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.29 #1Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Danivas, it looks to me like you're setting sharpening and contrast too high to enjoy the 'natural' character of your CY f3.4 35-70.
Middle-aged Zeiss lenses are known for their '3D' effect, the sense of roundness and depth within the picture's boundaries. But high contrast and sharpening diminish the viewer's sense of depth by calling attention to the '2D' surface details, textures, and edges of the subject matter. You get stronger graphics but less sense of the inner space of the image.
It's sort of a paradox: With contrasty and sharpened processing, the sense of depth you can achieve with any lens decreases. If you process for less contrast/sharpness, the screen image or print should look deeper rather than flat!
Just my 2 cents,
Kirk
Middle-aged Zeiss lenses are known for their '3D' effect, the sense of roundness and depth within the picture's boundaries. But high contrast and sharpening diminish the viewer's sense of depth by calling attention to the '2D' surface details, textures, and edges of the subject matter. You get stronger graphics but less sense of the inner space of the image.
It's sort of a paradox: With contrasty and sharpened processing, the sense of depth you can achieve with any lens decreases. If you process for less contrast/sharpness, the screen image or print should look deeper rather than flat!
Just my 2 cents,
Kirk
Jan 06, 2017 at 11:37 PM
p.29 #2Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
thompsonkirk wrote:
...high contrast and sharpening diminish the viewer's sense of depth by calling attention to the '2D' surface details, textures, and edges of the subject matter. You get stronger graphics but less sense of the inner space of the image.
Thank you for posting that comment. It articulates something I've been seeing but never quite put my finger on; that edges balance against areas. Will be keeping this in mind when I process images going forward.
Cheers,
Jon
...high contrast and sharpening diminish the viewer's sense of depth by calling attention to the '2D' surface details, textures, and edges of the subject matter. You get stronger graphics but less sense of the inner space of the image.
Thank you for posting that comment. It articulates something I've been seeing but never quite put my finger on; that edges balance against areas. Will be keeping this in mind when I process images going forward.
Cheers,
Jon
Jan 07, 2017 at 06:05 AM
p.29 #3Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
It's also the reason why some of us prefer older Leica Mandler-designed M and R lenses as well as CY. Modern Karbe designs for Leica emphasize contrast and pore-and-nose-hair resolution over the gentler rendering of volume by the older lenses. This is one of the main things folks are talking about when they discuss lens 'rendering' and call some modern lenses 'clinical.'
If one wants the modern rendering with emphasis on contrast/sharpness/resolution, it would be best to use new Sony Zeiss in the first place and not look for CY Zeiss or Leica R.
K
If one wants the modern rendering with emphasis on contrast/sharpness/resolution, it would be best to use new Sony Zeiss in the first place and not look for CY Zeiss or Leica R.
K
Jan 07, 2017 at 10:50 AM
p.29 #4Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Your 2c is worth so much more, TK, lol. Another key factor in the CY zooms is color handling and its interaction with contrast; and how small changes in these characteristics impact image depth, and inject shape to image motifs. My subjective experience is that DOF is perceptually increased as a result. Hard to be definitive of course, there is so much going on in imaging, but it's been a revelation how well the film lenses in general perform on such an alien medium as digital, with so much more DR and acuity.
One theory might be that in film days, no one really had a say in how these things went, the machines did C41, and E6 was projected. Maybe the lens producers put more work into color as a result. Now we dial in contrast-WB-saturation with precision undreamt of back then. Whatever the reason, the CY zooms are known for very good CA control, and stylish but peppy palettes. Travel guys like me travel through mornings to destinations, then have to shoot in midday hours before moving on, so this all matters a lot - I need much more than mere sharpness and high contrast to get where I want to go with images. Both Tibet and Australia are unbelievably bright/flat light much of the time (how I envy those in the northern hemisphere). A couple of CY 35-70 examples to maybe illustrate:
One theory might be that in film days, no one really had a say in how these things went, the machines did C41, and E6 was projected. Maybe the lens producers put more work into color as a result. Now we dial in contrast-WB-saturation with precision undreamt of back then. Whatever the reason, the CY zooms are known for very good CA control, and stylish but peppy palettes. Travel guys like me travel through mornings to destinations, then have to shoot in midday hours before moving on, so this all matters a lot - I need much more than mere sharpness and high contrast to get where I want to go with images. Both Tibet and Australia are unbelievably bright/flat light much of the time (how I envy those in the northern hemisphere). A couple of CY 35-70 examples to maybe illustrate:
Jan 07, 2017 at 08:11 PM
p.29 #5Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Philip, what gorgeous examples! The first row of yellow-leaved trees stands in its own separate plane; then an expansive depth; and then the mountains loom in front of (not just under) the sky.
And the Tibetan village displays three dimensions like you'd see through a stereopticon.
K
And the Tibetan village displays three dimensions like you'd see through a stereopticon.
K
Jan 07, 2017 at 09:23 PM
p.29 #6Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Hi folks,
I have just finished my Sony GM 2.8/24-70 review: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-sony-fe-2-824-70mm-gm/
Although I will keep my Contax 3.4/35-70 probably forever, the GM has at least taken it's place in most of my work.
I have just finished my Sony GM 2.8/24-70 review: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-sony-fe-2-824-70mm-gm/
Although I will keep my Contax 3.4/35-70 probably forever, the GM has at least taken it's place in most of my work.
Jan 08, 2017 at 02:14 PM
p.29 #7Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Jannik Peters wrote:
Hi folks,
I have just finished my Sony GM 2.8/24-70 review: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-sony-fe-2-824-70mm-gm/
Although I will keep my Contax 3.4/35-70 probably forever, the GM has at least taken it's place in most of my work.
I'd say the contax is a hair sharper at f8-f11 range, even at 35mm edges. It makes a great landscape zoom, as f8-11 is where I'm mostly working anyway.
The GM is very good and versatile lens!
Jan 08, 2017 at 08:52 PM
p.29 #8Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
TakenWild wrote:
I have just finished my Sony GM 2.8/24-70 review: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-sony-fe-2-824-70mm-gm/
Although I will keep my Contax 3.4/35-70 probably forever, the GM has at least taken it's place in most of my work.I'd say the contax is a hair sharper at f8-f11 range, even at 35mm edges. It makes a great landscape zoom, as f8-11 is where I'm mostly working anyway.
Maybe I'll compare them in the future too, although this thread is already very informative. I'm sure, that the GM has got the sharper corners at large apertures and probably also stopped down at 35mm. This focal length is definitely amazingly sharp, at least with my sample of the GM and the 24MPx sensor. On the other hand, I was impressed by the Contax results at 70mm, I'd expect a tough battle there.
Jannik Peters wrote
Hi folks,I have just finished my Sony GM 2.8/24-70 review: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-sony-fe-2-824-70mm-gm/
Although I will keep my Contax 3.4/35-70 probably forever, the GM has at least taken it's place in most of my work.
Maybe I'll compare them in the future too, although this thread is already very informative. I'm sure, that the GM has got the sharper corners at large apertures and probably also stopped down at 35mm. This focal length is definitely amazingly sharp, at least with my sample of the GM and the 24MPx sensor. On the other hand, I was impressed by the Contax results at 70mm, I'd expect a tough battle there.
Jan 09, 2017 at 01:46 AM
p.29 #9Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Jannik Peters wrote:
I'm sure, that the GM has got the sharper corners at large apertures and probably also stopped down at 35mm. This focal length is definitely amazingly sharp, at least with my sample of the GM and the 24MPx sensor. On the other hand, I was impressed by the Contax results at 70mm, I'd expect a tough battle there.
To my eye personally I found the 35mm corner crops that Fred posted earlier in the thread to be sharper on the CY lens from f8 onwards. https://www.fredmiranda.com/Buzz/gmvscy-35mm.jpg
Your GM may perform better than the one he tested with, or your CY worse, I guess. I definitely like the look of the CY after f8, though. No contest wide open.
I'm sure, that the GM has got the sharper corners at large apertures and probably also stopped down at 35mm. This focal length is definitely amazingly sharp, at least with my sample of the GM and the 24MPx sensor. On the other hand, I was impressed by the Contax results at 70mm, I'd expect a tough battle there.
To my eye personally I found the 35mm corner crops that Fred posted earlier in the thread to be sharper on the CY lens from f8 onwards. https://www.fredmiranda.com/Buzz/gmvscy-35mm.jpg
Your GM may perform better than the one he tested with, or your CY worse, I guess. I definitely like the look of the CY after f8, though. No contest wide open.
Jan 09, 2017 at 03:31 AM
p.29 #10Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Aztatlan wrote:
To my eye personally I found the 35mm corner crops that Fred posted earlier in the thread to be sharper on the CY lens from f8 onwards.
Yes, undeniable! I have found some field curvature at 35mm with the CY, at least with my sample. Maybe it's a matter of focusing. I'm not sure if I will find these differences with a 24 MPx sensor at all, both lenses look very good although the CY is visibly better.
To my eye personally I found the 35mm corner crops that Fred posted earlier in the thread to be sharper on the CY lens from f8 onwards.
Yes, undeniable! I have found some field curvature at 35mm with the CY, at least with my sample. Maybe it's a matter of focusing. I'm not sure if I will find these differences with a 24 MPx sensor at all, both lenses look very good although the CY is visibly better.
Jan 09, 2017 at 03:37 AM
p.29 #11Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
I got my C/Y 35-70 the other day although have had limited time to test as I've been churning through bad copy after bad copy of the CV15III.
Very impressed with this lens though. 35mm seems trickiest to focus, echoing thoughts previously posted here, and although it is the weakest FL it is still capable of good results corner-to-corner it seems.
Here's a 100% crop from the extreme corner and mid-field of my copy at 50mm f8.
Extreme corner @ 50mm f8
Mid-field at 50mm f8
Very impressed with this lens though. 35mm seems trickiest to focus, echoing thoughts previously posted here, and although it is the weakest FL it is still capable of good results corner-to-corner it seems.
Here's a 100% crop from the extreme corner and mid-field of my copy at 50mm f8.
Extreme corner @ 50mm f8
Mid-field at 50mm f8
Jan 14, 2017 at 04:50 PM
p.29 #12Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
One thing easily forgotten with the CY 35-70 is its bokeh capability. I sold my first copy but a quick regret made my by a second that I will not part from. Sry about the motoring theme but sometimes it reveals handsome background blur.
DSC02522 1500 II by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on Flickr
DSC02564 1500 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on Flickr
DSC01783 1500 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on Flickr
DSC02532 1500 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on Flickr
DSC03196 1600 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on Flickr
Edited on Jan 15, 2017 at 12:42 AM · View previous versions
DSC02522 1500 II by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on FlickrDSC02564 1500 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on FlickrDSC01783 1500 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on FlickrDSC02532 1500 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on FlickrDSC03196 1600 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on FlickrEdited on Jan 15, 2017 at 12:42 AM · View previous versions
Jan 14, 2017 at 05:25 PM
p.29 #13Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
35-70/3.4 girls with bokeh, close focal distance showing separation.
Jan 14, 2017 at 07:12 PM
p.29 #14Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Took my first shots with the C/Y 35-70 tonight (excluding test frames.) Very impressed, even at 35mm (the weakest FL) it is very good. Took this frame from the balcony of our Las Vegas hotel. 35mm f11.
Jan 17, 2017 at 08:22 PM
p.29 #15Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Wow! great images everyone.
Feb 23, 2018 at 12:28 PM
p.29 #16Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
I just purchased this lens again. It's really amazing at f/8 for landscapes.
Feb 23, 2018 at 01:04 PM
p.29 #17Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
I can't seem to let mine go . . . every time I think to list it, I take a few shots with the lens . . . then say, no way!
Feb 23, 2018 at 01:19 PM
p.29 #18Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
For my next few landscape sojourns I'm taking the 35-70/3.4 along with the Loxia 21 and Contax 28/2.8. I think this will be a nice trio.
Feb 23, 2018 at 02:09 PM
p.29 #19Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
A couple from tonight with the 35-70. Posted in the 35-70 and Sony images threads as well.
 |
||
 |
||
|
Feb 23, 2018 at 10:20 PM
p.29 #20Contax 35-70 vs 24-70 GM? Ultimate landscape lens?
Fred Miranda wrote:
I just purchased this lens again. It's really amazing at f/8 for landscapes.
Yep, it has a permanent place in my landscape kit. I've only owned it for a year but it's produced many keepers!
I just purchased this lens again. It's really amazing at f/8 for landscapes.
Yep, it has a permanent place in my landscape kit. I've only owned it for a year but it's produced many keepers!
Feb 24, 2018 at 01:37 AM