fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

3 4 5 end

Archive 2008 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

rfkiii
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

I've had a chance to look at some of the files. I'm not sure what I should be seeing in the cat pic in the left foreground behind the big tree. Is it softness or a smearing of fine detail? Or is it just the way the ground looks there?

Warped focus seems like an apt description and it occurs in an unusual spot behind the tree and not in front of it.

Looking at the landscape files, it really looks like the lens peaks at f/8. By f/11, a lot of fine detail is gone. I did a Smart Sharpen of 180/0.4/0 on the full rez images, and f/8 really is better.

Yep, absolutely correct.

On those landscape files, it looks to me like the right side of the images to about 25% inward are noticeably softer than the left 25% of the image. Some of the subject matter is farther away on the right side but the 21mm has no problem resolving detail on the far river bank from the same exact location where I setup my tripod.

Don't know if you looked at the broom file but it was particularly telling. Focused in the center of the bristles at an angle between 45 & 60 degrees about 4 feet away @f2, the entire left side of the image was oof. I would have called this front focusing but can that happen on a manual focus lens? More like it is decentered maybe? I tried two different nikon>EOS adapters and got the same result.

Man, I don't know anymore. I thought the ZF would be better than it appears to be, and its value is really being put into question by the recent price hikes. The shot of the amps is particularly disappointing. I've never used a C/Y 28/2, but surely the blooming (axial chromatic aberration?) can't be as bad as the ZF. Maybe I expect too much.

I thought the amps pic was the better of the bunch.

I don't know what CA/bloom is and now you've introduced another term I am unfamiliar with: axial chromatic aberration. Can you or anyone explain? can this stuff be dealt with in post? I often see folks say they can fix CA easily in post but not sure if blooming is a different thing.

I've sent the lens back for an exchange. Here's why I am giving it another chance instead of washing my hands of it. I had the 25 ZF for evaluation a year ago and it too presented weird distortions of focus except worse. I sent it back but I blamed everything on the adapter. Well, I ordered a new adapter for the 28/2 from happypagehk when I ordered the lens thinking the first adapter was simply a bad apple. When I started getting the weirdness on the 28/2 with the happypagehk adapter, I switched and got the same effects (as described above for the broom file) from the older adapter I used with the 25/2.8. So, now I am ruling out the adapters.

I can not believe that two expensive Zeiss lenses (both ZF) have performed so poorly because they are poorly designed and engineered. Something's wrong here. Maybe it is my technique but I invoke the Blind Hog Principle that I can not screw up a 100 images to the point where I haven't gotten one keeper.

I have the 50 f1.4 ZS (M42 version) and it works just fine and blew away the c/y 50 f1.7. Do you suppose there is a bit of a difference between the ZF and ZS versions for FF?

Edited on Apr 01, 2008 at 06:47 AM

Apr 01, 2008 at 06:35 AM

StevenPA
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

Rick,

If you look at the MTF for this lens, there is a resolution dip and recovery for the ZF 28/2 that would be kind of close to the area behind the tree in the 'cat' pic, but why you'd see it only in the one spot is supicious. This may be curvature of field, but I don't know enough about how to spot that to be sure.

The amp pic is sharp as anything, and the "plasticity" of the image is fantastic, but look at the purple halo/glow around the white markings on the dials, etc. That's going to be next to impossible to remove in post and ruins the shot IMHO.

If you feel your not getting an evenness of focus, then I'd sell the adapters you have and get a Kindai. The fact that you are pleased with the ZS 50/1.4 is even more reason to think that the Nikon adapters you have aren't the best. The optics are the same for ZF and ZS lenses.

Edited on Apr 01, 2008 at 07:56 AM

Apr 01, 2008 at 07:54 AM

StevenPA
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

Conner999 wrote:
From my CZ vs. ZF experience so far, I'd safely say that CA/blooming is more easily encountered with the newer lenses.

Why is that? Restrictions (legally imposed or otherwise) on lens materials like lead, etc.? All over the literature for the 28/2, Zeiss says they've taken the older C/Y design and "optimized" it.

Apr 01, 2008 at 08:00 AM

shiwan
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

First, I wouldn't rule out the adapter issues until you've used the lenses on a Novoflex adapter. If that's too expensive, try a Kindai adapter. I've used both, and the Novoflex is a fine piece of design and machinery.

Second, both the ZF25 and the ZF28 have strong fields of curvature. This is referenced on a few sites on the 'Net. This is also seen in the MTF graphs, especially at around 18mm, where there's a sharp drop.

Finally, while one optimizes a lens in one direction, as it were, other types of aberrations begin to crop up, especially in wider lens designs. Sometimes this can be corrected with aspherical elements, but even those can leave some unsavoury marks on images.

Apr 01, 2008 at 09:24 AM

Conner999
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #5 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

Steven no idea - just an observation of mine. Smarter folks may have an idea.

Apr 01, 2008 at 10:36 AM

rfkiii
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

Hi Steve,

I went back to the amp pic and looked at it at 100% and I see what you mean about blooming although I must admit that most of it on this pic does not bother me. The worst of it seems to be situated within the areas where the glare from the overhead lights hit the scene.

What seems more concerning to me on this pic looking at it now at 100% is the loss of sharpness on both sides of the image, a goodly distance into the image, to the point where one can not say it is just normal "edge problems". It is clear it is happening at both ends of the image, maybe as much as 25% into the left side of the image all the way up and down that side, and as much as 10% into the right side of the image all the way up and down that side

Because of the very straight horizontal lines, this image shows in a very clear manner the very distinct curvature that drops away from the center. Curvature in and of itself is no big deal for me except where and if it causes this kind of softness. Maybe stopping down would have straightened this out but unfortunately I wasn't thinking "stop-down" when I shot this. When I get the next lens I will reshoot to see if stopping down resolves this particular softness in this particular scene.

Apr 02, 2008 at 05:35 AM

StevenPA
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

At that close a distance and with the lens wide open, it's DOF you're seeing. I actually though you did a good job of paralleling the subject to get the amp sharp across most of the frame.

Of course the floating element helps a lot here too, which is why I just sold my ZF 25/2.8 (very close focusing, but unfortunately no floating element).

Apr 02, 2008 at 05:47 AM

rfkiii
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

shiwan wrote:
First, I wouldn't rule out the adapter issues until you've used the lenses on a Novoflex adapter. If that's too expensive, try a Kindai adapter. I've used both, and the Novoflex is a fine piece of design and machinery.

Second, both the ZF25 and the ZF28 have strong fields of curvature. This is referenced on a few sites on the 'Net. This is also seen in the MTF graphs, especially at around 18mm, where there's a sharp drop.

Finally, while one optimizes a lens in one direction, as it were, other types of aberrations begin to crop up, especially in wider lens...Show more →

Hi shiwan,

I suppose I shouldn't rule out anything, but I have to tell you that if all adapters cost $160 & up, I probably would never have gotten into Alt lenses in the first place.

Not sure when happypagehk adapters lost their cache around FM, but I have never had any kind of trouble with happypagehk's C/Y > EOS & M42 > EOS adapters.

The field curvature idea seems more likely since there appears to be a significant drop in sharpness beginning at the point where the curvature is accelerating (especially wide open).

I guess I thought pics could not be posted here unless one paid for the priviledge, which is why I posted RAWs in links. If I am violating a rule somebody let me know and I will take the following images down.

Here is the amp pic. See if you think this is an adapter problem. Could it be that I may have the same kind of vibe off this lens that I had off the 50L ie it doesn't behave as I am used to other lenses behaving so I am having trouble telling myself the lens is fine?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2250/2381890083_f9110432cc_o.jpg

Here is another weirdness. Four feet away about 45% angle. 100% crop. Wide open. Center AF trained on the center of the bristles. Everything left seems normal, everything right seems way soft.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2102/2381882145_55172cfca9_o.jpg

Apr 02, 2008 at 06:34 AM

rfkiii
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #9 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

StevenPA wrote:
At that close a distance and with the lens wide open, it's DOF you're seeing. I actually though you did a good job of paralleling the subject to get the amp sharp across most of the frame.

Of course the floating element helps a lot here too, which is why I just sold my ZF 25/2.8 (very close focusing, but unfortunately no floating element).

When I get the replacement, I will obviously reshoot many of these scenes and shoot a series using a variety of apertures. I usually do. I did with the landscapes. Don't know why I did not on the f2 shots.

Now for the BIG question.

Do folks think the lens is performing like it should given its design and CA?

Here's a landscape @f8.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2385/2382750916_8b2fa4e76c_o.jpg

Apr 02, 2008 at 06:51 AM

Conner999
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #10 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

rfkII,

What you are describing/seeing is a 'curvature of field', in effect, DoF not being perfectly consistently perpendicular to the lens element - is 'snakes' or curves or 'warps' a bit on off the expected plane.

The first and only occasion I've yet heard it mentioned in a review of the 28/2 ZF was that by Lloyd Chambers in his extensive review of the ZF line (highly recommended - worth the $$). Focus sharp in center, middle frame softer, sharp again near outer section.

IT IS NOT A SAMPLE ISSUE -- but an oddity of the remake of the 28/2ZF. Thus, the 28/ZF in my mind is not a great landscape lens - much better as a close focusing WA.

Lloyd goes thru a much better description of the issue and some of the limitations it produces - despite the lenses strong suits.

The 35/2 ZF is a MUCH better, if not THE bets ZF product IMHO and experience re IQ and no sample variation.

Edited on Apr 02, 2008 at 07:27 AM

Apr 02, 2008 at 07:18 AM

rfkiii
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

What you are describing/seeing is a 'curvature of field', in effect, DoF not being perfectly consistently perpendicular to the lens element - is 'snakes' or curves or 'warps' a bit on off the expected plane.

The first and only occasion I've yet heard it mentioned in a review of the 28/2 ZF was that by Lloyd Chambers in his extensive review of the ZF line (highly recommended - worth the $$). Focus sharp in center, middle frame softer, sharp again near outer section.

I went ahead and ordered the review.

I also hunted down a spec sheet from the Zeiss website (which I now discover I had already downloaded - Duh!!). Zeiss' spec page in part says:

The Distagon T* 2/28 ZF closes the gap in the line of
high-end lenses for analog and digital SLR cameras
because the jump in focal length from 35 mm to 25
mm is too big for many demanding photographers.
Modeled on current state-of-the-art lenses in this
category, it features markedly improved optical
quality. Thanks to the floating design, image quality
remains almost consistent from the close-up range
to infinity.

These features make the Distagon T* 2/28 ZF ideal
not only for atmospheric photos in weakly
illuminated rooms, but also for attractive portraits
from a close distance. With the aperture fully or
almost fully open, you can use the low depth of field
to make the main subject stand out slightly from the
background without causing total background blur.
The high image quality in the close-up range permits
the application range of this lens to be extended to
include still life photography of small objects.

IT IS NOT A SAMPLE ISSUE -- but an oddity of the remake of the 28/2ZF. Thus, the 28/ZF in my mind is not a great landscape lens - much better as a close focusing WA.

Agree now, after being smacked over the head with actual information. The good news is I have the C/Y 28mm f2.8 which is a great little lens.

The 35/2 ZF is a MUCH better, if not THE bets ZF product IMHO and experience re IQ and no sample variation.

Would you say this is a much better lens for landscapes (in particular)? I looked at the MTF charts for it, and to someone who does not really know how to read the things (I open a window with LL's tutorial beside the lens' MTF), it looks similiar to the 28/2's.

Thanks for the information, opinions and ideas.

Apr 04, 2008 at 06:04 AM

Conner999
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #12 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

Between the two, I'd pick the 35/2. One of teh sharpest lenses ever created, clear colors, no field distortion, etc., However like all the ZFs save the 50 macro, does suffer from CA - something the older CZs seem better optimized to defeat.

If I had a clean slate, I'd choose one of (from what I have used only):

1. Leica 28/2.8 Ver 2 (sharp across frame starting WO) - images just 'pop' into focus, floating element for close work, About same cost as a 28/2 ZF. Again, ONLY the latest version with the built-in square hood.

2. Your CZ 28/2,8 stopped down (to get high-res (flat MTF) across the frame).

3. The Leica 35/2 - probably best bokeh in bunch and considered by Son as much better close up than the 28 CZ.

4. If you want really wide - the latest Leica 19/2.8. Needs mods to fit a Canon, but picture the Leica 28, just wider. Sharp as freaking tack.

Others will have their own suggestions as well.

If you go Leica, wait for a good deal. Prices until now have climbed in part due to people buying in anticipation of an uber R10 from Leica. That expectation has diminished and am starting to see: a) more Leica gear coming for sale and b) at better prices as people start to cut back their exposure.

Apr 04, 2008 at 06:35 AM

rfkiii
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

1. Leica 28/2.8 Ver 2 (sharp across frame starting WO) - images just 'pop' into focus, floating element for close work, About same cost as a 28/2 ZF. Again, ONLY the latest version with the built-in square hood.

How do you tell if it is Version 2?

BTW, I called B&H and told them to hold off on the exchange and just refund me. I told them I was apparently mistaken about the lens being faulty and offered to reimburse them for the shipping back. They thanked me for my honesty (my stupidity notwithstanding) and let me off the hook.

Edited on Apr 04, 2008 at 10:20 PM

Apr 04, 2008 at 10:09 PM

robsteve
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #14 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

rfkiii wrote:
How do you tell if it is Version 2?

The latest version has a built in hood and 55mm filters. The older 28mm had a hood that came off and took series filters. The older version also had 48mm filter threads.

Robert

Edited on Apr 04, 2008 at 10:25 PM

Apr 04, 2008 at 10:23 PM

rfkiii
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

Thanks for the reply.

The Leica website lists the 28/2.8 with 55mm filter threads and built-in hood like it is in production, but nobody (B&H, Adorama et al) has one for sale. Is this the right lens or is the Version 2 we speak of a vintage lens?

Also, the Pebble Place List is quite ambiguous about the versions of the 28/2.8 in terms of the language we are using here and also the compatibility on a 5D.

http://www.pebbleplace.com/Personal/Leica_db.html

According to the list, the version labeled as "1998- " with 55mm threads & built-in hood does not work on a 5D.

The two versions earlier than 1994 use Series 7 filters (whatever that is, maybe the 48mm you mention).

It appears that the version "1994-1999" has a question mark as to compatibility. If this is the version 2 we are discussing, are there adapting issues on a 5D?

Sorry to be such a pain.

Edited by rfkiii on Apr 07, 2008 at 04:38 AM GMT

Edited on Apr 07, 2008 at 05:38 AM

Apr 05, 2008 at 07:15 AM

Conner999
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #16 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

No need to apologize, better to ask now...

Conflicting descriptions
------

I find some all-brand retailers tend to be all over the place with their descriptions of Leica R lenses due to the various iterations, filter sizes, etc. The result in those cases is that you're never quite sure what the hell they're describing. Just look for the sliding square hood.

Current Production
-----
The 28/2.8 latest is a current lens and frackin' expensive (like all Leica gear) new - and very rare 2nd hand.

ROM or 3Cam (a little cheaper) matters little if shooting on a Canon.

Ok for 5D
----
I had an older 3Cam on my 5D and worked fine. Sold the lens, regretted it, and just now bought a nice ROM unit from robsteve for my 1Ds2.

The PebblePlace db may simply reflect the fact that not enough users have supplied input to clearly tell. While 5Ds vary in their tolerances, the only R lenses I know that consistently give an issues are the ultra-wides and the 35/1.4. The 50/1.4, while listed as a no-fit, but will apparently do so with a simple 2 minute mod. Unless you have a VERY wonky copy of the 5D, I'd be very surprised if you had an issue.

Re: being in-stock
------
IMHO what you are seeing (and has been told to been happening in Europe) are Leica retailers keeping their stocks of R lenses low until/if they see movement on a new R camera. Especially with the recent management shakeup at Leica.

To finance ONE R lens in inventory, B&H could finance multiple, much faster moving, low-risk Canon/Nikon units. Many 2nd hand dealers will no longer buy R glass used, selling only on consignment - or offer you prices that would make you weep (e.g. $2500 for a ROM 180/2.8 APO...). None want to be holding a financial bag if Leica doesn't come thru in the Fall. Aperture in the UK recently had a big sale dumping their R glass.

What to look for
----
Ok... the single and ONLY important tell-tale you have to watch for is the built-in square hood. No sliding square hood, and it's not the lens you're looking for. Period. No exceptions.

Question to ask the seller other than the obvious for any lens? Focus ring smoothness. Older or neglected R lenses can develop stiff focus rings. Nothing a CLA wouldn't fix, but it pays to ask.

Performance
-----
While I am biased against Canon lenses, I'll own whatever works - preference Zeiss (be it CZ or Hasselblad). However but when it comes to the 28mm FL, the Leica 28 Mod II has got to be the the best all-round 28 ever made. If, not I'd hate to see the one that beat it.

Many cheaper 28s are great in center, awesome stopped down across the frame, great at mid-longer distances or great up close with a floating element. The 28 II is all them in one package.

The only thing I dislike (other than it doesn't cost the same as the CZ 28/2.8), is that the sliding hood does not lock in position. Tap the hood against something and it may well retract.

Possible sources
-----------

A good place to start would be posting a WTB here, on photo.net and at (my first stop) www.getdpi.com. Some ideas that seeped into my brain this am between sips of coffee as to where to look:

1. Adorama had/has one for $1500 -mixed rep as a 2nd hand seller. Bit spendy.
2. Re: KEH - don't think I've ever seen one listed.
3. Kurland Photo -tend to be spendy, good rep, poor web descriptions.

4. A chap on Luminous Landscape is selling a couple (from a BIG R collection). However, being European, his prices are roughly 1000 euros/per. That being said, he has been trying to sell this gear for a LONG time.....

5. A well respected UK vendor with gobs of exotica across all brands and formats is FFordes in Scotland. Great email response, considered to have accurate condition gradings. Insured shipping to NA is spendy however. Next time I'm in Scotland, me, my Visa card and an empty camera bag are heading to Inverness-shire (sic?).

Maybe if RobSteve is nice, he'll post some sample shots with MY lens (Rob - will email with get together time on Monday). Err, you know the shot & crop I mean, right Rob?

Good luck with the hunt - and let us know what you do.

Edited on Apr 05, 2008 at 11:27 AM

Apr 05, 2008 at 07:45 AM

robsteve
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

Is this the set of pictures?


	http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/files/2/2/l1010047.jpg

This was shot wide open. A crop into where I focused is the second picture.


	http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/files/2/2/l1070506.jpg


	http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/files/2/2/l1070506_2.jpg

Just to show how good this lens is at f2.8, here is a 100% crop of the white shirt. I don't see much CA in the transition of the white shirt to the darker shadow under her chin.


	http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/files/2/2/l1070506_4.jpg

Edited by robsteve on Apr 05, 2008 at 07:37 PM GMT

Edited by robsteve on Apr 05, 2008 at 07:38 PM GMT

Edited on Apr 05, 2008 at 06:38 PM

Apr 05, 2008 at 06:15 PM

robsteve
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #18 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

rfkiii wrote:
Thanks for the reply.

The Leica website lists the 28/2.8 with 55mm filter threads and built-in hood like it is in production, but nobody (B&H, Adorama et al) has one for sale. Is this the right lens or is the Version 2 we speak of a vintage lens?
.

Version 2 is the current lens. I noticed tha Samy's in LA has one. Samy's Camera is a large retailer, probably the west coast equivalent of B&H.

http://www.samys.com/product_detail.php?item=6009

CameraWest shows a used one:

http://www.camerawest.com/

Apr 05, 2008 at 06:30 PM

rfkiii
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #19 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

Thanks robsteve. I will check these out. There was an eBay auction for a Leica 28mm ver 2 store demo that sold Sunday for $971. I was 20 minutes late.

Conner999
As previously discussed, the Pebble Place List shows that the 28mm does not work with the 5D. 16-9.net indicates that the Leica 28mm would require a mirror shave. Just wondering if you had your 5D mirror shaved?

I would have no problem getting a mirror shave if that is what it takes. However, horse in front of cart seems like the way to go. I should get the shave first. (Having an adapter on hand before the lens arrives seems prudent also.) Assuming the merchants robsteve mentioned will not hold the lens while I get this stuff done, if there is a glimmer of hope that I could use the lens without the mods, I would order one of them today. Both are vulgarly expensive so I do not want to make a mistake.

By the way, who does mirror shaves these days? Both mirror shave links on the 16-9.net compatibility list are broken.

Edited on Apr 07, 2008 at 06:09 AM

Apr 07, 2008 at 06:03 AM

edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · ZF28/2, Contax 28/2 and 28/2.8?

I wouldn't recommend to shave the mirror of any camera. It's such a violent process and I wouldn't feel confident with the accuracy of my camera once it's done. I bought the 5D thinking it will work with all my existing Contax lenses, except the 18mm f/4. I was very disappointed to find out that my 28mm f/2.8 and 35mm f/1.4 hang the mirror as well. Solution: I bought a used 1DsII. I learned on my expense that current adapters are too thin. After having invested in a few Kindai adapters, now the 28 and 35 work on the 5D as well. As far as I know, Kindai are one of the rare adapters to keep the correct 1.5mm thickness.

Apr 07, 2008 at 06:25 AM

1 2 3 4 5 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 end