DonnieW wrote:
Having such great knowledge of these lenses, do you have a recommendation on adpaters for the 1-series cameras?
Son has devoted so much that he is making his own adapters and good news is you can buy it from him.
Guy,
no need to apologize. I have but one Zeiss lens, and it is not listed in Son's thoughts, but thats just fine, and for those of us who are taking the creative leap and buying these fine lenses, the information and insight that individuals like Son and yourself have provided over time has been invaluable. I wouldn't even know where to begin to test a lens, and some of the terminology is still greek to me, but my point is that through your testing, I have come to trust your judgement, and if you or Son write or tell me that a particular lens is really good, then that is exactly what I need. Quite frankly, I don't know of any store that could provide as good information as you guys have offered to the rest of the forum, and have taken your own time to do so.
Rant on - you KNOW what you're talking about, and thanks to that.
I hope FMers appreciate this tremendous contribution by Son - the monetary investment and sheer time required to form these impressions. By having a single, dedicated person handle the lenses, a uniform comparison can be made. The calibre of optics, and their rarity, make this report unique in the world.
Guy Mancuso wrote:
Well Natron I own 8 of them and must of had 11 of them so your point being what. That us guy's testing them and there are many and also owners that we just like doing this for fun. Natron I get PAID to shoot that is my job , i find no joy in testing , buying and rebuying and /or or selling any of them because I never get ahead and my kids college suffers from it. The point my friend and if you have not got it by now is this Canon lenses suck in certain area's PERIOD maybe a strong word let's say not cutting the cheese. I am sick and tried of trying to defend folks opinions that equal mine, I was not in diapers yesterday my friend . I have tried almost every lens that has been around from 8x10 to a Minox and after many years of this , i think I know what i am looking at, i may be wrong once in awhile but trust me it is not often. i make not one freaking penny from this or from anyone else but clients , they demand quility and they are going to get it no matter what. You wonder why most of the Pro's have left this forum, I really must be nuts
To the rest of the forum soory for the rant. ...Show more →
guy, don't worry about the hecklers. there are many many folks who appreciate what son and you and others are doing in terms of education for the forum.
son: thanks for the hard work, we really appreciate it!
Natron, every lens has its unique signature and it is our understanding of their weakness and strong points that allow us to use them in the proper applications. I speaks of their values so that we can take advantage of what they have to offer. There are weakness in every lens even the Zeiss Distagon 21mm F2.8 but we know what strength it brings to the table and the famous shot that Guy has shown us, the cockpit image, require this type of lens on the full frame digital sensor.
Natron, I have tested alot more lens but I did not listed them since they were good but could not make it on my long list for example the Distagon 25mm F2.8, the Vario-Sonnar 35-70mm F3.4 and the unique 70-210mm F3.5 macro which is a very unique lens that require some creative idea to bring about its application of being able to focus all the way to the front element. There is simply no lens can do this or have anyone heard of this lens. This is the future project that I need to show its amazing yes amazing lens. I also left out the Zeiss Planar 85mm F1.4 which I and lots of folks found that it is not the optics that we want from our Zeiss thus it was left out. Those lens that I have reported are lens that I find very strong in our applications of photography.
Guy and Rico both of you and other FMers have been great mentors to all of us including myself so your aknowledgement meant alot to me.
Andy, thank you and I will always remember you were the first guy that made our pocket empty with the new price on the Zeiss 21.
What's new, another Natron bomb....someone has an ax to grind.
Son, as usual thanks for your outstanding contributions. I, for one, love the passion you've displayed in finding and discussing some of the finest lenses ever engineered. Without your willingness to experiment and think out of the box, and the validation of others like Guy, many of us here would not have even thought about trying many of the lenses in our signatures.
I've no regrets. And I'm certain that quite a few others here have no regrets in adding a few of these lenses to our bags.
Kurt thanks for the kind words but you yourself has great passion. I see so many fine lens in your signature now and your continue quest for better understanding of these lens have been greatly admired and many fine folks can come to you for help if they have any question about these great lens. I wish that these information was available when I first started so I did not have to waste so much money on lens that did not make it to the list.
Guy and Rico, yes the amount of money that I have invested in this project single handedly was very difficult at times but it is done now and I am glad I got the chance to do it before the marriage.
Erik, yes alot of folks have come together through FM forum to bring in so many great information including Guy, Rico, Mark Kay, Lesong, yes even the green frog Pondria, Mike Hatam, and recently more folks such as Erik, David, Kurt, Robert Jones, Jia, Gerry and so many others (forgive me that I cannot mention all here) that continue to pour in great informations.
The beauty of all is our consensus of these lens and its strength and weakness thus we have characterized the profile of these lens signature. In return we know its best usage for the right applications.
Thanks so very much for the write up. I'm just exploring the possibility of adding some German glass to my bag and this is very helpful in that endeavor.
As Guy has pointed out too many times, to deaf ears, that Canon is lagging way behind in the wide end. I shoot mostly telephoto but when I do go wide I want it to be with the best equipment available.
Your hard work has made it much easy to explore the possibilities.
I'll go out on a limb and say I hate Son for draining my bank account (a good chunk of my money is now his money) Anyway, great writeup and summary. You're not leaving though, right?
Pham Minh Son wrote:
...and recently more folks such as Erik, David, Kurt, Robert Jones, Jia, Gerry and so many others (forgive me that I cannot mention all here) that continue to pour in great informations.
i'm honored to be associated with a group like this. lens testing isn't always entertaining, but it is good to know where our money is going and where it could be better spent to ultimately render better results. we have fallen victim to pixel-peeping but many of us are perfectionists and strive for these types of results. if our clients, friends, or family notice the difference then that's great, but i'm just happy to know that i took the absolute best shot possible at that given point in time and recorded it in high-resolution.
Although Son put the word "final" on the title of this writeup,and we all know that he will be getting married this weekend, but I don't think that he will not be visiting this forum again, right? You guys kind of implied that after his wedding that his FM days are over.... I don't think this is what he implied; is my assumption correct, Son? Please clarify....
I wish to add to all the people thanking you for your work and for the amount of information that you and all other FMers continue to give all of us.
When I started to read this Forum I'd never heard of the possibility to use different lenses than Canon. Then I started to test a 28 2,8 and now look at my sig... My experience with Non-Canon lenses started few months ago but I used them in my work and your comments mirror my opinions about their characteristics: very good work and comments.
Only one question: did you left out the 35 1,4 because you do not think it equals the other CZs quality? Or there are other reasons?
Ciao
Carlo
Carlo Botteghi wrote:
Only one question: did you left out the 35 1,4 because you do not think it equals the other CZs quality? Or there are other reasons?
cinstance tested the zeiss 35 1.4 against the canon 35 1.4 and found them to be so close that sacraficing autofocus wasn't worth it. both lenses have CA but are very sharp wide open -- at least, as sharp as a 1.4 lens can be.
Thanks Erik I'll look for his comparison. I'm curious as I paid my brand new copy about one fourth than the Canon 1,4 and I'm very glad with it and its quality.
Ciao
Carlo
"Final thoughts"---just because you're getting married doesn't mean your life is over! It certainly is an evolving story and we look forward to more valuable input from Son in the future.
"I also left out the Zeiss Planar 85mm F1.4 which I and lots of folks found that it is not the optics that we want from our Zeiss thus it was left out."
Oh sure! The one Zeiss that I hit the hip to buy and you make it an orphan
I'm, for the most part, still back with Canon/Sigma lenses but always appreciate someone who is willing to take the time and then shares freely.
Will look forward to more of your efforts in the future.
and good news is you can buy it from him.
Anyway, great writeup and summary. You're not leaving though, right?