Hrow wrote:
Quite true, but I'm still seriously pondering picking up a 21mm Distagon. I just haven't figured out why I really need it.
Just get it, you'll figure out how to use it most advantageously.
Beyond certain gear ownership point, any additional tools diminish in their role as enablers and increasingly become instruments of refinement.
For example, I am being tempted by 400 f/2.8 IS these days. Sure like heck the return on investment there will be miniscule when it comes to my keeper rate, new concept realization etc. However, something good ought to come out of it too......that might be worth a few thousand dollars to me.
PetKal wrote:
Would it be fair to say that once we shed the shackles of "sharpness" and " optical focus", we can move our photography forward ?
Wow, what a great morning, lots of stunning images.
Peter, sometimes we lose focus that the lens and camera are just a tool. We are so consume by it that we forget what it is intended for. I have seen some well taken pictures even from an iphone.
Henry, if you are considering the 21mm Distagon for landscape photography then it is an obvious answer, yes. But if you are considering for close up photography you may want to consider Zeiss 100mm f2. I guess everyone is raving about the 3D-ness from the Zeiss lens. Looks like Mike may have also caught the Zeiss bug. I understood from others that the 100mm f2 ZE (canon) mount may be coming out soon. You may just want to wait for it, if not, the C/Y version is also pretty good too .. but you have to use it together with an adapter to mount the lens to your camera.
As for me, I am more concern with the purple fringing seen like in the 85L images taken at high contrast. It really irritates me to see the purple edges.
PetKal wrote:
Just get it, you'll figure out how to use it most advantageously.
Beyond certain gear ownership point, any additional tools diminish in their role as enablers and increasingly become instruments of refinement.
For example, I am being tempted by 400 f/2.8 IS these days. Sure like heck the return on investment there will be miniscule when it comes to my keeper rate, new concept realization etc. However, something good ought to come out of it too......that might be worth a few thousand dollars to me.
Peter, that sounds like it would really be mean thing to do the pijuns. You already have them at a very unfair advantage.
Hrow wrote:
This led me to the Zuikos which I am actively pursing and in doing so, gave me the itch for a 21mm Zeiss but that has an 82mm filter thread.
Hi, Henry. I am using the Zuiko 18mm for landscape photography. It does vignet a bit at the corners. Hence, I would just crop it .. that would eventually bring it to the size about what the 21mm lens offers. Oh, my SR Vari-N-Duo just came in yesterday..still in the wrapper.
As for the 21mm distagon, go for it ! .. doubt you will go wrong with it, unless you don't use it often enough. Some guys had to wait a year for the ZE version. The ZE version is selling for about 1.5k which I think it is a good price considering the old version is selling in ebay for over 2k.
Hrow wrote:
Peter, that sounds like it would really be mean thing to do the pijuns. You already have them at a very unfair advantage.
Oh yeah, much maligned pijuns, they have helped me a lot learn a thing or two about fast action photography.
However, 400 f/2.8 IS would hopefully allow me to develop and diversify some views on creatures and objects that fly, particularly in low light, such as this one. (My apologies for the digression from the floral theme, as we are talking photography in general. ).
PetKal wrote:
Oh yeah, much maligned pijuns, they have helped me a lot learn a thing or two about fast action photography.
However, 400 f/2.8 IS would hopefully allow me to develop and diversify some views on creatures and objects that fly, particularly in low light, such as this one. (My apologies for the digression from the floral theme, as we are talking photography in general. ).
WOW !, Peter. Hella shot.
mike reid wrote:
im keeping the 85L forever...probably onto the 200/2 next then zeiss land
Mike, I thought we agreed that the Drainpipe could do just about a comparable job for 15% of the 200 f/2 IS purchase price.
Not that 200 f/2 IS is chopped liver.....here is some old stuff taken with it.
PetKal wrote:
Oh yeah, much maligned pijuns, they have helped me a lot learn a thing or two about fast action photography.
However, 400 f/2.8 IS would hopefully allow me to develop and diversify some views on creatures and objects that fly, particularly in low light, such as this one. (My apologies for the digression from the floral theme, as we are talking photography in general. ).
