AhamB wrote:
I would like to see shots with high contrast where the focus transition is, and at near wide open apertures! Stopping down is cheating because it doesn't reveal LoCA that might be there at larger apertures. I think axial CA usually isn't much of a problem with macro lenses (it is with long teles).
And here I have cranked the saturation in Bibble as far as it can go, to try to coax LoCA to show. There just isn't a speck of it. Both front and back colour is identical.
Well, I intended to buy a 100m macro lens, either the Zeiss 100 f:2 or the new Canon 100L f 2:8. You have now made this officially a 3-way contest with the Voïgtländer...
Any suggestions?
philber wrote:
Well, I intended to buy a 100m macro lens, either the Zeiss 100 f:2 or the new Canon 100L f 2:8. You have now made this officially a 3-way contest with the Voïgtländer...
Any suggestions?
Ummm, be patient and dig deep into your pocket/bank?
philber wrote:
I just checked the Voigtländer homepage. Is your lens no longer produced? Now how do we call people who create desires that cannot be satisfied?
With due respect, those prices are higher than I would need to pay for a new Zeiss or Canon. Is it worth it, meaning better than the Zeiss, the Canon being an unknown at this time?
philber wrote:
With due respect, those prices are higher than I would need to pay for a new Zeiss or Canon. Is it worth it, meaning better than the Zeiss, the Canon being an unknown at this time?
I feel your pain. I didn't pay that much.
On the other hand, consider that it is a stellar portrait lens. For me, it is two lenses in one, which made the decision to buy it a no-brainer.
The Zeiss isn't APO and can't compete with the Voigtlander's bokeh (in my opinion), and I doubt the new Canon will either. But only time will tell. I'm sure the new Canon will be a pretty decent lens.
Wait a minute, which Zeiss 100 are you speaking of?
It is not pain just yet... and could be gain if it turns out to be the right choice... But you haven't given me your opinion on whether it outperforms the well-respected Zeiss 100, which also offers to same twofer advantage
philber wrote:
It is not pain just yet... and could be gain if it turns out to be the right choce... But you haven't given me your opinion on whether it outperforms the well-respected Zeiss 100, which also offers to same twofer advantage
The Zeiss 100/2 macro does show significant longitudinal CA wide open, as well as a violet/green defocus CA. OTOH, I've never heard anyone complain about its ability to deliver microcontrast, which is a credit to its overall correction rather than just CA.
No way!! But smart sharpening gone bad maybe,!! I tend to get carried away sometimes and that shot was processed earlier on to my getting the D300. Still getting used to it's needs in post processing. But, now as I look at it I see weird stuff happening about the outline of the pronghorn. I wonder what I was doing because that looks real bad, as does another area off to the far left edge, hmmm.
philber wrote:
With due respect, those prices are higher than I would need to pay for a new Zeiss or Canon. Is it worth it, meaning better than the Zeiss, the Canon being an unknown at this time?
I've been wondering just what the Zeiss 100/2 goes for. Basically the same as the Voigtlander (remember that the ZE (EF mount) version will have a premium over the ZF).
It all boils down to:
- There is a 1/2-stop difference between them
- The Voigtlander is APO, the Zeiss is far from it
- The Voigtlander has extremely neutral colour, the Zeiss is a bit to the cooler side, from all that I have read
- The Voigtlander is 1:1, the Zeiss is 1:2
- The Voigtlander is 10g heavier
- The Voigtlander has a 530 degree focus throw and very smooth action. The Zeiss has a long throw (not sure how long) but there have been complaints about "stiff" copies.
I think axial CA usually isn't much of a problem with macro lenses (it is with long teles).
!! I tend to get carried away sometimes and that shot was processed earlier on to my getting the D300. Still getting used to it's needs in post processing. But, now as I look at it I see weird stuff happening about the outline of the pronghorn. I wonder what I was doing because that looks real bad, as does another area off to the far left edge, hmmm.