Philber,
Thanks for the info. The second B&W shot with the ZO is magnifique.
Rick,
I have yet to sample decent fish and chips since moving to the United States and living in Texas and Florida. Perhaps I need to try the North East.
Joekraft,
You are absolutely right. Damn my ageing eyes!
Philber,
Nice captures.I especially like the shadows in 1,3(also nice door), #2 has a nice 3D look to it.I wonder how my Rokinon would hold up againt the ZE 85?
-Jim
philber wrote:
Woe is me! ... giving it up didn't sound that painful. Right? Wrong! The lens, probably sensing that it might soon be reduced to "for sale-used" status, decided to teach me a lesson.
This is the lesson it taught me. I am in love -again-!
philber wrote:
Thanks for the kind words, but you get no sympathy from me ...
Back at you, no sympathy.
Seriously keep the 85 and get the 100 you'll be sorry if you don't. If you get rid of the 85 you'll have nothing between 50 and 100mm.
Philippe, the photos of the building are absolute terrific! There is absolute no feeling of watching photo, but instead real strong feeling watching the building itself. These again made me really want to have 85mm Planar.
Philippe (or anyone else having 85ZE/ZF),from many place I have read about the focus shift and even Zeiss admits it. It should be almost non-existent at infinity but I have not found any documentation, which would say how it exactly behaves. Only reference I have found said that when focused to 10m with f/1.4 then at f/2.8 the focal plane is at 8m. Can anybody confirm this or give more accurate description how the focus shift behaves.
If it's very bad then I think I go for Contax 1.4/85 instead since it has aperture ring; focusing and pressing DOF button at same time will be very difficult, but focusing the C/Y with f/2.8 instead of f/1.4 s very easy to do. I don't mind bad performance close-up, but please don't propose 2.8 Sonnar, I already had it and it obviously don't have same magic as 1.4 Planar at long distance (like these shots by Philippe).
Burningheart also has a point, since I sold 85LmkII and Sonnar 2.8/85 got stolen, I have not had any 85mm Zeiss, just Leica 90/2.8 and 80-200. And I have felt that not having anything between 50 and 100 is problematic.
However "in paper" the hole doesn't seem that bad, but still exists. Below are my planned "2010 travel and hiking lenses" now consists of 2.8/21ZE, 2.8/25C/Y, 2/35ZE, 1.4/50ZE, 2/100ZE, 3.5/200C/Y, real focal lengths from Zeiss PDFs used:
Here are Philippe's current lenses, some similarity at wide end D: - based on this you might want to replace 135mm with Makro-Planar:
Of course many of us in Alternative forum select lenses based on their characteristic, not just because focal lengths. Last week I won from eBay Helios 44M-4 58mm f/2, Zeiss Jena Tessar 2.8/50, Pentax Super Takumar 50mm f/1.4 lenses, and I already have 6 different 50mm lenses
thx all - we were walking on the valley floor - came out of the trees and saw that picture - perfect for the 50mm - more luck than skill, but the Zeiss ZE certainly got the detail and the color that I wanted - the picture above is basically untouched except for a little sharpening.
Nice shot and lighting Phillipe on the door shot!
I don't think the door shot at f6.3 would be any better with the 100 MP but the bench shot at f3.5 would probably be sharper with the 100 MP.
