I recently got a second copy of the 24-70L, which seems to have somewhat
better performance than my first copy at 70mm with infinity focus. The previous
owner had cherry picked through five copies of the lens to get this one, and
it seems very good, so I'm pretty confident I'm seeing the best of what this
lens can deliver on a 5D. [Well, at least the best lens performance. I'm
sure a better photographer can produce better images with it than I can. ]
So, having recently been very impressed with the corner-to-corner performance
of my CZ 35-70/3.4 Vario-Sonnar on the 5D, I thought I'd test the 24-70L
against it at one of its weak points: 70mm with infinity focus. I was
particularly interested in performance at the typical "landscape apertures"
of f/8 and f/11. I know, the 35mm end of the range would make more sense
for most landscape shooters, but I have always found the 24-70L to deliver
pretty well at the wide end, so I was focusing on the long end for the moment.
The results are here: http://www.pbase.com/tswen/gallery/midzooms
Here are the high points, all at f/8.
The scene, focused on the distant building/foliage:
Conclusion:
They are pretty close. In my testing, The Canon is the winner at
f/4 and below, but at f/5.6 the Zeiss pulls ahead slightly, and the Canon starts
to catch up again by f/11. The Zeiss seems to have better resolution into
the corners, but it has somewhat less contrast. The Zeiss has less vignetting
and less purple fringing in the corners when stopped down to f/8.
Full size images are at the link above. If I get around to it, I'll post some
comparisons at 35mm.
They both have semi-macro modes, but yes, I agree that the CZ does
great in the macro arena. A very nice lens, though more trouble to use
due to manual aperture & focus, and also the rotating front element.
Nice and compact, though. Not as light as some compact lenses,
but it has a great feeling of being solidly constructed.
I was getting sorely tempted to sell the CZ, but I'll probably keep it for the time
being. It's hard to let go of that glass, even though it takes more thinking to use.
Actually, that's probably a good thing for anything but fast moving action.
OK, here are some 35mm comparison shots from a previous day.
Once again, these are on a 5D, sitting on a tripod. No mirror lock-up or timer.
All of these are at f/8.
I had the Canon 24-70 and 24-105mm and now have the CZ 35-70mm. While I didn't have any of them side by side to test, I like the CZ overall. The edge to edge is great and I like the colors better from the CZ. It is also a great starter lens for mf - not too expensive, excellent quality and good useful range. Thanks for sharing the comparisons!
I think there was one on the buy/sell for $375 a few days ago. If I remember correctly, I paid around $400 including a fotodiox adapter. I have not had any issues with my lens/adapter - perfect, snug fit with AF confirmation.
Andi Dietrich wrote:
the 24-70L is among the lenses with the nicest bokeh IMO, for Landscape its too heavy and not always as sharp as we would like it to be
Andi is spot on here. The Canon is great for closer-in work, with wonderful bokeh and a nice
close focusing capability. Not the first choice for landscape work, though.
I picked one up from B&S that had significant image deterioration on the right side of the lens, perhaps indicative of element separation. Left side was stunning, however. Caveat emptor ... like most purchases, assess carefully on receipt.
The resolution of the cz 35-70 can not be challanged, however it is a lens which is difficult to use, as it is not parafocal and AF chips may not work properly.
I have a CZ 35-70, and it stacks up pretty darn well when compared to my Canon 28-70L. In some cases, it even out-performs the Canon. The only downside for me is the rotating barrel...PITA with a polarizer or GND holder. For this reason, I don't use it for landscape shots where any type of filter is necessary. Other than that, its an incredible lens...
trumpet_guy wrote:
OK, here are some 35mm comparison shots from a previous day.
Once again, these are on a 5D, sitting on a tripod. No mirror lock-up or timer.
All of these are at f/8.
only mm versions. I sold mine when I bought a 5d kit, since the AF, IS and range on the 24-105 is important to me and the handling of the 35-70 is funky.
But I'd be remiss to say that it doesn't crush the 24-105 at f5.6 and f8. f11 for me was a break-even point, and where the 24-105 really hits stride full on. Both do wonderfully
It's a lens I would like to have again at some point, but I don't see it happening soon. Would be an amazing tripod lens, IMO. I do have an old panorama using it and a 20D that is awesome. But it's too cumbersome otherwise for my purposes.
ovredal73 wrote:
The macro mode on the Zeiss is an amazing thing. Completely unique construction, well worth to keep the lens for this feature alone.
No kidding. I JUST figured out how to "turn on" the macro mode, and I've had the lens for 2 months now. I had the biggest grin on my face when I saw the lens literally shifting it's focus and change it to macro mode. Still can't get over it... just too cool.
I'm gonna put mine against the 24-70 as well, hopefully this weekend at the Smokies. I'll post some samples when I get them for more in-depth research.
Yes, this is really the only reason. And personally this is no big deal at all,
since for landscapes I'm mostly at infinity focus, and hence I'm not moving the
focus ring much, so the filter orientation is pretty constant. A graduated
ND filter will be a bit of a pain still, but it's walk-around situations with polarizer
attached where the real hassle is.
]