I recently bought and returned this lens. I liked it and was encouraged to buy it by Ming Thien's high praise of it, but I was not that impressed. It is possible that I have not invested enough time in learning how to use it. Chroma aberration seemed high and the bokeh was not the best. I have replaced it with the Zeiss 25mm f/2.
rareshb wrote:
... I have replaced it with the Zeiss 25mm f/2...
@rareshb
Are you happier with the bokeh rendition of 2/25 ZF in similar composition to those two shots above?
Unfortunately I haven't had the opportunity to test the new lens in the same conditions. Another reason for switching for the 25mm was the fact that I also have a 35mm 1.4 (Nikon) that I love and the 28mm was competing for the same use, while 25mm is different (for me).
rareshb wrote:
Unfortunately I haven't had the opportunity to test the new lens in the same conditions. Another reason for switching for the 25mm was the fact that I also have a 35mm 1.4 (Nikon) that I love and the 28mm was competing for the same use, while 25mm is different (for me).
Your photos above with the 28mm of the girl look pretty good to me. It will be interesting to hear your comparison (bokeh and otherwise) once you try out the 25mm.
Alright, I have managed to take out my new Zeiss Distagon 25mm f/2. I like it, obviously and the general consensus seems to be that it is a great lens.
@Malina and @Cadaver asked about this lens, compared to the Zeiss Distagon 28mm f/2 which I had briefly.
I am not a professional photographer, much less a lens reviewer. I have not shot the lenses side by side, I have only shot them for a short period and the conditions were similar, but not exactly the same.
What can be seen clearly (and gathered from reviews, for example DXO mark) is the lack of purple fringing and much less chromatic aberration of the newer 25/2.
Subjectively, I like the bokeh of the 25/2 much more.
Both lenses seem very sharp on my old D700, measurements online say that 25/2 is sharper wide open and sharper across the frame.
I have found it a bit more difficult to nail focus on the 25/2. It might have been the cold today or perhaps it needs some focus microadjust (I use the green dot for focusing; I have used the same method for a number of manual lenses and I had in general higher hit rate).
It seems to me that the 28/2 had a bit more of a 3d pop, but overall I prefer the 25/2.
Hope this helps.
rareshb wrote:
Alright, I have managed to take out my new Zeiss Distagon 25mm f/2. I like it, obviously and the general consensus seems to be that it is a great lens.
@Malina@ and @Cadaver@ asked about this lens, compared to the Zeiss Distagon 28mm f/2 which I had briefly.
I am not a professional photographer, much less a lens reviewer. I have not shot the lenses side by side, I have only shot them for a short period and the conditions were similar, but not exactly the same.
What can be seen clearly (and gathered from reviews, for example DXO mark) is the lack of purple fringing and much less chromatic aberration of the newer 25/2.
Subjectively, I like the bokeh of the 25/2 much more.
Both lenses seem very sharp on my old D700, measurements online say that 25/2 is sharper wide open and sharper across the frame.
I have found it a bit more difficult to nail focus on the 25/2. It might have been the cold today or perhaps it needs some focus microadjust (I use the green dot for focusing; I have used the same method for a number of manual lenses and I had in general higher hit rate).
It seems to me that the 28/2 had a bit more of a 3d pop, but overall I prefer the 25/2.
Hope this helps....Show more →
I own both and tend to agree with you. But I won't be selling the 28/2. To paraphrase your review, the 2 lenses have 2 different personalities. The 25/2 doesn't have that 3D pop, maybe, but it is sharp and does possess that Zeiss micro-contrast. The 28/2, and the 35/2, as well, seem to "glory" in 3D pop. I like all three, especially since they are all smallish.
