p.1 #1 · It's not difficult to get addicted, Zeiss!!
I was having lots of difficulty to MF earlier because I haven't used a MF lens for a long time. But through lots of practice, here's what I've got. Frankly, the Zeiss quality gets me so addicted that I bought a 50 Makro F2!!!
The ZF50 hasn't arrived, but I'll show one with the 85mm.
Here's one with the Zeiss 85 @ F1.4, ISO 1100, D700. No flash.
p.1 #4 · It's not difficult to get addicted, Zeiss!!
the_wrath_of_khan wrote:
Have you given any of the older AIS lenses a try?
I have once played with the 85 F1.4 AI-S, but never owned one. The impression I had at the time was that colour is a bit cool, and contrast is not as pleasing as the Zeiss. Someone here who had tried both might be able to tell more.
the 80 hassy is awesome on my d3.
While the picture quality might be awesome the 35/2 is huge and should be a 35/1.4. There needs to be a spectacular 35/1.4 option for Nikon as Canon has two spectacular wide 1.4 AF lenses, 24/1.4L and 35/1.4L. The 28/1.4 would be nice if it wasn't over $3,000.
I think the only impressive ZF mount is the 85/1.4. That is not to say the others aren't nice and all, but man there are just so many more practical options out there that might not be quite as sharp, etc, but just make more sense. I would be all over a ZF 35/1.4, that would be amazing, but instead they make the worlds biggest manual focus 35/2...
p.1 #7 · It's not difficult to get addicted, Zeiss!!
i completely agree with Nate, in regards to the ZF 35. How much is it? Oh yeah, way too much for a 35/2. You can get a beater 35/2 AIS for like $60.... that is at LEAST 90% less than the ZF goes for.
The ZF 28/2 is cool, but not $1100 awesome.
The ZF 85 is really cool, but i'd rather have an AF-D 85 for a little less.
I think the ZFs are pretty much a complete waste of time... there are already a crapload of great Nikkors to choose from. I wish Voigtlander made more SLII lenses though- i love that the 40 and 58 SLII's have a CPU chip.
p.1 #8 · It's not difficult to get addicted, Zeiss!!
I'd have to disagree generally. The ZF85 is about the least interesting Zeiss out there for me (with the 25 running a close second).
Sure the Zeiss 35/2 is pricey. But consider the fact that it simply destroys any of the Nikon 35's in IQ, the 35/2 AF-D or AI-S aren't even in shouting distance for sharpness at wide apertures or the edges. If you don't need absolute corner performance, the Voigtlander 40's a near-match for less than half the cost and 1/3 the size and has a CPU to boot.
The ZF50/2 is simply the sharpest, most CA free 50 in F mount.
The ZF100/2 may be only marginally better as a portrait lens than the 105DC, but it's ALSO a macro (albeit only 1:2) and it's significantly better than any of the Nikkor 105 Macros for less than the cost of a 105D and a 105DC.
The 18/3.5 is much better than the Nikkor 18/2.8D for marginally more cost.
The 28/2 is available, 1/3 the cost of a 28/1.4 and much sharper outside of the centre than the 28/2 AI-S.
The 25/2.8's better than any of the Nikkor 24's. But not enough to justify the price difference IMHO.
The 50/1.4 is a distinctly better performer wide-open than the Nikkor, but the Sigma or Voigtlander Nokton 58 are better choices IMHO.
The 85 is very good and draws beautifully. I'd rather a 85/1.4D for the same cost though.
The 21's almost guaranteed to be stunning, but we won't know for a while yet just how it compares to its legendary Contax predecessor. If it does equal the Contax's performance there will be a wide in F mount that exceeds the 14-24's already superb performance.
