My 28 2.8 is just a bit too close to my 35-70, I know that 25 isn`t a mile away from 35 but i think this lens might get used whereas the 28 tends to stay in the bag.
This is a mint German lens with " chrome mount version"
Is there any difference between the German version against the Japan version and the chrome mount version against( what my 28 2.8 is) a black mount version.
"chrome mount version"? That's the first time I've heard it described that way. Makes it sound better than version that don't have a chrome mount. Marketing rules. I believe they are referring to an early "AE" version.
Where there is any difference between German and Japanese version is a heated debate. Zeiss says no. Others swear that there is -- that German is better. Some say that the Japanese versions fall out of adjustment easier. There is only anecdotal evidence for this. Some improvements were made over time with the lenses and the change to the "MM" mount (or perhaps, "black mount"), aside from the functionality increase when used on the later Contax bodies. These improvements/changes may, or may not have occurred at the same time as the shifting of production of any given lens to Japan (some were never made in Germany). Summing up, Japanese MM versions of the 25mm might have received some incremental design improvements over time (which may or may not ever express themselves in your images), but the German AE version might be slightly higher quality. Will you see a difference? I think that will depend entirely on the specific examples of the lenses used (considering sample variation, wear, and state of adjustment/maintenance).
My Makro Planar 100mm f/2.8 is also a chrome mount version. I was under the impression chrome mounts are older lenses than the black mounts, but I'm probably wrong.
I tested a CZ 25/2.8 (not sure if it was MM or AE) about 10 years ago, using agfapan 25, so really only a resolution test. To be honest, the lens did nothing special and I gave it back. I would definitely not crave to have this lens but it did seem to be a fine lens.
JohnJ wrote:
I tested a CZ 25/2.8 (not sure if it was MM or AE) about 10 years ago, using agfapan 25, so really only a resolution test. To be honest, the lens did nothing special and I gave it back. I would definitely not crave to have this lens but it did seem to be a fine lens.
JJ
If you trust the old photodo ratings, this lens gets a mediocre 3.4 while the 28/2.8 gets a 4.3. Zeiss own MTF charts confirm these results. In real life photos, the 25 seems to perform better than what the MTF charts indicate. Resolution seems to be stellar in the center but drops dramatically in the corners.
I often use these values http://www.photozone.de/active/survey/querylens.jsp and have found them pretty much on the mark. The stats are from real time shooting by users. You`ll see that stopped down it is more or less on par with the 28 2.8 and fairs well as far as flare etc. Of course there will always be the user that just can`t bring themselves to mark a lens that they own down but in general the results I`ve had from other lenses have been more or less in line.
Let me know what you think. I will have the 7 day return option.
IMHO, there are no bad Zeiss lenses. Some lenses score not so well on MTF charts (including Zeiss' own charts) but somehow in the field they perform very well. Probably there are other IQ aspects that come into play. I believe the 25mm falls into this category. I personally didn't buy it because I have used the 28/2.8 for over 12 years and the focal length of the 25 (actually 26) is too close to justify the purchase. If it was a 24mm, it would have been a no brainer. I still have to find someone who actually owns and uses this lens who doesn't love it.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Dave,
I still have to find someone who actually owns and uses this lens who doesn't love it.
very true,
There is another thread on the 25mm lens at the moment, where a long time 25mm cy user Peet Simard shows what it can do.
Also true re. the 25mm focal length that is actually closer to 26mm!
Different of course to 28mm but surely a 24mm, as all other manufacturers and photographers choose, makes more sense?
Is that the going price for this lens or is this dealer a bit high on the price ?
I recall seeing a few copies at KEH for around $450-$500.
Then again, being in the UK, I doubt KEH would have worked out better.
Well, there is a German one on KEH at present for $665 couple to this the $110 for P&P the something like the $ 200 for UPS customs +vat + there own fee in the UK (rip off) and you are looking at $975 which to round things off is close to £500 in the UK.which actually makes this one reasonable and of course I will have a 7 days return to base and 3 months warranty which will be a lot easier to claim on if required. when you consider something like a Canon 24 2.8 at around £300 UK that will probably have the usual Canon WA problems!!
I must admit a 24 would have been better but after using the 35-70 and finding that 35 is a very useful focal length I think even at 25.5mm there will be enough spread to make it worth while.The worry is that if it does turn out to be a good copy then my 28 will get even less use. Out of interest I also have a Sigma 20 1.8 that is a very good copy (not anywhere near the Contax) and a 17-40 that can be called on in emergency (if you don`t mind the Ca and distortion and lack of bite on the 1Dsmk3)
I`m hoping the 25mm will feel like my 28 2.8CZ that in some way goes towards the enjoyment of using it. I have a Oly 21 3.5 that I`m not over the moon with IQ wise and using a Lee WA hood and adapter needs a small set of fingers to be able to get them between the hood and the focus ring.(and to be honest, the difference between the Sigma and Oly is quite narrow) the 1.8 of the Sigma is so easy to focus with.
BTW, I`ve tried the central freshnal screen in the Canon and now have a centre split screen that seems to be in general a better bet when focussing is required.
Fingers crossed this end that it is a good copy, this guy does specialise so hopefully he has got it right with this lens.(it certainly can`t be any worse than having to spend lots of time in CS3 trying to correct images from the 17-40 and 24-105)
edwardkaraa wrote:
IMHO, there are no bad Zeiss lenses. Some lenses score not so well on MTF charts (including Zeiss' own charts) but somehow in the field they perform very well. Probably there are other IQ aspects that come into play. I believe the 25mm falls into this category. I personally didn't buy it because I have used the 28/2.8 for over 12 years and the focal length of the 25 (actually 26) is too close to justify the purchase. If it was a 24mm, it would have been a no brainer. I still have to find someone who actually owns and uses this lens who doesn't love it....Show more →
I think that's right. There are those that love it, and this has translated in to pretty strong prices for the lens. There must be some reason why the sharper c/y 28/2.8 sells for $250 and the c/y 25/2.8 sells for $500-600+. Not only might the lens' performance exceed it's MTF (perhaps due to incremental improvements to the lens over it's long history), but also perhaps because MTF's really aren't everything. The look of this lens can be very appealing.
Was the Zeiss 25mm f2.8 released recently.
Was this the lens that Zeiss advertised as having high resolution of up to 400 lp/mm or was it the older 25mm f2.8.... or am I way off here.
If anyone interested, there is a Zeis c/y 25mm in the buy and sell forum for $425 shipped. That's a pretty decent deal compared to the prices quote above. (disclaimer, I do not know and have no affiliation with the seller).
See: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/643357
Lotusm50 wrote:
If anyone interested, there is a Zeis c/y 25mm in the buy and sell forum for $425 shipped. That's a pretty decent deal compared to the prices quote above. (disclaimer, I do not know and have no affiliation with the seller).
See: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/643357
Out of interest, the serial number of that lens above is 6591927 (for sale) and is West German, the lens I`ve ordered is serial number 6966837 (the one with the supposed chrome mount. So do the numbers run in sequence for the lens focal lengths? or would the chrome mount lenses have there own serial numbers?
If they all run in sequence (chrome and black mount) then the lens on route is 374,910 later! surely not!
I must say that no one seems to know about a chrome mount 25 2.8 MM (or haven`t seen this thread) should I be getting worried??
I`m not sure where to look for serial numbers and types so maybe someone could point me their.
Sorry, Dave-
I don't know the code behind Zeiss' numbering system. I am sure there is a sequence, but it probably doesn't run to all the digits of the serial number. It probably contains other information like dates, etc. Given that the c/y 25mm in the buy/sell forum is a "black mount" and an earlier production number than the one you purchased, I am admittedly at a loss how the different color mounts figured into Zeiss' production history or the reasons for the different color mounts. I'm sure that there is a Zeiss lens Compendium book out there somewhere that might provide insights to their numbering system, but i don't have it.
