glass and may be actually better than the Canon according to their MTFs.
K thanks folks. thats out
There is always the Canon 28/2.8IS prime. I don't know...the FE 28/2 has a lot of special glass and may be actually better than the Canon according to their MTFs.
Apr 25, 2016 at 11:25 AM
p.14 #12Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
I may just save my pennies.
Apr 25, 2016 at 11:35 AM
p.14 #13Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
arduluth wrote:
But I bet it's much, much better at f/2 than the C/Y 50/1.7 is at f/1.7 or f/2. I used to use the 50/1.7 a lot, it was my main lens on the NEX for a few months... Beautiful at f/2.8, but f/1.7 was pretty much only if I really needed to. The situation is better on FF compared to APS-C, though the corners take longer to sharpen up. My Contax G 45mm f/2 blows it away at f/1.7 and f/2, and I'm sure the Loxia would be even better.
The C/Y 50/1.4 is supposed to be somewhat better stopped down....Show more →
at f/4 and smaller the c/y 50/1.4 is a bit better than the c/y 50/1.7 around the corners. i like it's draw better for portraits at f/2 and f/2.8 as well.
the g45 is about a stop better than the c/y 50/1.7 (e.g. comparable sharpness at f/2.8 to the c/y 50/1.7 at f/4), i assume the loxia is similar.
arduluth wrote:
Short answer: unless you're sebboh, it's not worth it.
sooner or later somebody else will learn to love it...
Jannik Peters wrote
The 1.7/50 is another sleeper. Mine is tack sharp stopped down. I doubt that the Loxia is much sharper.The C/Y 50/1.4 is supposed to be somewhat better stopped down....Show more →
at f/4 and smaller the c/y 50/1.4 is a bit better than the c/y 50/1.7 around the corners. i like it's draw better for portraits at f/2 and f/2.8 as well.
the g45 is about a stop better than the c/y 50/1.7 (e.g. comparable sharpness at f/2.8 to the c/y 50/1.7 at f/4), i assume the loxia is similar.
arduluth wrote:
GMPhotography wrote
A7rII unmodifiedsooner or later somebody else will learn to love it...
Apr 25, 2016 at 02:30 PM
p.14 #14Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Fred Miranda wrote:
There is always the Canon 28/2.8IS prime. I don't know...the FE 28/2 has a lot of special glass and may be actually better than the Canon according to their MTFs.
Yep I think it's relax until there's a Loxia (hopefully a new design not a ZM tweak) 28.
The z* 28/2 is a lovely lens, but it has huge field curvature (actually part of its loveliness for certain applications), and going by the MTFs is not amazing in the outer zone stopped down, even accounting for the curved field.
I've rented it at times and it can look really special in enviro portraiture. Very occasionally you can great a great effect on a landscape where, say, there are trees or rocks on the edges and a clear view to infinity in the middle, and the field curvature means you can get them all in focus.
Actually there's a cool specialty lens design. Rather than just tilt, a lens with variable field curvature!
GMPhotography wrote
K thanks folks. thats outYep I think it's relax until there's a Loxia (hopefully a new design not a ZM tweak) 28.
The z* 28/2 is a lovely lens, but it has huge field curvature (actually part of its loveliness for certain applications), and going by the MTFs is not amazing in the outer zone stopped down, even accounting for the curved field.
I've rented it at times and it can look really special in enviro portraiture. Very occasionally you can great a great effect on a landscape where, say, there are trees or rocks on the edges and a clear view to infinity in the middle, and the field curvature means you can get them all in focus.
Actually there's a cool specialty lens design. Rather than just tilt, a lens with variable field curvature!
Apr 25, 2016 at 03:33 PM
p.14 #15Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Actually that already exists: http://www.rokkorfiles.com/24mm%20VFC.htm
Edit: more on topic: really amazing how this old C/Y zoom is still (one of) the best landscape lenses in it's range!
Edit: more on topic: really amazing how this old C/Y zoom is still (one of) the best landscape lenses in it's range!
Apr 25, 2016 at 03:49 PM
p.14 #16Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Well I was after a kid lens in a way and I don't have anything AF for the A6300 except the GM bad boys and they dwarf this little camera. Maybe just grab the new Sigma 30 1.4 for the A6300 . The other thing is backup if the A7rII goes down in the middle of a gig, I got the GMs of course but a small 30 1.4 plus I can use them side by side but as soon as a 28 or great 35 come out I'm jumping all of over it. My thinking now and I did not think this before is the GM 24-70 is the main lens in my kit. I got to get my mind in that space because I don't like zooms. But this one is special and need to get mentally correct about it. I have a block in my head for zooms. I know I'm crazy. Lol
It's been 12 years since I removed the fence around the pool and today I just ordered a new one for the grandkids. I'm in grandpa mode need to get camera there. Lol
It's been 12 years since I removed the fence around the pool and today I just ordered a new one for the grandkids. I'm in grandpa mode need to get camera there. Lol
Apr 25, 2016 at 03:57 PM
p.14 #17Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Koen Nhz wrote:
Actually that already exists: http://www.rokkorfiles.com/24mm%20VFC.htm
Ah yes, as I typed that I had a dim recollection that someone once made one....
Edit: more on topic: really amazing how this old C/Y zoom is still (one of) the best landscape lenses in it's range!
Actually that already exists: http://www.rokkorfiles.com/24mm%20VFC.htm
Ah yes, as I typed that I had a dim recollection that someone once made one....
Edit: more on topic: really amazing how this old C/Y zoom is still (one of) the best landscape lenses in it's range!
Apr 25, 2016 at 04:51 PM
p.14 #18Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
arduluth wrote:
But I bet it's much, much better at f/2 than the C/Y 50/1.7 is at f/1.7 or f/2. I used to use the 50/1.7 a lot, it was my main lens on the NEX for a few months... Beautiful at f/2.8, but f/1.7 was pretty much only if I really needed to. The situation is better on FF compared to APS-C, though the corners take longer to sharpen up. My Contax G 45mm f/2 blows it away at f/1.7 and f/2, and I'm sure the Loxia would be even better.
The C/Y 50/1.4 is supposed to be somewhat better stopped down....Show more →
Maybe I got lucky but my C/Y 50/1.7 improves a lot at f2. Unitl I got the C/Y 35-70 it was one of my main lenses. Because of it I have so far avoided getting the FE 55/1.8. I did just pick up the SEL 24-70/4 to have a decent AF zoom when such is called for. For critical work the C/Y 35-70 goes on.
Jannik Peters wrote
The 1.7/50 is another sleeper. Mine is tack sharp stopped down. I doubt that the Loxia is much sharper.The C/Y 50/1.4 is supposed to be somewhat better stopped down....Show more →
Maybe I got lucky but my C/Y 50/1.7 improves a lot at f2. Unitl I got the C/Y 35-70 it was one of my main lenses. Because of it I have so far avoided getting the FE 55/1.8. I did just pick up the SEL 24-70/4 to have a decent AF zoom when such is called for. For critical work the C/Y 35-70 goes on.
Apr 25, 2016 at 07:40 PM
p.14 #19Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
So, uh, can we wrap this thread up already? It's not making things any easier for those of us with the 35-70 already on our wish list. 
Apr 25, 2016 at 07:56 PM
p.14 #20Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Thank you Fred for putting these comparisons together. I'm trying to remember which year I got my c/y 35-70 for my 5DII, maybe 2011 or 2012? And it was because of pictures posted here. My landscape kit revolved around it, and TS-Es. On the 5DII, the 35-70 was kind of a nightmare in the field, but the images were so lovely.
Switching to the A7R and later the A7RII has made its operation so much easier. After a productive year and a lot of published work, I am finding myself pondering a few things: One is that of course, everyone should shoot for what makes them happy as far as IQ is concerned and we all know that a certain masochistic obsession can come with that, and it seems that most of us are trying to find the fine line where obsession benefits the creative process and elevates the work, and where it is just mania that is creatively stifling. And in pondering that for me, I've found that when my landscape work is aimed at trying to change the world, the wider the audience the better, and with a wide audience, people tend to respond far more to impact and content than the do to corner sharpness, micro contrast and the like. Frankly, these things do not move people, generally, they could give a damn. So when it comes to tools I work with, getting the job done in various circumstances is the name of the game, which absolutely for me puts emphasis on size, weight, versatility. The c/y 35-70 has won out in some of these categories, especially now on the A7RII. Being able to grab a few macro shots is definitely a bonus too.
Recently sold my TS-E 24II and decided to break stride from having the wide end covered by very high quality primes and in weighting the benefits the FE 16-35 f4 (to complement the c/y 35-70) against the loxia 21 2.8 (which I know I will own eventually because for all the reasons we know so well) I thought about how many times I was in rapidly changing light, seeing new and interesting compositions with only moments to spare and how great it would be to have there versatility of a zoom. And in thinking about that I couldn't help to remember the lessons of the year. Will a wide audience looking for content and impact scrutinize the corners of the image and say...ahh, must not have used the prime on that one, corners a little soft here.
And of course, the crazy in me is looking at the first shots from the 16-35 and going...ahh, corners not on par with my old primes, ahhh, maybe I'll do some more extensive testing, so how bad it is, return it if you have to, maybe just get the loxia 21 2.8...
And maybe I might...but while testing out the 16-35, I'm going to be asking myself...other than you and other hyper critical blogging photographers like you...who else gives a damn?
Switching to the A7R and later the A7RII has made its operation so much easier. After a productive year and a lot of published work, I am finding myself pondering a few things: One is that of course, everyone should shoot for what makes them happy as far as IQ is concerned and we all know that a certain masochistic obsession can come with that, and it seems that most of us are trying to find the fine line where obsession benefits the creative process and elevates the work, and where it is just mania that is creatively stifling. And in pondering that for me, I've found that when my landscape work is aimed at trying to change the world, the wider the audience the better, and with a wide audience, people tend to respond far more to impact and content than the do to corner sharpness, micro contrast and the like. Frankly, these things do not move people, generally, they could give a damn. So when it comes to tools I work with, getting the job done in various circumstances is the name of the game, which absolutely for me puts emphasis on size, weight, versatility. The c/y 35-70 has won out in some of these categories, especially now on the A7RII. Being able to grab a few macro shots is definitely a bonus too.
Recently sold my TS-E 24II and decided to break stride from having the wide end covered by very high quality primes and in weighting the benefits the FE 16-35 f4 (to complement the c/y 35-70) against the loxia 21 2.8 (which I know I will own eventually because for all the reasons we know so well) I thought about how many times I was in rapidly changing light, seeing new and interesting compositions with only moments to spare and how great it would be to have there versatility of a zoom. And in thinking about that I couldn't help to remember the lessons of the year. Will a wide audience looking for content and impact scrutinize the corners of the image and say...ahh, must not have used the prime on that one, corners a little soft here.
And of course, the crazy in me is looking at the first shots from the 16-35 and going...ahh, corners not on par with my old primes, ahhh, maybe I'll do some more extensive testing, so how bad it is, return it if you have to, maybe just get the loxia 21 2.8...
And maybe I might...but while testing out the 16-35, I'm going to be asking myself...other than you and other hyper critical blogging photographers like you...who else gives a damn?
Apr 25, 2016 at 08:44 PM