Beautiful scene captured. I just went. 'Ahhhh, nice! ' when I saw this picture. IMHO, it is the kind of picture I would like to hang on the wall to remind myself of the beauty of this world.
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 am usually not too concerned about CAs, but 25 shots of yours had much better light, making more pleasing color, not that 28 shots were bad in color either, but more subdued because of the difference in light. I agree that bokeh is nicer with 25, although in theory, 28 should have larger bokeh circle, it probably is showing the age with more clutter. 25mm is harder to focus as subjects appear smaller, or you are much closer, so the DOF is shallower, making less forgiving for focusing. I have 25/2.8, the unsung hero, and definitely hard to nail focus for reportage portraits.
rareshb wrote:
It seems to me that the 28/2 had a bit more of a 3d pop, but overall I prefer the 25/2...
@rareshb thank you for sharing your impressions and wonderful images. It's hard to argue 2/25 better optical performance in regards to aberrations. I have no experience with 2/25, but do shoot a lot with 2/28 ZE. 3D pop is all about how you frame and light a shot. I have plenty of flat images shot with Zeiss 28mm in artificial and ambient light, and I won't blame a lens for that or give it too much credit otherwise for a 3-D illusion
akul wrote:
Beautiful scene captured. I just went. 'Ahhhh, nice! ' when I saw this picture. IMHO, it is the kind of picture I would like to hang on the wall to remind myself of the beauty of this world.
candreyo wrote:
Anyone have any thoughts or experience using the Zeiss 135mm ZF/ZE lens?
Your thought on its weight on a Sony A7 series camera?
Incredible lens right up there next to the Otus series. The focus throw is a bit heavy to the fingers and you sure
can't do fast candids, despite what some purists will claim. But for slow set up portraits, anything at distance or anything off a tripod, it is simply world class. Can't speak to how it would balance on the A7. It's wonderful on my D810.
It works very well in setting up "layers" for stacked images in Zerene Stacker or Helicon Focus.
