I see that you've shot at f/22. Avoid going above f/16 or diffraction will kill off a lot of detail in the image. The 21/2.8 has a massive DOF at larger apertures so there is no need to go as high. You'll get the best performance from the lens at f/5.6 - f/8. Already at f/16 there is a loss of fine detail.
This is my first ever post, although I've been lurking FM for a few years now. Like some of the others, I can thank/blame denoir for having sold all my Canon glass in favour of Zeiss glass, ZE 21, ZE 100 and an old 16mm fisheye Rollei-mount. I've heard people talk about, and said my self, that the old Canon 5D had some sort of magic in it's pictures, that wasn't present in 5D Mark II - now that I've moved on to Zeiss, I see that magic again. Maybe I'm nuts, or maybe it's the Zeiss superior resolving power that can handle 5D2's huge sensor? Anyway, here's one portrait I took handheld, no proper lighting, with the Zeiss 100/2 Makro-Planar, the most pleasurable lens I have ever used.
Thank you denoir, for showing me/us what Zeiss is all about. And thanks as well to all the other Zeiss posters :-)
Wow some amazing images on here. I just bought a Distagon 2/35 for my 7D (plus focusing screen), mainly due to seeing threads like this.
Here is something a bit different (from the type of pics been posted so far at least!) - first day out with it was on a friends birthday pub crawl around Sydney.... It was a retro/denim theme, they don't dress like this normally!
Not the best circumstances to test it out, but it was fun! And manual focus not as bad/hard as I thought it may be...
Poor tourist got more than he bargained for when he wanted to pose for pictures!
Congrats on your new lens, Graham, and welcome to FM. Nice beer shot, BTW! As to you other fellow posters, there are so many good shots I cannot begin to congratulate you all who deserve it, including the newcomers: Akul, Kiddik, Uzai, Samuli, Gary, Apiel. Though a few stand out for my money: Samuli's HDR, Luka's night sets, Gary's truck, Uzay's first shot from his second set, the two portraits.... just can't list them all.. guys, you have to slow down, this is just no longer manageable; You can't go on posting so many great shots in such short time...
philber wrote:
Congrats on your new lens, Graham, and welcome to FM. Nice beer shot, BTW! As to you other fellow posters, there are so many good shots I cannot begin to congratulate you all who deserve it, including the newcomers: Akul, Kiddik, Uzai, Samuli, Gary, Apiel. Though a few stand out for my money: Samuli's HDR, Luka's night sets, Gary's truck, Uzay's first shot from his second set, the two portraits.... just can't list them all.. guys, you have to slow down, this is just no longer manageable; You can't go on posting so many great shots in such short time...
+1
What Philippe says
Philippe, in your comparison, maybe a lower f stop would be also helpful.
This is my first ever post, although I've been lurking FM for a few years now. Like some of the others, I can thank/blame denoir for having sold all my Canon glass in favour of Zeiss glass, ZE 21, ZE 100 and an old 16mm fisheye Rollei-mount. I've heard people talk about, and said my self, that the old Canon 5D had some sort of magic in it's pictures, that wasn't present in 5D Mark II - now that I've moved on to Zeiss, I see that magic again. Maybe I'm nuts, or maybe it's the Zeiss superior resolving power that can handle 5D2's huge sensor? Anyway, here's one portrait I took handheld, no proper lighting, with the Zeiss 100/2 Makro-Planar, the most pleasurable lens I have ever used.
Akul: I really like the first shot with the Brooklyn bridge in the background .
Philippe: Thanks! Interesting comparison of the 50 P & 100 MP. A f/11 the only thing we can look at is the color rendering. Interestingly enough, if you open the images in separate tabs and flip between them there is a clear difference. The 100 MP has definitely a clearer color rendering - more contrasty and a bit stronger color separation.
denoir wrote:
Philippe: Thanks! Interesting comparison of the 50 P & 100 MP. A f/11 the only thing we can look at is the color rendering. Interestingly enough, if you open the images in separate tabs and flip between them there is a clear difference. The 100 MP has definitely a clearer color rendering - more contrasty and a bit stronger color separation.
Strange, I only see that sun was lower (see shadows, specially the loop shadow on big "main target" flower) on P50 shot than it was in MP100 shot --> more light (the luminance is higher on MP100 shot) and in "better" angle. Also there is possibility that f/11 isn't f/11 exactly in both lenses, the exposure difference is under 1/3 stop (for example at same aperture MP100 gives about 2/3 stop more light to sensor than Canon 100/2.8L, but this is common between all Zeiss and Contax lenses compared to Canon lenses, but I haven't ever noticed much differences between Zeiss (/Contax) lenses, the light transmission seems to be similar after vignetting is not affecting --- also there can be mechanical variations in aperture mechanism, the difference on 50mm lens between f/11 and f/13 isn't that big).
In order to see differences (if any) in these shots we would need to evaluate much bigger size, with properly sharpened (Philippe's method tends to loose smallest and finest textures). However f/11 takes the edge off from both lenses, so there ain't that much fine texture left on the flowers.
----
Vähä-Kausjärvi 04 - Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/21 @ f/5, HDR, ISO 100 (and yes I'm very aware of the noise under the boat...5DmkII has only 3 shot bracketing, which does add limitations on this kind of extreme settings, and yes I'm too afraid of tripod movement if I change the shutter speed manually between shots...)
Beatiful shots people. Denoir: the clarity on your images is striking and Samuli Vahonen: fantastic treatment, so lifelike.
Samuli Vahonen. A trick I sometimes use is to add a 4th exposure for a specific area. You don't have to include it in the 3 image HDR but after the HDR creation you can blend in the 4th exposure in PS with painting on a layermask just for that element you exposed for. There is little risk of not aligning with the real HDR file this way.
Zeiss 50 MP ZE. 18 image pano (2 row).
Check out the high res as well. I over-sharpened it slightly. Somehow I can't get the sharpness using PTgui for RAW conversions compared to when I convert the files myself in Lightroom.
ViscaB I really like the colors in the first. Excellent work as always.
Samuli, excellent shots on the last three pages, I especially like Vähä-Kausjärvi 01 with the ZE 35. Great sharpness in the clouds.
Luka, not saying anything, you know
Uzay I'm not sure what camera you are using but probably the D3 or D700. If so, I have found that with the 50 anything below f/11 sadly suffers badly from diffraction. Going from f/11 - f/16 there is a huge amount of detail lost. I just found this out and trashed about 100 pics where it really ticked me off.
apiel123 You're shots aren't showing for me...showing it is unavailable
Philber how dare you show how sharp the 50 Planar is when comparing to the 100 MP
