I have missed this thread, having previously sold off all of my ZE lenses after moving to Sony. However, I have now bought back my two favorites (1.4/35 and 2/50MP) and added the 1.4/85, all now in ZF style to permit stopping down on mirrorless. I feel like I am back home again. :-)
The only real downside of Z-type (ZE, ZF, ZM, etc.) lenses is the chrome filter/hood ring on the front of the lens with no hood mounted, and only when dealing with reflective surfaces. Here the reflection from shooting through a window at an angle sort of adds a surrealistic ring glow to the image.
Just stumbled upon this thread and now my wallet is scared!
However, I do want to add a Zeiss lens to my fleet in the future. Maybe sometime this year. So I have a few questions for the Zeiss owners here.I'm thinking about getting either the Milvus 35mm f/2 ZF.2 or the Distagon T* 35mm f/2.0 ZF.2. Anyone here use these lenses on D8xx/Z x bodies? For those that have or have tried both, which do you prefer? Is there a significant update from the Distagon on the Milvus? I'm just confused on which lens to get.
I have the ZF.2 35/2, and I've owned two ZE 35/2 (have one currently). I was recently looking at the Milvus ZE 35/2 as replacement for these.
I also own and love the Zeiss Loxia 35/2 for Sony bodies.
I am basically going to sell my two Nikon mount Zeiss and concentrate on models for Sony and Canon, with an eye to using the Canon on both Sony and Canon platforms via Sigma MC-11 adapter, or straight Sony E mount.
I prefer the ZE and ZF.2 over the plain ZF models for their electronics and exif info.
Gunzorro wrote:
I have the ZF.2 35/2, and I've owned two ZE 35/2 (have one currently). I was recently looking at the Milvus ZE 35/2 as replacement for these.
I also own and love the Zeiss Loxia 35/2 for Sony bodies.
I am basically going to sell my two Nikon mount Zeiss and concentrate on models for Sony and Canon, with an eye to using the Canon on both Sony and Canon platforms via Sigma MC-11 adapter, or straight Sony E mount.
I prefer the ZE and ZF.2 over the plain ZF models for their electronics and exif info.
Hi Jim,
I find it interesting that you have both the ZF.2 and ZE versions of the Zeiss 35/2. I've always wondered if one had better image quality over the other....but I've never known anyone that actually had both until you Have you noticed any difference in sharpness, colors, contrast, CA, etc between the ZF.2 and ZE versions?
I find it interesting that you have both the ZF.2 and ZE versions of the Zeiss 35/2. I've always wondered if one had better image quality over the other....but I've never known anyone that actually had both until you Have you noticed any difference in sharpness, colors, contrast, CA, etc between the ZF.2 and ZE versions?
Thanks much,
Don
No difference that I can tell. I think it is exactly the same lens formula, with different mount and electronic couplings in ZE and ZF.2 versions. I've also used the Nikon Zeiss versions on Canon, particularly the non-electronic ZF 25/2.8 with decent adapter ring. I like maximum versatility between brands, currently owning Sony, Canon, and Nikon systems -- getting the most use from these lenses whenever possible.
Hi Jim, thanks for the reply. I thought they would be likely the same but was always curious.
Best wishes,
Don Gunzorro wrote:
No difference that I can tell. I think it is exactly the same lens formula, with different mount and electronic couplings in ZE and ZF.2 versions. I've also used the Nikon Zeiss versions on Canon, particularly the non-electronic ZF 25/2.8 with decent adapter ring. I like maximum versatility between brands, currently owning Sony, Canon, and Nikon systems -- getting the most use from these lenses whenever possible.
