I am seriously considering a Zeiss 28mm or wider as my landscape lens and was just wanting to see some pictures taken with any .I will be using it on a 5D.Any other thoughts about the lenses is always appreciated.If possible can you please include camera settings
-Jim
The Distagon 2.8/28 is very well regarded. The 25mm is not that much. The 21mm lens is a legend! The 18mm is very nice too. My conclusion (reading things here and there) is that you can't go wrong with 21 (drool) or 28mm. Avoid 25mm and, if tempted by 18mm FL, gues what I'll say? Go Zuiko!
Here is one (C/Y AE J) 28/2.8, ISO 3200 on 5D2. The 28 has better corner resolution than the 35. Careful, there is copy variation; I had to buy 2 to get a good one. It might be because I went the cheapo route though ($100). CZ 25 is supposedly soft and 21 too expensive, so I am on Zuiko for wider than 28. http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3336/3540695324_d6dbc33d5b_o.jpg
Let's be clear about what we are talking about. We should distinguish between Zeiss lenses for Contax and Zeiss ZF/ZE/ZK series lenses.
The Zeiss Contax 25/2.8 has a bit of reputation for being a bit soft. However, there are many people who just love this lens. Color and contrast are exceptional and it produces absolutely lovely images,
The Zeiss ZF 25.2.8 is very sharp and is a distinct improvement over the older Contax 25mm. It produces lovely images with great color and bokeh.
The ZF21 is edge to edge fantastic, just larger than I'd like. It replaced the ZF25. The ZF25 was very good, but has a lot of field curvature so the extreme corners are often soft. Very close focusing for versatility though.
I didn't notice any geometric distortion on the ZF25. From what I know it has mild barrel distortion, but usually not enough to be a problem. The field curvature I was talking about means that the focus 'plane' curves away from the center of the image. For landscapes this sometimes means that getting everything in focus can be a bit more difficult than with other lenses.
The C/Y 28/2.8 is easily one of my favourite lenses. It's comparatively very cheap ($250~$300), it's small and light, and the image quality is excellent.
Has anyone directly compared the CY 28/2.8 to the Nikon Ai-s 28/2.8?
I haven't, but from the various pics I've seen online, my Nikon is equal to or possibly nicer than the Zeiss. Both are incredibly sharp, corner-to-corner, both have pretty low distortion, and both are slightly lacking in color saturation.
Man, would I love to see a comparison.
--------
Separate question: Alex mentions above a C/Y AE J 28/2.8. What is this? All I ever see are "T" versions. Different lens?
Cableaddict wrote:
Has anyone directly compared the CY 28/2.8 to the Nikon Ai-s 28/2.8?
I haven't, but from the various pics I've seen online, my Nikon is equal to or possibly nicer than the Zeiss.
Pics, please.
Both are incredibly sharp, corner-to-corner, both have pretty low distortion, and both are slightly lacking in color saturation.
C/Y 28/2.8 center sharpness doesn't really change that much from wide open to stopped down, but the corners improve dramatically by f/8. Center sharpness is excellent, and corner sharpness is very good. The corners will show CA in high-contrast situations.
There is no way the C/Y 28/2.8 is lacking in colour saturation. I've owned a few copies of this lens (can't seem to get it out of my system), and it has the Zeiss colour signature all over it: inky blacks, excellent tonality, the images just pop.
Separate question: Alex mentions above a C/Y AE J 28/2.8. What is this? All I ever see are "T" versions. Different lens?
AE = mount construction
J = Made in Japan
T* = lens coating
C/Y lenses come in two basic flavours: AE and MM. You can use only Av and M modes with AE lenses, whereas you can use Av, Tv, M, and P modes with MM lenses. Of course this is only relevant if you're using a C/Y mount camera. The counterpart to "J" is "G", or Made in Germany. A given C/Y lens might be AEG, AEJ, MMG, or MMJ. I think that's all there is. I've only ever used MMJ lenses, and of course the famous Distagon 21/2.8 only ever came in MMJ.
Cableaddict wrote:
Has anyone directly compared the CY 28/2.8 to the Nikon Ai-s 28/2.8?
I haven't, but from the various pics I've seen online, my Nikon is equal to or possibly nicer than the Zeiss. Both are incredibly sharp, corner-to-corner, both have pretty low distortion, and both are slightly lacking in color saturation.
Man, would I love to see a comparison.
--------
I did a comparison a few years ago though it is not available on the net. I had the 28/2.8 Ais for many years and, yes it is a great lens and very good close up. At close range I think it is slightly better than the Contax 28/2.8, but that is just at close quarters.
The Nikkor is a very fine lens but the Contax, when stopped down to f8/f11 has more snap and microcontrast. On color I would say the Contax lens has an edge though the Nikkor is no slouch. If I get the time I could scan some photos taken with both.
I can recommend both, though be aware that the Nikkor has to be the very latest Ai-S, the older ones are not as good. ...Show more →
I believe the better Nikkor 28/2.8 AIS focuses to 0.2m...I have the 28/2 Nikkor AIS, also very nice rendition, but a little heavier and larger; sadly quite lot more expensive, the price is rising since the Nikon FFs appeared. The CY 28/2.8 I just bought for its stopped down performance at medium distances and the 3D look I read about here - it is reputedly very good at f8-f11, after which diffraction begins to steal from you on the large Mp cameras in any case.
The 25ZF gets much less flattering reviews than the 28ZF, despite reportedly high field curvature in the 28ZF. Photozone reports (perhaps unacceptable) corners, which pick up just as the centre falls off, at f8 or so. The wide ZFs are also quite large and heavy, comparatively. Zeiss is fertilising many of their latest lenses ;-)
