charles.K wrote:
I think the feature that is drawing me to this lens, is the classical rendering. It is just different and unique
Yes, I quite agree. I hope they'll keep that quality with the coming Z* version and that they will not force it in line with the of other Z* glass. Don't take me wrong, I love the likes of the 21, 100 MP and 35/2, but they are good in a different way and I'd really like the rendering style of the 35/1.4 to survive.
Luka, excellent shots...gotta say every single one of them on this page. I particularly like the 2nd statue shot and the 2nd to last boat shot with the dark sky. Excellent work! I NEED ONE OF THESE!
Great shots Luka! The 35/1.4 is an extension of how you see images, or visualize them.
I am really enjoying your series. I really like #3 and 4 in the last lot, so different to a lot of stock shots we see, and it is refreshing IMHO.
Just letting you guys know, I am selling my almost mint Contax MM 35mm f1.4. It has a tiny ding on the barrel, otherwise it would be mint. The glass and all else is flawless.
I will post this in the B&S forum tomorrow, but I know it would be well appreciated by someone here, so I thought I would give you guys first crack at it. I'll post a link to the B&S post when I make it.
PM me if you are interested.
If you are wondering, I also have a the Rollei and can't justify both. I think the Contax is a nicer lens, but I figure my skills (or lack thereof) don't justify the nicer of the two.
I like to shoot after sunset (much more interesting light) and the f/1.4 really enables it - without having to carry around a tripod. Something mysterious though is why I keep encountering and taking pictures of motorcycles..
Anden,
You said you had the Canon 35f1.4 twice and now have the Zeiss 35.How much better is the Zeiss than the Canon? Can you elaborate a bit.Thanks
-Jim
I can answer that as well Jim - I've had the Canon 35L. The Zeiss is a *lot* better than the 35L. The 35L is not bad but it suffers from the same dull colors and lack of micro contrast as most of Canon's glass. In terms of resolution they are about equal - adequate resolution wide open in the center and weak at the edges. Image with the Zeiss appear much sharper though (sharpness = resolution + micro contrast).
Overall colors and contrast are much better on the Zeiss and it's rendering has one of the strongest spatial qualities (i.e '3D') of all Zeiss glass. The Canon is very flat on the other hand.
In short they are different and unless you need AF picking the Zeiss over the Canon is really an easy choice.
denoir wrote:
I can answer that as well Jim - I've had the Canon 35L. The Zeiss is a *lot* better than the 35L. The 35L is not bad but it suffers from the same dull colors and lack of micro contrast as most of Canon's glass. In terms of resolution they are about equal - adequate resolution wide open in the center and weak at the edges. Image with the Zeiss appear much sharper though (sharpness = resolution + micro contrast).
Overall colors and contrast are much better on the Zeiss and it's rendering has one of the strongest spatial qualities (i.e '3D') of all Zeiss glass. The Canon is very flat on the other hand.
In short they are different and unless you need AF picking the Zeiss over the Canon is really an easy choice. ...Show more →
+1
I also had the 35L and was one of the first L series lenses I moved on, after receiving the Zeiss. The Z* 35/2 is an excellent lens, regardless of the Z* 35/1.4 eminent arrival and will continue to be.
The 35L is a very good lens, as it is f/1.4 and AF when no other lens will do. But with the choice of excellent Zeiss glass in this FL the decision is easy IMO.
Hopefully tommorrow I may find out more information about the release of the Z* 35/1.4 from a contact higher up and maybe some more definitive info.
Really nice shots Luka! Love the last one of the bike.
The good thing about the vignetting is that it at least partially covers up the weak corners/edges wide open.
As for the 35/1.4 Z* it seems that it's pretty much a certainty now. There have been not so much leaks as floods of information about it - including price lists that have been accidentally released. The big question is if they'll launch an ZE version at once and how long after the announcement it will take for it to reach the stores.
denoir wrote:
I can answer that as well Jim - I've had the Canon 35L. The Zeiss is a *lot* better than the 35L. The 35L is not bad but it suffers from the same dull colors and lack of micro contrast as most of Canon's glass. In terms of resolution they are about equal - adequate resolution wide open in the center and weak at the edges. Image with the Zeiss appear much sharper though (sharpness = resolution + micro contrast).
Overall colors and contrast are much better on the Zeiss and it's rendering has one of the strongest spatial qualities (i.e '3D') of all Zeiss glass. The Canon is very flat on the other hand.
In short they are different and unless you need AF picking the Zeiss over the Canon is really an easy choice. ...Show more →
+2. My thoughts exactly. Except to add that the 35L is one of the best Canon lenses, second only to my 135L among the 12 canon lenses I owned over time. That is how good the Zeiss is.
Luka, I know you want to because you can but your last set of shots do not seem to benefit at all from shooting at f/1.4 (except for maybe the last shot so you can have the cars frozen) other than that you can do them handheld....which I must say is a very nice option when necessary. In my opinion the lights in all the other pics would look much better stopped down...too much nasty CA
