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.21 #1Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Fred Miranda wrote:
I've seen some of your images with it Helena!
I have a good copy of the FE 28/2 (I went through a few of them). For those who follow DXOmark, the test is done at close range and center only. It seems to be optimized for that. It is also a 26mm lens and has high distortion.
The CY Distagon 28//2.8 is just better when comparing them side by side at infinity distances. It definitely has more micro-contrast and resolution. At f/8, it's excellent everywhere. For landscapes, the mechanical MF is very nice. Its inwards field curvature could be an asset for landscapes if focused properly.
I believe the FE 28/2 could be better at closer distances and likely be more flare resistant.
These Contax lenses are just excellent especially for the price they are going for. CA is is very apparent towards the corners but not too difficult to fix in post. Micro-contrast and colors have the Zeiss signature.Another 28mm that someone should examine on the A7rII is the new Leica M 28 f/2.8 Elmarit ASPH. Leica has just released a new version of this lens designed for digital, whereas the old version was designed for film. Actual copies are just making their way into people's hands and the new version looks a ton better on the Leica SL than the old version. See this post at getDPI:
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/leica/57393-new-leica-lenses-announced.html#post681796
The lens has a lot of virtues including a very small size (tiny) and it weighs only 180g. And Fred, I think you would be happy to know it has a 10 blade aperture like the Loxia lenses, so it ought to make very nice sunstars. It may loose some of its luster on the A7rII, but it might not. If performance does drop off on the an unmodified A7rII, then it ought to be spectacular on a Kolari modified camera. The price is $2,200 as this lens is introduced, but you ought to be able to get used copies for about $1,500 in a couple of years and although that is expensive at that price I don't think it is a horrible value. It is a fairly unique in being such a strong performer at such a small size.I remember reading about these new lenses at the beginning of the year. The new 35/2 Summicron has 11 blades!
Where did you see the pricing for the new Summicron-M 28/2 and Elmarit f/2.8 versions?
I am hoping Zeiss will release a Loxia 28/2 soon but it will probably cost ~$1,500. The Leica at $2,000 is not too much if it works well with Sony's cover glass.I do think they will make a Loxia 28, but I wonder whether it will be f/2 or f/2.8. An f/2.8 would be a bit disappointing but it wouldn't surprise me. I expect it to be a distagon so very different from the ZM 28, which was in my mind pretty mediocre anyway. A good revision of the C/Y 28 for digital with modern glass including an aspherical or two and some anomalous partial dispersion glass could be excellent. I guess we will have to see what they do.
With the Leica lenses, I think the new 28 Elmarit ASPH looks better than the new 35 cron ASPH--at least by the MTF charts--and I know I would prefer the 10 blades for landscapes to the 11 blades (although 11 would be nice for portraits). I really wish that Leica would standardize on 12 bladed apertures for M lenses. To me that is a nice middle ground. Plenty of blades for portraits and still very nice sunstars. I am getting a few Zeiss CP.2 lenses before long and it will be interesting to see their sunstars. They have a 14 blade aperture. I'm not sure if that will be gorgeous or perhaps a bit too many. I won't have them for a couple of months, but when I do I will post what they look like.
Leica hasn't published the datasheet for the new 28 summicron ASPH yet. It will be interesting how many blades it has. The old one had 10 blades like the Elmarit, so the new one might as well, but they might bump it up to 11 like the 35 cron ASPH. We ought to know soon. If someone out there has one and can let us know that would be great.I have a feeling the next Loxia will be a tele. I believe the L28 will come but it may take a while.
Definitely 10 blades for landscapes!
I'm curious what's the best A7RII 28mm option for landscapes right now. Aside from the GM at 28mm, I tested the CY 28/2.8 which is excellent at f/8 with moderate field curvature and CA.
Next, I will test the new Leica M 28/2.8 Elmarit and the famous Olympus 28/2. -- Guy convinced me.
If the Leica Elmarit R 28/2.8 II wasn't so hard to find, I would try it out as well.
Within a budget,...Show more →
Do you mean the Olympus 28/2, which is lovely but not for landscape, or the legendary and cheap Olympus 28/3.5 which many say has better corners than the distagon or the Pentax-K?
Steve Spencer wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
HelenaN wrote
Like Fred I have both FE 28 and C/Y 28/2.8 and my findings mirror his exactly. I like my FE for people photography and close-ups, but for landscapes I much prefer the C/Y. There's not a big difference in sharpness between mine, but the photos from the C/Y come out more vivid, detailed and clear. It's apparent on my screen even without pixel peeping.I have a good copy of the FE 28/2 (I went through a few of them). For those who follow DXOmark, the test is done at close range and center only. It seems to be optimized for that. It is also a 26mm lens and has high distortion.
The CY Distagon 28//2.8 is just better when comparing them side by side at infinity distances. It definitely has more micro-contrast and resolution. At f/8, it's excellent everywhere. For landscapes, the mechanical MF is very nice. Its inwards field curvature could be an asset for landscapes if focused properly.
I believe the FE 28/2 could be better at closer distances and likely be more flare resistant.
These Contax lenses are just excellent especially for the price they are going for. CA is is very apparent towards the corners but not too difficult to fix in post. Micro-contrast and colors have the Zeiss signature.
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/leica/57393-new-leica-lenses-announced.html#post681796
The lens has a lot of virtues including a very small size (tiny) and it weighs only 180g. And Fred, I think you would be happy to know it has a 10 blade aperture like the Loxia lenses, so it ought to make very nice sunstars. It may loose some of its luster on the A7rII, but it might not. If performance does drop off on the an unmodified A7rII, then it ought to be spectacular on a Kolari modified camera. The price is $2,200 as this lens is introduced, but you ought to be able to get used copies for about $1,500 in a couple of years and although that is expensive at that price I don't think it is a horrible value. It is a fairly unique in being such a strong performer at such a small size.
Where did you see the pricing for the new Summicron-M 28/2 and Elmarit f/2.8 versions?
I am hoping Zeiss will release a Loxia 28/2 soon but it will probably cost ~$1,500. The Leica at $2,000 is not too much if it works well with Sony's cover glass.
With the Leica lenses, I think the new 28 Elmarit ASPH looks better than the new 35 cron ASPH--at least by the MTF charts--and I know I would prefer the 10 blades for landscapes to the 11 blades (although 11 would be nice for portraits). I really wish that Leica would standardize on 12 bladed apertures for M lenses. To me that is a nice middle ground. Plenty of blades for portraits and still very nice sunstars. I am getting a few Zeiss CP.2 lenses before long and it will be interesting to see their sunstars. They have a 14 blade aperture. I'm not sure if that will be gorgeous or perhaps a bit too many. I won't have them for a couple of months, but when I do I will post what they look like.
Leica hasn't published the datasheet for the new 28 summicron ASPH yet. It will be interesting how many blades it has. The old one had 10 blades like the Elmarit, so the new one might as well, but they might bump it up to 11 like the 35 cron ASPH. We ought to know soon. If someone out there has one and can let us know that would be great.
Definitely 10 blades for landscapes!
I'm curious what's the best A7RII 28mm option for landscapes right now. Aside from the GM at 28mm, I tested the CY 28/2.8 which is excellent at f/8 with moderate field curvature and CA.
Next, I will test the new Leica M 28/2.8 Elmarit and the famous Olympus 28/2. -- Guy convinced me.
If the Leica Elmarit R 28/2.8 II wasn't so hard to find, I would try it out as well.
Within a budget,...Show more →
Do you mean the Olympus 28/2, which is lovely but not for landscape, or the legendary and cheap Olympus 28/3.5 which many say has better corners than the distagon or the Pentax-K?
Apr 28, 2016 at 03:58 PM
p.21 #2Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Fred Miranda wrote:
I've seen some of your images with it Helena!
I have a good copy of the FE 28/2 (I went through a few of them). For those who follow DXOmark, the test is done at close range and center only. It seems to be optimized for that. It is also a 26mm lens and has high distortion.
The CY Distagon 28//2.8 is just better when comparing them side by side at infinity distances. It definitely has more micro-contrast and resolution. At f/8, it's excellent everywhere. For landscapes, the mechanical MF is very nice. Its inwards field curvature could be an asset for landscapes if focused properly.
I believe the FE 28/2 could be better at closer distances and likely be more flare resistant.
These Contax lenses are just excellent especially for the price they are going for. CA is is very apparent towards the corners but not too difficult to fix in post. Micro-contrast and colors have the Zeiss signature.Another 28mm that someone should examine on the A7rII is the new Leica M 28 f/2.8 Elmarit ASPH. Leica has just released a new version of this lens designed for digital, whereas the old version was designed for film. Actual copies are just making their way into people's hands and the new version looks a ton better on the Leica SL than the old version. See this post at getDPI:
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/leica/57393-new-leica-lenses-announced.html#post681796
The lens has a lot of virtues including a very small size (tiny) and it weighs only 180g. And Fred, I think you would be happy to know it has a 10 blade aperture like the Loxia lenses, so it ought to make very nice sunstars. It may loose some of its luster on the A7rII, but it might not. If performance does drop off on the an unmodified A7rII, then it ought to be spectacular on a Kolari modified camera. The price is $2,200 as this lens is introduced, but you ought to be able to get used copies for about $1,500 in a couple of years and although that is expensive at that price I don't think it is a horrible value. It is a fairly unique in being such a strong performer at such a small size.I remember reading about these new lenses at the beginning of the year. The new 35/2 Summicron has 11 blades!
Where did you see the pricing for the new Summicron-M 28/2 and Elmarit f/2.8 versions?
I am hoping Zeiss will release a Loxia 28/2 soon but it will probably cost ~$1,500. The Leica at $2,000 is not too much if it works well with Sony's cover glass.I do think they will make a Loxia 28, but I wonder whether it will be f/2 or f/2.8. An f/2.8 would be a bit disappointing but it wouldn't surprise me. I expect it to be a distagon so very different from the ZM 28, which was in my mind pretty mediocre anyway. A good revision of the C/Y 28 for digital with modern glass including an aspherical or two and some anomalous partial dispersion glass could be excellent. I guess we will have to see what they do.
With the Leica lenses, I think the new 28 Elmarit ASPH looks better than the new 35 cron ASPH--at least by the MTF charts--and I know I would prefer the 10 blades for landscapes to the 11 blades (although 11 would be nice for portraits). I really wish that Leica would standardize on 12 bladed apertures for M lenses. To me that is a nice middle ground. Plenty of blades for portraits and still very nice sunstars. I am getting a few Zeiss CP.2 lenses before long and it will be interesting to see their sunstars. They have a 14 blade aperture. I'm not sure if that will be gorgeous or perhaps a bit too many. I won't have them for a couple of months, but when I do I will post what they look like.
Leica hasn't published the datasheet for the new 28 summicron ASPH yet. It will be interesting how many blades it has. The old one had 10 blades like the Elmarit, so the new one might as well, but they might bump it up to 11 like the 35 cron ASPH. We ought to know soon. If someone out there has one and can let us know that would be great.I have a feeling the next Loxia will be a tele. I believe the L28 will come but it may take a while.
Definitely 10 blades for landscapes!
I'm curious what's the best A7RII 28mm option for landscapes right now. Aside from the GM at 28mm, I tested the CY 28/2.8 which is excellent at f/8 with moderate field curvature and CA.
Next, I will test the new Leica M 28/2.8 Elmarit and the famous Olympus 28/2. -- Guy convinced me.
If the Leica Elmarit R 28/2.8 II wasn't so hard to find, I would try it out as well.
Within a budget,...Show more →
Ah you gave it away. I bought a Oly 28mm F2 about a hour ago. Going to try it and if its really good , Ill send out to Fred against the Contax for a test.
From memory and i better start paying attention because i put a bid on a OLY 35mm instead earlier, Thanks to Fred I would have bought that instead.
I canceled the e- bay bid right away.
Anyway i remember back in the day the Oly 28mm F2 was a really nice lens, great wide open and corners i think hit it at F5.6. So I will test it against the GM zoom and see how it does.
Steve Spencer wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
HelenaN wrote
Like Fred I have both FE 28 and C/Y 28/2.8 and my findings mirror his exactly. I like my FE for people photography and close-ups, but for landscapes I much prefer the C/Y. There's not a big difference in sharpness between mine, but the photos from the C/Y come out more vivid, detailed and clear. It's apparent on my screen even without pixel peeping.I have a good copy of the FE 28/2 (I went through a few of them). For those who follow DXOmark, the test is done at close range and center only. It seems to be optimized for that. It is also a 26mm lens and has high distortion.
The CY Distagon 28//2.8 is just better when comparing them side by side at infinity distances. It definitely has more micro-contrast and resolution. At f/8, it's excellent everywhere. For landscapes, the mechanical MF is very nice. Its inwards field curvature could be an asset for landscapes if focused properly.
I believe the FE 28/2 could be better at closer distances and likely be more flare resistant.
These Contax lenses are just excellent especially for the price they are going for. CA is is very apparent towards the corners but not too difficult to fix in post. Micro-contrast and colors have the Zeiss signature.
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/leica/57393-new-leica-lenses-announced.html#post681796
The lens has a lot of virtues including a very small size (tiny) and it weighs only 180g. And Fred, I think you would be happy to know it has a 10 blade aperture like the Loxia lenses, so it ought to make very nice sunstars. It may loose some of its luster on the A7rII, but it might not. If performance does drop off on the an unmodified A7rII, then it ought to be spectacular on a Kolari modified camera. The price is $2,200 as this lens is introduced, but you ought to be able to get used copies for about $1,500 in a couple of years and although that is expensive at that price I don't think it is a horrible value. It is a fairly unique in being such a strong performer at such a small size.
Where did you see the pricing for the new Summicron-M 28/2 and Elmarit f/2.8 versions?
I am hoping Zeiss will release a Loxia 28/2 soon but it will probably cost ~$1,500. The Leica at $2,000 is not too much if it works well with Sony's cover glass.
With the Leica lenses, I think the new 28 Elmarit ASPH looks better than the new 35 cron ASPH--at least by the MTF charts--and I know I would prefer the 10 blades for landscapes to the 11 blades (although 11 would be nice for portraits). I really wish that Leica would standardize on 12 bladed apertures for M lenses. To me that is a nice middle ground. Plenty of blades for portraits and still very nice sunstars. I am getting a few Zeiss CP.2 lenses before long and it will be interesting to see their sunstars. They have a 14 blade aperture. I'm not sure if that will be gorgeous or perhaps a bit too many. I won't have them for a couple of months, but when I do I will post what they look like.
Leica hasn't published the datasheet for the new 28 summicron ASPH yet. It will be interesting how many blades it has. The old one had 10 blades like the Elmarit, so the new one might as well, but they might bump it up to 11 like the 35 cron ASPH. We ought to know soon. If someone out there has one and can let us know that would be great.
Definitely 10 blades for landscapes!
I'm curious what's the best A7RII 28mm option for landscapes right now. Aside from the GM at 28mm, I tested the CY 28/2.8 which is excellent at f/8 with moderate field curvature and CA.
Next, I will test the new Leica M 28/2.8 Elmarit and the famous Olympus 28/2. -- Guy convinced me.
If the Leica Elmarit R 28/2.8 II wasn't so hard to find, I would try it out as well.
Within a budget,...Show more →
Ah you gave it away. I bought a Oly 28mm F2 about a hour ago. Going to try it and if its really good , Ill send out to Fred against the Contax for a test.
From memory and i better start paying attention because i put a bid on a OLY 35mm instead earlier, Thanks to Fred I would have bought that instead.
I canceled the e- bay bid right away. Anyway i remember back in the day the Oly 28mm F2 was a really nice lens, great wide open and corners i think hit it at F5.6. So I will test it against the GM zoom and see how it does.
Apr 28, 2016 at 03:59 PM
p.21 #3Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
DavidBM wrote:
I have a good copy of the FE 28/2 (I went through a few of them). For those who follow DXOmark, the test is done at close range and center only. It seems to be optimized for that. It is also a 26mm lens and has high distortion.
The CY Distagon 28//2.8 is just better when comparing them side by side at infinity distances. It definitely has more micro-contrast and resolution. At f/8, it's excellent everywhere. For landscapes, the mechanical MF is very nice. Its inwards field curvature could be an asset for landscapes if focused properly.
I believe the FE 28/2 could be better at closer distances and likely be more flare resistant.
These Contax lenses are just excellent especially for the price they are going for. CA is is very apparent towards the corners but not too difficult to fix in post. Micro-contrast and colors have the Zeiss signature.Another 28mm that someone should examine on the A7rII is the new Leica M 28 f/2.8 Elmarit ASPH. Leica has just released a new version of this lens designed for digital, whereas the old version was designed for film. Actual copies are just making their way into people's hands and the new version looks a ton better on the Leica SL than the old version. See this post at getDPI:
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/leica/57393-new-leica-lenses-announced.html#post681796
The lens has a lot of virtues including a very small size (tiny) and it weighs only 180g. And Fred, I think you would be happy to know it has a 10 blade aperture like the Loxia lenses, so it ought to make very nice sunstars. It may loose some of its luster on the A7rII, but it might not. If performance does drop off on the an unmodified A7rII, then it ought to be spectacular on a Kolari modified camera. The price is $2,200 as this lens is introduced, but you ought to be able to get used copies for about $1,500 in a couple of years and although that is expensive at that price I don't think it is a horrible value. It is a fairly unique in being such a strong performer at such a small size.I remember reading about these new lenses at the beginning of the year. The new 35/2 Summicron has 11 blades!
Where did you see the pricing for the new Summicron-M 28/2 and Elmarit f/2.8 versions?
I am hoping Zeiss will release a Loxia 28/2 soon but it will probably cost ~$1,500. The Leica at $2,000 is not too much if it works well with Sony's cover glass.I do think they will make a Loxia 28, but I wonder whether it will be f/2 or f/2.8. An f/2.8 would be a bit disappointing but it wouldn't surprise me. I expect it to be a distagon so very different from the ZM 28, which was in my mind pretty mediocre anyway. A good revision of the C/Y 28 for digital with modern glass including an aspherical or two and some anomalous partial dispersion glass could be excellent. I guess we will have to see what they do.
With the Leica lenses, I think the new 28 Elmarit ASPH looks better than the new 35 cron ASPH--at least by the MTF charts--and I know I would prefer the 10 blades for landscapes to the 11 blades (although 11 would be nice for portraits). I really wish that Leica would standardize on 12 bladed apertures for M lenses. To me that is a nice middle ground. Plenty of blades for portraits and still very nice sunstars. I am getting a few Zeiss CP.2 lenses before long and it will be interesting to see their sunstars. They have a 14 blade aperture. I'm not sure if that will be gorgeous or perhaps a bit too many. I won't have them for a couple of months, but when I do I will post what they look like.
Leica hasn't published the datasheet for the new 28 summicron ASPH yet. It will be interesting how many blades it has. The old one had 10 blades like the Elmarit, so the new one might as well, but they might bump it up to 11 like the 35 cron ASPH. We ought to know soon. If someone out there has one and can let us know that would be great.I have a feeling the next Loxia will be a tele. I believe the L28 will come but it may take a while.
Definitely 10 blades for landscapes!
I'm curious what's the best A7RII 28mm option for landscapes right now. Aside from the GM at 28mm, I tested the CY 28/2.8 which is excellent at f/8 with moderate field curvature and CA.
Next, I will test the new Leica M 28/2.8 Elmarit and the famous Olympus 28/2. -- Guy convinced me.
If the Leica Elmarit R 28/2.8 II wasn't so hard to find, I would try it out as well.
Within a budget, it would be interesting to see how the Olympus compares to the Contax.Do you mean the Olympus 28/2, which is lovely but not for landscape, or the legendary and cheap Olympus 28/3.5 which many say has better corners than the distagon or the Pentax-K?
Interesting well lets see how the F2 does. I can return it if I need too and get a different version of it
Fred Miranda wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
I've seen some of your images with it Helena!I have a good copy of the FE 28/2 (I went through a few of them). For those who follow DXOmark, the test is done at close range and center only. It seems to be optimized for that. It is also a 26mm lens and has high distortion.
The CY Distagon 28//2.8 is just better when comparing them side by side at infinity distances. It definitely has more micro-contrast and resolution. At f/8, it's excellent everywhere. For landscapes, the mechanical MF is very nice. Its inwards field curvature could be an asset for landscapes if focused properly.
I believe the FE 28/2 could be better at closer distances and likely be more flare resistant.
These Contax lenses are just excellent especially for the price they are going for. CA is is very apparent towards the corners but not too difficult to fix in post. Micro-contrast and colors have the Zeiss signature.
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/leica/57393-new-leica-lenses-announced.html#post681796
The lens has a lot of virtues including a very small size (tiny) and it weighs only 180g. And Fred, I think you would be happy to know it has a 10 blade aperture like the Loxia lenses, so it ought to make very nice sunstars. It may loose some of its luster on the A7rII, but it might not. If performance does drop off on the an unmodified A7rII, then it ought to be spectacular on a Kolari modified camera. The price is $2,200 as this lens is introduced, but you ought to be able to get used copies for about $1,500 in a couple of years and although that is expensive at that price I don't think it is a horrible value. It is a fairly unique in being such a strong performer at such a small size.
Where did you see the pricing for the new Summicron-M 28/2 and Elmarit f/2.8 versions?
I am hoping Zeiss will release a Loxia 28/2 soon but it will probably cost ~$1,500. The Leica at $2,000 is not too much if it works well with Sony's cover glass.
With the Leica lenses, I think the new 28 Elmarit ASPH looks better than the new 35 cron ASPH--at least by the MTF charts--and I know I would prefer the 10 blades for landscapes to the 11 blades (although 11 would be nice for portraits). I really wish that Leica would standardize on 12 bladed apertures for M lenses. To me that is a nice middle ground. Plenty of blades for portraits and still very nice sunstars. I am getting a few Zeiss CP.2 lenses before long and it will be interesting to see their sunstars. They have a 14 blade aperture. I'm not sure if that will be gorgeous or perhaps a bit too many. I won't have them for a couple of months, but when I do I will post what they look like.
Leica hasn't published the datasheet for the new 28 summicron ASPH yet. It will be interesting how many blades it has. The old one had 10 blades like the Elmarit, so the new one might as well, but they might bump it up to 11 like the 35 cron ASPH. We ought to know soon. If someone out there has one and can let us know that would be great.
Definitely 10 blades for landscapes!
I'm curious what's the best A7RII 28mm option for landscapes right now. Aside from the GM at 28mm, I tested the CY 28/2.8 which is excellent at f/8 with moderate field curvature and CA.
Next, I will test the new Leica M 28/2.8 Elmarit and the famous Olympus 28/2. -- Guy convinced me.
If the Leica Elmarit R 28/2.8 II wasn't so hard to find, I would try it out as well.
Within a budget, it would be interesting to see how the Olympus compares to the Contax.
Interesting well lets see how the F2 does. I can return it if I need too and get a different version of it
Apr 28, 2016 at 04:01 PM
p.21 #4Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Here check this out
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/best28mm.html
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/best28mm.html
Apr 28, 2016 at 04:07 PM
p.21 #5Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
GMPhotography wrote:
Here check this out
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/best28mm.html
Guy, That is just a list. He never got around to doing the tests. So, that isn't a ranking or anything. Compare it to the other lists in which he actually did the tests. The Olympus is a nice lens (it is small and fast), but personally I couldn't get past the bokeh on the f/2 which I found to be pretty harsh. I also found there to be a fair bit of astigmatism with the lens. So, I don't think it would come anywhere near the performance of the GM zoom.
That is consistent with the MTF test that photodo did. You can find the link here:
http://www.photodo.com/lens/Olympus-28mm-f2-146/images
The lens actually looks pretty bad in that test, but perhaps they had a bad copy.
Also see this test at 16-9.net in which the C/Y 28 f/2.8 and the Nikon 28 f/2.8 AiS both outperform the Olympus 28 f/2 that he tested:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/28mm_3.html
Here check this out
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/best28mm.html
Guy, That is just a list. He never got around to doing the tests. So, that isn't a ranking or anything. Compare it to the other lists in which he actually did the tests. The Olympus is a nice lens (it is small and fast), but personally I couldn't get past the bokeh on the f/2 which I found to be pretty harsh. I also found there to be a fair bit of astigmatism with the lens. So, I don't think it would come anywhere near the performance of the GM zoom.
That is consistent with the MTF test that photodo did. You can find the link here:
http://www.photodo.com/lens/Olympus-28mm-f2-146/images
The lens actually looks pretty bad in that test, but perhaps they had a bad copy.
Also see this test at 16-9.net in which the C/Y 28 f/2.8 and the Nikon 28 f/2.8 AiS both outperform the Olympus 28 f/2 that he tested:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/28mm_3.html
Apr 28, 2016 at 04:16 PM
p.21 #6Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Thanks Steve I'll give it a go. I bought it at KEH which takes returns so I can just try different things if it don't work out. I can always buy up to. Feel like playing a little
Apr 28, 2016 at 04:26 PM
p.21 #7Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
I will probably be testing the Olympus 28 but I am very impressed with the CY 28/2.8. It does need f/8 for landscapes and its field curvature makes it tricky to focus but the level of micro-contrast and colors are impressive. Way better than the FE 28/2 for landscapes. Not bad for a $250 lens.
In comparison the Loxia 35/2 stopped down never sharpen up from 18 to 21.6mm area of the frame.
In comparison the Loxia 35/2 stopped down never sharpen up from 18 to 21.6mm area of the frame.
Apr 28, 2016 at 04:37 PM
p.21 #8Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Fred Miranda wrote:
I have not received my CY 100/3.5 yet but another very light/compact 'only primes' alternative with great IQ would be:
CY 28/2.8, Loxia 50/2 and CY 100/3.5.
Switch out the Loxia, switch in the CZ P50/1.4 C/Y, and you have my travel prime kit. It's the 1990s again! On film, I pair with the Contax Aria. For digital, I used Canon until Sony MILC became real. These were lenses designed for hardcore manual-focus, and had the bodies to back them up.
I have not received my CY 100/3.5 yet but another very light/compact 'only primes' alternative with great IQ would be:
CY 28/2.8, Loxia 50/2 and CY 100/3.5.
Switch out the Loxia, switch in the CZ P50/1.4 C/Y, and you have my travel prime kit. It's the 1990s again! On film, I pair with the Contax Aria. For digital, I used Canon until Sony MILC became real. These were lenses designed for hardcore manual-focus, and had the bodies to back them up.
Apr 28, 2016 at 04:45 PM
p.21 #9Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Speaking of the 3.4/35-70 Vario-Sonnar T*, my copy has a ssssshhhhh sound when you tilt it back and forth. It's almost like there is a bunch of loose ball bearings sloshing around in there -- it's kinda towards the aperture ring end of the lens. Functionally, the lens is perfect. Zooming & focusing is smooth and well damped. The macro collar work as it should. Aperture action is fine. Optics is very clean and there is nary a scratch on the body. A reputable local repair shop says not to worry about it.
Anyone else has the same "problem"?
As far as a "new" lens from Zeiss or Sony, I really hope they'll do a 2x zoom in the spirit of the 3.4/35-70. That is a lens that is small and not necessarily all that fast, but superlative in IQ across its operating range especially at mid apertures. Given the short flange distance of the A7 cameras, the optimum zoom range is problably NOT 35-70 but 25-50 mm. The 35-70 basically brackets the most compact focal length given the SLR flange distance. A 25-50 will bracket the most copact focal length given the flange distance of the A7-series.
I'll really like to see a 3.5/25-50 Vario-Sonnar T* which matches the Batis 25, Loxia 35 and 1.8/55 when stopped down to F5.6 or F8. A 25-50 is arguably a better zoom range than 35-70 from the standpoint of a walkabout zoom. 25 is actually wide enough for most scenics whereas a 35 generally is not. 70 is more of a portrait length, but a portriat lens without an F1.4~F2 aperture is a big compromise. I'll take a tack sharp 50 anyday if I can't have a fast aperture. A reasonable estimate for such a lens will be that it's a long as the 1.8/55, maybe a tad fatter which is plenty small enough. I really don't care if it's branded a SONY-Zeiss or a Batis Zeiss.
Anyone else has the same "problem"?
As far as a "new" lens from Zeiss or Sony, I really hope they'll do a 2x zoom in the spirit of the 3.4/35-70. That is a lens that is small and not necessarily all that fast, but superlative in IQ across its operating range especially at mid apertures. Given the short flange distance of the A7 cameras, the optimum zoom range is problably NOT 35-70 but 25-50 mm. The 35-70 basically brackets the most compact focal length given the SLR flange distance. A 25-50 will bracket the most copact focal length given the flange distance of the A7-series.
I'll really like to see a 3.5/25-50 Vario-Sonnar T* which matches the Batis 25, Loxia 35 and 1.8/55 when stopped down to F5.6 or F8. A 25-50 is arguably a better zoom range than 35-70 from the standpoint of a walkabout zoom. 25 is actually wide enough for most scenics whereas a 35 generally is not. 70 is more of a portrait length, but a portriat lens without an F1.4~F2 aperture is a big compromise. I'll take a tack sharp 50 anyday if I can't have a fast aperture. A reasonable estimate for such a lens will be that it's a long as the 1.8/55, maybe a tad fatter which is plenty small enough. I really don't care if it's branded a SONY-Zeiss or a Batis Zeiss.
Apr 29, 2016 at 09:34 AM
p.21 #10Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
As the OP who started this mess with the question "What is your ultimate f8 and be there landscape kit now that you have seen the new 24-70GM?"
I thought I should give an update of my learnings from my Moab pilgrimage.
1) Lens manufacturers continue to disappoint. My 24-70mm GM came in horribly decentered and went back and didn't make the trip. My CV 15mm arrived after trip was completed, and appears to have smeared corners, and it took multiple attempts to get a Loxia 21mm that wasn't decentered.
2) Contax 35-70mm did not disappoint from an IQ standpoint at f8. However... I agree with many posters who said the 24-35mm is the most used range, and that made the 35-70mm less useful. I agree so much that I thought about making it another dead horse at Dead Horse point by throwing it off canyon
Resisted urge as with my luck I would have got sued for hitting a car on White rim trail, and got a ticket for littering. I am very conflicted about the 35-70 on next landscape trip. Foliage for sure, but landscape not so sure.
3) My copy of 16-35 is great and was heavily used. Biggest surprise was that sun stars were pretty nice and the resistance to green spots was better than Loxia 21mm. So while I liked the star from Loxia better, I wound up picking more images form 16-35mm shot at 20mm if shooting into sun.
4) Batis 25mm never left bag as it was too cloudy every night to do the intended night work.
5) Choice to take Canon 70-200mm f4 IS over the Sony 90mm Macro was probably a good one based on focal length versatility. That lens is horrible for sun stars and flare however!!! I would love to hear comments of others on how the Sony 70-200mm or yet to be delivered 70-300 compare the Canon 70-200 f4 IS. I am really regretting having sold the 70-300L
6) Have Contax 85mm f2.8 coming today, and will report about it in near future. I thought I read less flare than 100mm f3.5 but we will see.
7) Canon 40mm STM and 50mm f1.8 never left the bag. I would not carry them next time
8) Sony 24-70 F4 is not bad on the A7S, especially stopped down. For web use that combo was really quite awesome
So final tally... I won't be buying a Sony 24-70GM right now. I hope there is a Sony 16-35 GM some time in the future, but I could live happily ever after with the current f4. I won't buy a Loxia 50mm as the Contax 35-70 is pretty stellar across it's limited range, but it's range is huge compared to a 50mm. My copy of CV15mm FE appears to have smeared corners but that requires more focus tests to confirm. And the quest for the perfect short tele or short tele-zoom begins
Bill
I thought I should give an update of my learnings from my Moab pilgrimage.
1) Lens manufacturers continue to disappoint. My 24-70mm GM came in horribly decentered and went back and didn't make the trip. My CV 15mm arrived after trip was completed, and appears to have smeared corners, and it took multiple attempts to get a Loxia 21mm that wasn't decentered.
2) Contax 35-70mm did not disappoint from an IQ standpoint at f8. However... I agree with many posters who said the 24-35mm is the most used range, and that made the 35-70mm less useful. I agree so much that I thought about making it another dead horse at Dead Horse point by throwing it off canyon
Resisted urge as with my luck I would have got sued for hitting a car on White rim trail, and got a ticket for littering. I am very conflicted about the 35-70 on next landscape trip. Foliage for sure, but landscape not so sure.3) My copy of 16-35 is great and was heavily used. Biggest surprise was that sun stars were pretty nice and the resistance to green spots was better than Loxia 21mm. So while I liked the star from Loxia better, I wound up picking more images form 16-35mm shot at 20mm if shooting into sun.
4) Batis 25mm never left bag as it was too cloudy every night to do the intended night work.
5) Choice to take Canon 70-200mm f4 IS over the Sony 90mm Macro was probably a good one based on focal length versatility. That lens is horrible for sun stars and flare however!!! I would love to hear comments of others on how the Sony 70-200mm or yet to be delivered 70-300 compare the Canon 70-200 f4 IS. I am really regretting having sold the 70-300L
6) Have Contax 85mm f2.8 coming today, and will report about it in near future. I thought I read less flare than 100mm f3.5 but we will see.
7) Canon 40mm STM and 50mm f1.8 never left the bag. I would not carry them next time
8) Sony 24-70 F4 is not bad on the A7S, especially stopped down. For web use that combo was really quite awesome
So final tally... I won't be buying a Sony 24-70GM right now. I hope there is a Sony 16-35 GM some time in the future, but I could live happily ever after with the current f4. I won't buy a Loxia 50mm as the Contax 35-70 is pretty stellar across it's limited range, but it's range is huge compared to a 50mm. My copy of CV15mm FE appears to have smeared corners but that requires more focus tests to confirm. And the quest for the perfect short tele or short tele-zoom begins
Bill
Apr 29, 2016 at 11:27 AM
p.21 #11Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Bill really appreciate your comments. Sorry you got a bad GM. I am trying to setup a GM vs canon 24-70 IS vs anon 24-70 2.8 ii shootout as for landscapers that would be helpful. I'm one of the posters that noted the 24-35 range is important ... so I ended up keeping the Contax in the bag because I usually had a 24-70 on and didn't change.
I am really torn on the FE 16-35. I have the canon version and will probably keep a 5DsR around. But the 16-35 - assuming you get a centered copy - is really good from 16-24 and so much smaller on the sony body. If I could just let go of my TSEs, I'd probably go FE 16-35, GM 24-70, 55 1.8, Sony 70-200 and be done with it.
I am really torn on the FE 16-35. I have the canon version and will probably keep a 5DsR around. But the 16-35 - assuming you get a centered copy - is really good from 16-24 and so much smaller on the sony body. If I could just let go of my TSEs, I'd probably go FE 16-35, GM 24-70, 55 1.8, Sony 70-200 and be done with it.
Apr 29, 2016 at 11:32 AM
p.21 #12Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Knowing quite a few people who do serious landscape photography (a few as their full time jobs), I have noticed several things:
1. They use a wide range of cameras brands and formats, from LF film to MFT mirrorless and everything in between — DSLRs from Canon and Nikon; mirrorless from Sony, Fujifilm, Olympus, and others; primes and/or zooms; T/S systems (native or adapted or camera movements); lenses from their camera manufacturer and third parties, etc.
2. The majority rely primarily on zoom lenses, and some use exclusively zoom lenses. Some augment zooms with special purpose primes. A few — a rather small number and declining all the time — use primes exclusively.
3. Most primarily use the same brand of lens and camera with a few exceptions: Sony A7r/A7rII users tend to augment the relatively leaner selection of native lenses with third-party lenses via adapters, and some folks are doing things like adapting MF lenses via T/S adapters to their full frame digital cameras.
4. Given the huge variety of gear used, it is really impossible to name an "ideal" landscape lens or ideal landscape lenses. First, not one single brand or lens among them is truly ideal for all photographers — while photographer A may swear by lens X, photographer B will swear by lens Y with equal certainty, and both will produce equally good work.
5. No lens is perfect in a general way. Every single one of them has pluses and minuses, particularly once you consider the many different things known to be valuable or even indispensable by various photographers. Some swear they need TS primes, while other never use them. Some swear that they need the very sharpest lens (however you measure this) while other are certain that many lenses are functionally excellent in terms of sharpness. Some swear that primes are a necessity, while others swear that zooms are far better.
In the end, the real question is what lens(es) best allow you to produce the photographs that you are passionate about creating, and which produce qualitative differences that are actually visible in your photographs, with "differences" including everything from image quality to the functional ability to photograph certain things.
There are perhaps two measures that might apply.
My preferred measure is the one I described above, in that paragraph beginning with, "In the end..." — namely, what do my photographic prints look like.
Another measure for "ultimate," I presume, is "do I own a lens regarded as 'ultimate' by some people," or "do I feel that my lens has the highest possible specifications."
Dan
1. They use a wide range of cameras brands and formats, from LF film to MFT mirrorless and everything in between — DSLRs from Canon and Nikon; mirrorless from Sony, Fujifilm, Olympus, and others; primes and/or zooms; T/S systems (native or adapted or camera movements); lenses from their camera manufacturer and third parties, etc.
2. The majority rely primarily on zoom lenses, and some use exclusively zoom lenses. Some augment zooms with special purpose primes. A few — a rather small number and declining all the time — use primes exclusively.
3. Most primarily use the same brand of lens and camera with a few exceptions: Sony A7r/A7rII users tend to augment the relatively leaner selection of native lenses with third-party lenses via adapters, and some folks are doing things like adapting MF lenses via T/S adapters to their full frame digital cameras.
4. Given the huge variety of gear used, it is really impossible to name an "ideal" landscape lens or ideal landscape lenses. First, not one single brand or lens among them is truly ideal for all photographers — while photographer A may swear by lens X, photographer B will swear by lens Y with equal certainty, and both will produce equally good work.
5. No lens is perfect in a general way. Every single one of them has pluses and minuses, particularly once you consider the many different things known to be valuable or even indispensable by various photographers. Some swear they need TS primes, while other never use them. Some swear that they need the very sharpest lens (however you measure this) while other are certain that many lenses are functionally excellent in terms of sharpness. Some swear that primes are a necessity, while others swear that zooms are far better.
In the end, the real question is what lens(es) best allow you to produce the photographs that you are passionate about creating, and which produce qualitative differences that are actually visible in your photographs, with "differences" including everything from image quality to the functional ability to photograph certain things.
There are perhaps two measures that might apply.
My preferred measure is the one I described above, in that paragraph beginning with, "In the end..." — namely, what do my photographic prints look like.
Another measure for "ultimate," I presume, is "do I own a lens regarded as 'ultimate' by some people," or "do I feel that my lens has the highest possible specifications."
Dan
Apr 29, 2016 at 11:51 AM
p.21 #13Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
I like to hike the 85 otus into the backcountry for the sheer audacity of it. And considering that everything else in my pack is state of the art ultralight.
Apr 29, 2016 at 12:04 PM
p.21 #14Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
I prefer the Oly 35-80/2.8 over the Contax 35-70/3.4. I've had 3 copies of the 35-70 and 3 copies of the 35-80 While the Contax is better at 35, the Oly is even better at the long end. So good, there is no need to carry a 100mm prime lens. It's clear and sharp from f/2.8 at 80mm. I never found the 35-70 to be much good in its focal range unless stopped down. The Oly is good when stopped down at 35mm, and if I need something better or better there are prime lenses like the FD 35/2.8 (sharp, good color, and cheap) or my old Rollei/Zeiss 35/1.4 (fast). The two-ring zoom handling of the Oly 35-80 is a joy compared to the rotating push/pull Zeiss 35-70. I also prefer the colors from the Oly 35-80 on my A7R.
While the Contax is better at 35, the Oly is even better at the long end. So good, there is no need to carry a 100mm prime lens. It's clear and sharp from f/2.8 at 80mm. I never found the 35-70 to be much good in its focal range unless stopped down. The Oly is good when stopped down at 35mm, and if I need something better or better there are prime lenses like the FD 35/2.8 (sharp, good color, and cheap) or my old Rollei/Zeiss 35/1.4 (fast). The two-ring zoom handling of the Oly 35-80 is a joy compared to the rotating push/pull Zeiss 35-70. I also prefer the colors from the Oly 35-80 on my A7R. Apr 29, 2016 at 02:43 PM
p.21 #15Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
mike reid wrote:
I like to hike the 85 otus into the backcountry for the sheer audacity of it. And considering that everything else in my pack is state of the art ultralight.
Kudos!
But I'm not so audacious, and try to take a tripod..
I like to hike the 85 otus into the backcountry for the sheer audacity of it. And considering that everything else in my pack is state of the art ultralight.
Kudos!
But I'm not so audacious, and try to take a tripod..
Apr 29, 2016 at 05:46 PM
p.21 #16Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
It may have been said before in this thread and others, but wouldn't it be fantastic for Zeiss to re-release the Vario-Sonnar 35-70 as a Loxia.
Heaven.
Heaven.
Apr 29, 2016 at 06:22 PM
p.21 #17Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Ben, I wrote to them about just that suggestion, with the difference being that Zeiss is looking at a potential windfall for the company with a series of AF (i.e. Batis) lenses. A 'Batis' 35-70 would reach far more people - many of whom would never consider a manual focus lens like we all here enjoy and love using.
It might even be a matter of corporate pride. Having to admit that the previous generation of your design staff made lenses many people prefer to use on the hottest cameras in 2016, while you've been busy cranking out 1000 gram primes might be a bitter pill to swallow. That is not supposed to happen. They would figure they set the agenda for us to follow - go heavy or get out.
And part of positioning your company as the cutting edge of optical development is that you don't look back and reflect on your great achievements of the recent past. In the recent sweep of history Zeiss made one zoom for the G series, five zooms for the N series, and eight zooms for the CY series, a total of 14 such lenses.
Not one zoom lens has appeared alongside the 22 prime lenses made for Canon and Nikon mounts since late 2008 (ZE/F-13; Milvus-6; Otus-3). So it's a matter beyond argument that Zeiss is now very much anti-zoom in the premier format (for both C/N and Sony), and has drifted rapidly in the direction of high end 'boutique' prime lenses as their main product type. I'd like to think they could walk and chew gum at the same time, but who knows what they think?
They did not reply to me - I figure they marked me out as some kind of retro crank. lol.
It might even be a matter of corporate pride. Having to admit that the previous generation of your design staff made lenses many people prefer to use on the hottest cameras in 2016, while you've been busy cranking out 1000 gram primes might be a bitter pill to swallow. That is not supposed to happen. They would figure they set the agenda for us to follow - go heavy or get out.
And part of positioning your company as the cutting edge of optical development is that you don't look back and reflect on your great achievements of the recent past. In the recent sweep of history Zeiss made one zoom for the G series, five zooms for the N series, and eight zooms for the CY series, a total of 14 such lenses.
Not one zoom lens has appeared alongside the 22 prime lenses made for Canon and Nikon mounts since late 2008 (ZE/F-13; Milvus-6; Otus-3). So it's a matter beyond argument that Zeiss is now very much anti-zoom in the premier format (for both C/N and Sony), and has drifted rapidly in the direction of high end 'boutique' prime lenses as their main product type. I'd like to think they could walk and chew gum at the same time, but who knows what they think?
They did not reply to me - I figure they marked me out as some kind of retro crank. lol.
Apr 29, 2016 at 07:54 PM
p.21 #18Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Philip, the selection of CZ-branded zooms (and all their lenses in general) is a matter of sourcing. The many recent primes in ZM/ZE/ZF/ZK/ZS mounts are manufactured by Cosina who has no zoom production. Loss of the Tomioka facility was clearly a blow to the CZ supply base. Meanwhile, Sony does make zooms, hence the Zony offerings. Oberkochen themselves are fully capable of zoom manufacturing, but operate at the elevated cine pricing tier: the 70-200/2.8 CZ.2 is $20K! I surely don't want to know the price for a Master Zoom 16.5-110mm (Super 35 coverage), but it weighs 28 lbs!
Apr 29, 2016 at 09:30 PM
p.21 #19Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
I received my CY 100/3.5 today and tested it against the FE 70-200/4 "G" @100mm.
At infinity they were not too different, meaning one was not much better than the other. That is great news because the CY 100mm is about the size of my Loxia 21mm!
At the edges, there is a lot of LaCA in the CY images. The G zoom is almost free of it.
The G is more flat field and performs best at f/5.6-f/8. The CY is sharp in the center and edges but the mid-field is in a slightly different focus plane. (probably wavy field curvature). It's only noticeably at 1:1. Its sweet spot is at f/8.
At f/8 and smaller, aside from CA and field curvature more prominent on the prime, they are both excellent. As a tele landscape lens, it's very compact and packs great micro-contrast.
At infinity they were not too different, meaning one was not much better than the other. That is great news because the CY 100mm is about the size of my Loxia 21mm!
At the edges, there is a lot of LaCA in the CY images. The G zoom is almost free of it.
The G is more flat field and performs best at f/5.6-f/8. The CY is sharp in the center and edges but the mid-field is in a slightly different focus plane. (probably wavy field curvature). It's only noticeably at 1:1. Its sweet spot is at f/8.
At f/8 and smaller, aside from CA and field curvature more prominent on the prime, they are both excellent. As a tele landscape lens, it's very compact and packs great micro-contrast.
Apr 29, 2016 at 09:51 PM
p.21 #20Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
philip_pj wrote:
They did not reply to me - I figure they marked me out as some kind of retro crank. lol.
lol
The great majority of photographers got used to shooting with the 24-70 zoom range and now it's hard to give this up, even if it means better IQ. Even on this thread, where most sympathize with the CY 35-70mm, this seems to be evident.
They did not reply to me - I figure they marked me out as some kind of retro crank. lol.
lol
The great majority of photographers got used to shooting with the 24-70 zoom range and now it's hard to give this up, even if it means better IQ. Even on this thread, where most sympathize with the CY 35-70mm, this seems to be evident.
Apr 29, 2016 at 09:57 PM