Your knowledge about zeiss is a kind of "I've heard about", your statement is an insult to Zeiss QC policy.I have my own experiences on both lenses, from outside to inside, they have much higher quality than of today EX Sigma lenses.We all didn't know what is the true in blackbox of coorperation between them.As my recognition lens optics structures like vario-sonnar ( and other planar, tessar...) belongs to the Zeiss and precise mechanical base to hold optics is very high quality, made of alloy metal not like in Canon, Sigma or Tamron lenses.The part I considered look like Sigma is electro-electronic part.So I guess that in coorperation, Sigma did on electro-electronic part, and both of them made many correction to make room for that part.Believing that Sigma can make Zeiss optics is an absurd.In photography they must know who is who and when the coorperation is considered.For Sigma making the luxury lens for their SD camera is only in dream, unless the 2nd larger coorperation is considered.
We should organize a Contax N gathering in Vietnam.
By the way, any reason to get the N100 if
1) you don't do macro
2) you already have the N85 which is quite close in FL
3) the prices after conversion is more than ZE 100/2
ManWearPants wrote:
We should organize a Contax N gathering in Vietnam.
By the way, any reason to get the N100 if
1) you don't do macro
2) you already have the N85 which is quite close in FL
3) the prices after conversion is more than ZE 100/2
I can think of a few reasons:
1) closer MFD can be useful even if you don't shoot macro.
2) better performance across the frame, the 85 being basically a portrait lens with high central sharpness but somewhat soft corners.
3) the pleasure of owning one more fine piece of glass
edwardkaraa wrote:
3) the pleasure of owning one more fine piece of glass
That pleasure is at the expense of a burnt hole in the pocket. no pain no gain, I guess.
AhamB wrote:
4) The N100 usually is far cheaper to buy unconverted.
The price of unconverted N100 has gone up (going by eBug standards). It is cheaper to get the ZE 100 with f2 nowadays. But it is no "N" We love our Ns.
I have liked the images I have seen from the ZE100 so much I am thinking of getting one. BUT home much better or worse is it than the 100N? I already have one and while it is very good stopped down I think it's not so good open wide. Is the ZE better open wide?
I have Ns also, but we must recognize that those lenses are more than 10 years old and everything may happens to that old homeless and derelict things.If you are a technically "shy" person and your country (-ies) considered "weak" to repair them, better put your money on Cosina Zx or Sony A or E mounts lenses.I know, in my own country, some
camera-repairers refused to open Contax N lens, because they didn't get accquaintance with those rare lenses and it may happens to you too.
MarkJones wrote:
I have liked the images I have seen from the ZE100 so much I am thinking of getting one. BUT home much better or worse is it than the 100N? I already have one and while it is very good stopped down I think it's not so good open wide. Is the ZE better open wide?
There are pros and cons of both lenses.
contas wrote:
I have Ns also, but we must recognize that those lenses are more than 10 years old and everything may happens to that old homeless and derelict things.If you are a technically "shy" person and your country (-ies) considered "weak" to repair them, better put your money on Cosina Zx or Sony A or E mounts lenses.I know, in my own country, some
camera-repairers refused to open Contax N lens, because they didn't get accquaintance with those rare lenses and it may happens to you too.
I am not shy of opening up lenses. It is the original spare parts that I am more concerned about. Anyway, Kyocera still repairs these Ns. So the worst case scenario is to have to send these lenses for around the world trip.
