This topic is in the 2007 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2007Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
p.1 #1Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
I keep getting confused as I know very little about these lenses and the cameras that they were designed to go on.
I want a wide angle lens for a Canon 5D that is sharp to the edge of frame and was thinking of a Zeiss 21mm f2.8.
Is this a good choice?
I've got a Canon 24mm f1.4L and a 17-40mm f4.0L and both are great in the centre, but absolute mush on the edges.
I don't want to modify the camera body. I just want to use a mount adaptor.
Which lenses can I use and which lenses won't work?
I want a wide angle lens for a Canon 5D that is sharp to the edge of frame and was thinking of a Zeiss 21mm f2.8.
Is this a good choice?
I've got a Canon 24mm f1.4L and a 17-40mm f4.0L and both are great in the centre, but absolute mush on the edges.
I don't want to modify the camera body. I just want to use a mount adaptor.
Which lenses can I use and which lenses won't work?
Jan 04, 2007 at 09:55 PM
p.1 #2Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
The CZ 21mm is a perfect option for your requirements. Edge to edge sharpness. you only need a lens adapter. they are pricey though
Jan 04, 2007 at 10:33 PM
p.1 #3Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
The Contax 21mm is the king of wide angle primes. If you can afford it, it's a no-brainer.
Jan 04, 2007 at 11:01 PM
p.1 #4Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
Check out these tests: http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/
The Contax 21mm is great, however, its difficult to find and very expensive. Other good alternatives are the Olympus 21mm lenses and the Nikon 17-35mm.
The Contax 21mm is great, however, its difficult to find and very expensive. Other good alternatives are the Olympus 21mm lenses and the Nikon 17-35mm.
Jan 04, 2007 at 11:23 PM
p.1 #5Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
I'm looking on E-Bay.
"Contax Carl Zeiss Biogon 21mm F2.8 ( G21 ) for G2"
Is this the lens you guys are referring to?
"Contax Carl Zeiss Biogon 21mm F2.8 ( G21 ) for G2"
Is this the lens you guys are referring to?
Jan 05, 2007 at 12:55 AM
p.1 #7Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
No, that is the rangefinder lens. You want the 21mm Distagon. It looks very different, like this:
http://photosig.pcphotoreview.com/Channels/PhotographyReview/images/products/product_83441.jpg
http://photosig.pcphotoreview.com/Channels/PhotographyReview/images/products/product_83441.jpg
Jan 05, 2007 at 12:58 AM
p.1 #8Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
Thanks, I've got a lot to learn about these lenses.
Actually they look very similar to the Zeiss distagon cine lenses.
Actually they look very similar to the Zeiss distagon cine lenses.
Jan 05, 2007 at 01:06 AM
p.1 #9Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
c/y mount, to be specific! MM or AE... IQ should be the same (I think)
I have two adapters (cost me less than $30.00/e). Now they have a new version for sale (autofocus confirmation), they're about $70/$80 each.
Can't be wrong with these lenses!!
I have two adapters (cost me less than $30.00/e). Now they have a new version for sale (autofocus confirmation), they're about $70/$80 each.
Can't be wrong with these lenses!!
Jan 05, 2007 at 01:26 AM
p.1 #10Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
If your 17-40L is mush in the corners, either there is something wrong with it, or you are shooting it wide open. Hardly any wide-angle lenses perform well wide-open, and there aren't many good reasons for shooting that way anyway. Try taking some shots at f/8. The Distagon will probably cost you over $3000US.
Jan 05, 2007 at 02:55 AM
brainiac
Offline
[X]
Details
p.1 #11Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
Hi Mike
the C/Y Zeiss Distagon 21 is simply superb. It is unlike any other 135 format wide-angle I have used. However, if you want a really beautiful copy in pristine condition with the highly sought step up hood, I am prepared to sell mine for the right price. The reason I can sell it is that I never use it. My work shooting events doesn't require supreme very wide performance, and causes my gear to get knocked around a bit. As a result I have always been too scared to use the 21 so it sits at home in a cupboard looking minty, which is a tragedy really. I take an inferior lens with me instead, happy in the knowledge that it is replaceable. If I were a serious landscape, nature, architectural or interiors photographer the 21 would be the first thing in my bag. I love the lens, and I am not desperate to sell, so I am asking a serious price which reflects its condition and the increasing scarcity of the lens on the market. My nearest used Contax specialist is listing a copy of the lens at UK£3500, without the hood. My price is UK£3250 with hood. You may see cheaper ones on ebay, but as always with ebay you may not get what you expect.
I am based in London and happy to let you try the lens next time you are over if you are interested!
Cheers
the C/Y Zeiss Distagon 21 is simply superb. It is unlike any other 135 format wide-angle I have used. However, if you want a really beautiful copy in pristine condition with the highly sought step up hood, I am prepared to sell mine for the right price. The reason I can sell it is that I never use it. My work shooting events doesn't require supreme very wide performance, and causes my gear to get knocked around a bit. As a result I have always been too scared to use the 21 so it sits at home in a cupboard looking minty, which is a tragedy really. I take an inferior lens with me instead, happy in the knowledge that it is replaceable. If I were a serious landscape, nature, architectural or interiors photographer the 21 would be the first thing in my bag. I love the lens, and I am not desperate to sell, so I am asking a serious price which reflects its condition and the increasing scarcity of the lens on the market. My nearest used Contax specialist is listing a copy of the lens at UK£3500, without the hood. My price is UK£3250 with hood. You may see cheaper ones on ebay, but as always with ebay you may not get what you expect.
I am based in London and happy to let you try the lens next time you are over if you are interested!
Cheers
Jan 05, 2007 at 04:56 AM
Andi Dietrich
Offline
[X]
Details
p.1 #12Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
Sorry Richard this price is way over the top. I recently saw the lens go for 2600$/2100€ which would be about 1400 £, this is still a high price considering that new ZF lenses are probable in the next few months or years
Jan 05, 2007 at 05:07 AM
brainiac
Offline
[X]
Details
p.1 #13Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
I think I mentioned that Mike should find cheaper on ebay. Like I said - I am not keen to sell. But for the right price...
Jan 05, 2007 at 05:37 AM
p.1 #14Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
carstenw wrote:
If your 17-40L is mush in the corners, either there is something wrong with it, or you are shooting it wide open. Hardly any wide-angle lenses perform well wide-open, and there aren't many good reasons for shooting that way anyway. Try taking some shots at f/8. The Distagon will probably cost you over $3000US.
Carsten, i think those Canon lenses really are that bad. Remember Hubsand's famous 21mm v Canon 17-40 L test? http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/1740.html
These pics are at f11 !
Contax:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/21mm_b4.jpg
Canon:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/21mm_a4.jpg
If your 17-40L is mush in the corners, either there is something wrong with it, or you are shooting it wide open. Hardly any wide-angle lenses perform well wide-open, and there aren't many good reasons for shooting that way anyway. Try taking some shots at f/8. The Distagon will probably cost you over $3000US.
Carsten, i think those Canon lenses really are that bad. Remember Hubsand's famous 21mm v Canon 17-40 L test? http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/1740.html
These pics are at f11 !
Contax:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/21mm_b4.jpg
Canon:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/21mm_a4.jpg
Jan 05, 2007 at 08:14 AM
p.1 #15Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
Seems tobe a lotof variablility in the 21mm
I have tried three - all failed to focus at infinity and when focused were soft.
It is the only lens I have ever had to send back. The fault could have been the adapters, or the camera (I used a kodak SLR/c) but regardless, it did not work and was disappointing.
If you find one(21mm CZ thatis) make sure it works in your set up.
Having said that, theLeica M lenses have been a real eye opener
sharp as hell
victor
I have tried three - all failed to focus at infinity and when focused were soft.
It is the only lens I have ever had to send back. The fault could have been the adapters, or the camera (I used a kodak SLR/c) but regardless, it did not work and was disappointing.
If you find one(21mm CZ thatis) make sure it works in your set up.
Having said that, theLeica M lenses have been a real eye opener
sharp as hell
victor
Jan 05, 2007 at 08:49 AM
Andi Dietrich
Offline
[X]
Details
p.1 #16Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
Victor, if you tried 3 zeiss 21's and none of them was sharp, that sounds not like a lot of variability 
Jan 05, 2007 at 08:59 AM
p.1 #17Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
foto-z wrote:
Carsten, i think those Canon lenses really are that bad. Remember Hubsand's famous 21mm v Canon 17-40 L test? http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/1740.html
These pics are at f11 !
Contax:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/21mm_b4.jpg
Canon:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/21mm_a4.jpg
Graham, I am not particularly in the mood to test my 17-40L right now, but I don't get results like that. They may not be as sharp as the Contax, but they are not as bad as what Hubsand saw. There has been talk about variability, but more recently, many people have been getting decent lenses from Canon. Maybe Canon tightened up their QA? Anyway, mine is quite a decent performer.
carstenw wrote
If your 17-40L is mush in the corners, either there is something wrong with it, or you are shooting it wide open. Hardly any wide-angle lenses perform well wide-open, and there aren't many good reasons for shooting that way anyway. Try taking some shots at f/8. The Distagon will probably cost you over $3000US.These pics are at f11 !
Contax:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/21mm_b4.jpg
Canon:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/21mm_a4.jpg
Graham, I am not particularly in the mood to test my 17-40L right now, but I don't get results like that. They may not be as sharp as the Contax, but they are not as bad as what Hubsand saw. There has been talk about variability, but more recently, many people have been getting decent lenses from Canon. Maybe Canon tightened up their QA? Anyway, mine is quite a decent performer.
Jan 05, 2007 at 09:07 AM
jjlphoto
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.1 #18Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
xicotencatl wrote:
c/y mount, to be specific! MM or AE... IQ should be the same (I think)
I have two adapters (cost me less than $30.00/e). Now they have a new version for sale (autofocus confirmation), they're about $70/$80 each.
Can't be wrong with these lenses!!
The CZ 21/2.8 Distagon was made in Japan as MM only. You will most likely need a custom made adapter of 1.4 mm thick. (The pre-made ones are 1.5mm thick, and do not allow infinity focus for most Canon users.) FM member Pham Minh Son makes the thinner ones, as well as the fellow with the focus confimation adapters from this fellow
happypagehk:
http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQfgtpZ1QQfrppZ25QQsassZhappypagehkQQssPageNameZSTRKQ3aMEFSQ3aMESOI
c/y mount, to be specific! MM or AE... IQ should be the same (I think)
I have two adapters (cost me less than $30.00/e). Now they have a new version for sale (autofocus confirmation), they're about $70/$80 each.
Can't be wrong with these lenses!!
The CZ 21/2.8 Distagon was made in Japan as MM only. You will most likely need a custom made adapter of 1.4 mm thick. (The pre-made ones are 1.5mm thick, and do not allow infinity focus for most Canon users.) FM member Pham Minh Son makes the thinner ones, as well as the fellow with the focus confimation adapters from this fellow
happypagehk:
http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQfgtpZ1QQfrppZ25QQsassZhappypagehkQQssPageNameZSTRKQ3aMEFSQ3aMESOI
Jan 05, 2007 at 09:58 AM
p.1 #19Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
I only tried one CZ21 and it worked perfectly with stunning results. The adaptor came from Pham Minh Son. You do need the thinner adaptor for infinity focus and the Contax lenses do sometimes need to be sent back to the factory for callibration. Many users here have reported stunning results once their lens was callibrated. My CZ21 was callibrated a year or so before I purchased it.
Jan 05, 2007 at 10:09 AM
p.1 #20Zeiss 21mm for Canon EOS?
here we are, watching internet myth being propagated. allow me to quote from the same page linked along with those pictures:
This page was originally built to prove to Canon that I had a bad sample. It's behaviour was curious, however: it was as though the lens was acceptably (but not impressively) sharp at a focal length of 17.85mm, but hopelessly soft (as you see here) at 17.9mm. Quite often it would just pop a stinker for no apparent reason. Eventually, after three months haggling, Canon accepted the lens back and the dealer refunded the money,
you're using images of a lens that Canon admitted was faulty, to prove that the lens is faulty. follow the links on that page to the replacement test. pretty dang good on center, and guess what, a $2000-4000 prime is sharper than $600 zooms in the corners.
This page was originally built to prove to Canon that I had a bad sample. It's behaviour was curious, however: it was as though the lens was acceptably (but not impressively) sharp at a focal length of 17.85mm, but hopelessly soft (as you see here) at 17.9mm. Quite often it would just pop a stinker for no apparent reason. Eventually, after three months haggling, Canon accepted the lens back and the dealer refunded the money,
you're using images of a lens that Canon admitted was faulty, to prove that the lens is faulty. follow the links on that page to the replacement test. pretty dang good on center, and guess what, a $2000-4000 prime is sharper than $600 zooms in the corners.
Jan 05, 2007 at 11:34 AM