Wonderful photos everybody, Bob, the urban decay series looks wonderful - looks like you feel really at home there :-)
Although the colour makes the Zeiss stand out in this thread, I follow my old preference and post some black and white photos of the big Jewish cemetery in Berlin.
The areas I like most there are the ones that haven't been maintained for a while - forest and nature have come back - so that human traces are now a part of nature again...
Great shots, Bernie. You get exactly the kind of angles I am not good at. I can do details and tight framings, but when it comes to getting something a little more open, I have trouble.
alba63 wrote:
Hi Fracas,
interesting comparision, I would suggest that you slightly correct the 17-40 image to match the Zeiss pic colourwise, and show a 50% crop or so. This is more or less what the viewer sees when looking at a print, even 25% can do. I would be curious to see this comparision taken further.
I am a Zeiss user myself (currently 35, 50/1,4 and 85/1,4), but we should never stop to question whether our idea of what sets the Zeiss lenses apart is in line with reality or not. I would assume that except at F8 the Zeiss is much sharper and has better micro contrast, I remember the 17-40 to be soft in the corners and not very good for fine detail contrast.
Following your advices I am posting a new comparison between two 50% crops, taken the first with the ZE21 and the second with the canon 17-40. I have also set the white balance on the same object (the tent on the background) and have chosen a subject more suitable to see a 3D effect.
What do you think? Can you see a difference in terms of 3D effect?
fracas wrote:
Following your advices I am posting a new comparison between two 50% crops, taken the first with the ZE21 and the second with the canon 17-40. I have also set the white balance on the same object (the tent on the background) and have chosen a subject more suitable to see a 3D effect.
The first shot is focused a little closer, which becomes apparent when you flip back and forth between them. It also has slightly warmer and more pleasing colours. Finally, there is some difference in the way the central lemon pops out, and it feels more part of the frame than in the second shot, where it appears more floating in free air. However, given the differences in focus, I am not sure that this last observation is significant.
carstenw wrote:
The first shot is focused a little closer, which becomes apparent when you flip back and forth between them. It also has slightly warmer and more pleasing colours. Finally, there is some difference in the way the central lemon pops out, and it feels more part of the frame than in the second shot, where it appears more floating in free air. However, given the differences in focus, I am not sure that this last observation is significant.
You are right about the misfocus ... I am now posting another couple of shots, which should be more correct
the ZE21:
the 17-40:
what about 3D effect differences now?
Thanks for your feedbacks!
Jeffrey - very cool shot, well controlled exposure, beautiful light and view. Maybe a tiny bit more of river at the bottom would make composition more balanced. And yeah - to the knee in the river is every day joy for landscape photographers...at least I have fisherman's gum shoes just in case in my car trunk..
blueshadows - Great series. Really loved the fridge shot. Crazy stuff you find ! I also like the mattress spring shot.
Bob - Yeay love your Urbex series. Yellow switch box is my favorite !
alba63 - Beautiful series. B/W conversion is still a mystery for me. Love the subtle tonal difference.
Diploneis - Thank you for the comment !!
Really beautiful shots with all of them. Very strong mood. I agree with blueshadows, I'd not call depressing. I may prefer to call it solitary. Very impressive three different rendition from same subject.
fracas - I am most likely biased as I am a Zeiss owner, but, to my eyes, there is a visible difference between the two. There also seem to be a slight exposure difference, which makes canon shot slightly less flattering. What I see is that lemon's tonality / contast is a bit less articulated on hightlight and shaded area on the second shot, which result in more flat appearance on the second shot IMHO. There are ton of people on this thread who are much more qualified than me on this matter, hopefully, someone else would give you better analysis.
Jeffrey - Love your choice of vertical layout accentuating the scale of canyon. Beautiful. Well worth your effort of getting wet for the shot. I admire that.
Blueshadows, Bob, Bernie, super shots! BBB are the A team
Diploneis, really wonderful. Here I am bemoaning the fatc that light sucks, and you show how much can be done even in nastly weather.
Jeffrey, brilliant shot, as ever!
Fracas, to my eyes, there is a clear and important difference between your two shots. Not only in the "center" lemon, but also on the one in the lower right, in the highlights, and in its shadow. How much one sees and how much it matters to each person is an individual "thing", but, to me, your shots show why I own Zeiss after having sold my Canon lenses.
