adamdewilde wrote:
Wow, ok it's definitely something I've not seen before, or something I haven't noticed, it's pretty problematic, but I'm guessing this is an extreme case that you posted Anden.
Thanks Wayne, that really helped.. I can see it now!
It is something to take into consideration definitely worth mentioning. And yes, sometimes we're blinded by a brand, and dont' want to see faults. Though, the people that have this lens, seem to not be bothered by either A) fixing it in post, or B) just shooting around the problem...
ER i mean if what I said above wasn't the case, I'm sure I would have noticed this optical flaw earlier.
Thanks again for pointing it out, really something worth taking into consideration when looking for a wide angle lens.
Thanks for understanding my point. As Andreas mentioned this mustache distortion is nothing new and has been there since the C/Y version. I look forward to renting the ZE 21 and doing some landscape and architectural test shot comparisons with my current wide angle lenses.
Nice and sharp. As you mention, the bokeh is a little busy in the the first shot only.
It would be interesting to compare the 85 N to this lens for center composed portrait type shots like these.
The ZE 100 is probably better in the corners but they are probably close in the middle and I think the 85N has much smoother bokeh.
Bobu wrote:
Some snapshots from the last weekend with the 100 MP @f/2.0. I really like this lens. The bokeh is not as smooth as with the 85L, but still very good.
Boris
Boris, I actually perfer the boken of the 100 MP over the 85L...
Have you ever thought for a minute that perhaps the reason the bokeh appears more creamy is because it's closer to the subject and further from the background?
I mean for the simple fact that you can get closer to your subject with the 85L then you can with the 100 MP framing wise, not focusing distance.
Try this, take a shot of a friend with the 85L on the camera, stand in the same spot and take another shot of the same friend with the 100 MP on the camera, I know the 100MP will crop in tighter, but honestly the bokeh IMHO will be nicer. Also you have to take into account the fact that the 1.2 is only really super useful by f/2 anyway for headshots @ 1.2 it's really just useful for situations where you need to soak up light. And at f/2 the 100MP beats the 85L at sharpness IMO.. Though these are just from past shots I've pulled up and looked at over current shots I've taken... I no longer have the 85L or 85L II, sold one a long time ago, and sold the vII to a friend a year back. Though we were comparing shots on a walk around one day!
Though I think bokeh is a subjective thing, because people seem to really like the bokeh of the 35/2 ZE, and I think it's probably the only fault I can find with the lens, and thats only because I'm comparing it to the 100MP ZE.. When I say fault, I mean in a few situations I've thought the bokeh could be smoother.. We can call it user fault if you want, I don't mind.
adamdewilde wrote:
Boris, I actually perfer the boken of the 100 MP over the 85L...
Have you ever thought for a minute that perhaps the reason the bokeh appears more creamy is because it's closer to the subject and further from the background?
I mean for the simple fact that you can get closer to your subject with the 85L then you can with the 100 MP framing wise, not focusing distance.
Try this, take a shot of a friend with the 85L on the camera, stand in the same spot and take another shot of the same friend with the 100 MP on the camera, I know the 100MP will crop in tighter, but honestly the bokeh IMHO will be nicer. Also you have to take into account the fact that the 1.2 is only really super useful by f/2 anyway for headshots @ 1.2 it's really just useful for situations where you need to soak up light. And at f/2 the 100MP beats the 85L at sharpness IMO.. Though these are just from past shots I've pulled up and looked at over current shots I've taken... I no longer have the 85L or 85L II, sold one a long time ago, and sold the vII to a friend a year back. Though we were comparing shots on a walk around one day!
Though I think bokeh is a subjective thing, because people seem to really like the bokeh of the 35/2 ZE, and I think it's probably the only fault I can find with the lens, and thats only because I'm comparing it to the 100MP ZE.. When I say fault, I mean in a few situations I've thought the bokeh could be smoother.. We can call it user fault if you want, I don't mind. ...Show more →
As you said, this is a highly subjective thing. And you are right, that the dictance to the subject (and background) has an effect. I would not say, that the 100MP is sharper than the 85L at f/2.0 but it has a significantly higher (better?) contrast compared to the 85L. Maybe this is one of the reasons for the sometimes better bokeh of the 85L.
I find the bokeh characteristic of the 85L very reliable and independend from the situation. The 100MP has in some situations a great (smooth) bokeh and in some other situations the background looks a bit nervous/busy...
Here is an example for a situation with a not so smooth bokeh (100MP at f/2.0):
Revisting an earlier subject, does no-one have any images taken with the 85 close up, wide open? Everyone talks about how it is not optimized for such, but it's hard to believe it has never been done with that lens.
joekraft wrote:
That's a fantastic image of the horse, Bobu.
Revisting an earlier subject, does no-one have any images taken with the 85 close up, wide open? Everyone talks about how it is not optimized for such, but it's hard to believe it has never been done with that lens.
Yes Boris,
In this recent picture the bokeh does look a bit busy, did you have your 85L with you, wonder what it would look like taking that shot?
joekraft, I'm actually still thinking about getting the 85ZE for portraits at f/1.4 just to see how it handles, and if it's unfavorable, then I'd see it off I suppose. I like the 100MP for portraits, but I'm just curious to see what the 85 can do, as we don't get many portraits on here done with it.
I used to have the 85ze but traded it in for a 100/2 MP. I do like the drawing style of 85 ze better than 100/2 for portraits but the focus shift threw me off.
Thanks for comparison of the 85ZE and 85L. I have the 85L and 100ZE, and I do find that the bokeh of the 100ZE in portraits, can be different, and may not suit some portraits and shots, as what the 85L can render. I would love to try the 85 ZE, but I am undecided about it still.
Ajay
thanks, nice shot. Is that wide open? it looks like it, and if so, even though the depth of critical focus will be very narrow, it looks like there is a "slice" through his eyes that is quite sharp.
Adam, SKumar - Yes, I was referring to shots from the 85ZE.
The 85 is available for rent, and I plan on renting it eventually, I just am not in a position to buy one now, so am going to wait to rent it for awhile.
charles.k - I actually prefer it over the 85L in all aspects, though if I'm doing slightly tighter crop of half body, 85 is a better FL for me. This is the only reason I asked about the 85ZE as honestly I really like the 100MP ZE much better then the 85L II... Just curious about the 85ZE purely for the FL, it's a better working distance while shooting people.
I keep getting warned by other members that it's not a good idea, but I keep getting taunted by flickr and other photo sites that have beautiful image samples.
joekraft - I'm really not in a position to spend any more money on lenses either, but I have someone selling one locally for a decent price, and I was thinking about jumping on it.. I also seen the 50 1.4 going at a decent price... They're both taunting me, just because I wanna try them out, nothing really more. Though I'd think that renting may be safer, as I'd probably have to take a bit of a hit on the resale... And with resale there's always the chance you'll say screw it, and keep the lens. Which is bad bad bad!
Honestly though, the 50 MP is amazing, I would only wanna try the 50/1.4ZE for its low light abilities. And again because I hear things about focus shift, not good at closer distances etc.. I get a bit worried.. That and honestly how many lenses would you carry in your bag, and how often would you switch them? I have 3 lenses now, and I'm having a hard time switching, I find I rather just take a few steps forward and back (especially when switching from the 35 to the 50MP and from 50 back to 35). The 100MP generally stays on the camera for most of my fun walk around activities, unless I need wide.. And even then, sometimes I just don't bring the other lenses. On vacation, I'd probably sacrifice the 50MP and take the 35/2.. I'd regret leaving the 50, but honestly I'm kinda lazy when it comes to lugging and switching gear.. Though I hate zooms, kinda make me feel mindless like a snapshot tourist... And I use zooms for work, so I hate them for play.
On another note, the Makros focus throw (would you call it that), are far different from the 35/2 that I'd be curious to see how the 85ZE and 50/1.4ZE handles (aside from the few test shots I took with it), since focusing would be different then with the makros, more in line with the 35/2 I'm assuming...
Sorry for the rant guys, but need to get it off my chest or i'll be on the forms/photo-sites searching for ZE images to much and shooting less... I'm gonna go out and shoot some nonsense now
I have the 35/2 and 50/2MP (ZF, not ZE, as I use a D700).
Am sorely tempted by the 85/1.4, given that it appears to be quite similar to the 85L in performance, but having the true Zeiss palette (which is quite special). It probably performs better than the Nikon 85/1.4 by a little.
The focus shift issue is a bit problematic, I would expect. I am thinking of just getting it (one available nearby for an OK price) and perhaps using DOF preview at stopped down apertures to compensate for focus shift. It's a bit less than ideal, but in a lot of situations where critical focus is, well, critical, it pays to get into habits that get the best results. I would use it like this: if shooting wide open, just focus as normal. If shooting at f2, stop down to f2 to focus with DOF preview. If shooting at f2.8 or smaller, then stop down to f2.8, DOF preview to focus, then dial up intended aperture to capture.
I notice that most people displaying 50/1.4 images don't mention too much of the focus shift issue, so presumably it is less problematic with that lens (or perhaps the wider perspective and larger DOF, relatively speaking, means it is less of an issue).
If I get the 85mm, then perhaps I'll take a few shots of the type you mention (close up near MFD and wide open) and post them up here!
Thanks Dave, hopefully we'll get some portraits up sooner then later. I'm sure a certain someone with a 85ZE who likes to take french architecture can stop a pretty lady who's walking down the street and ask if he can take her portrait say at slightly above the waste up, then another maybe slightly closer in between 1.4 and say f/2... You know who you are
Charles - It looks like the 100 MP ZE is showing shallower DOF then the 85L, were they both shot wide open? Also how did you resize for web?
Juan - the 35 is still a fast lens. You don't need to consider it any differently than you would any other fast lens as far as tripod use goes. The lighting conditions and your skill will dictate when a tripod would help you get a better image.
I don't have any empirical evidence yet, but I can tell you in my experience with the ZE, low-light images do seem slightly better with the ZE than the 35L that I had for years. Colors seem to be a little better, and the noise a little less ugly. I'd be very interested to hear if anyone else has a feeling on this.
The one other thing that was a concern to me though, was losing a stop between the 35L/1.4 and the ZE/2. My eyes are going, and I have to do a lot of low-light shooting, so I was concerned the viewfinder would be darker in losing that step. However, the difference is pretty much impossible to see in the viewfinder, so that was a relief.
adamdewilde wrote:
Thanks Dave, hopefully we'll get some portraits up sooner then later. I'm sure a certain someone with a 85ZE who likes to take french architecture can stop a pretty lady who's walking down the street and ask if he can take her portrait say at slightly above the waste up, then another maybe slightly closer in between 1.4 and say f/2... You know who you are
Charles - It looks like the 100 MP ZE is showing shallower DOF then the 85L, were they both shot wide open? Also how did you resize for web?
Adam,
Philippe has posted a lot of great portrait shots with his ZE 85 from his India trip in various threads here including this one. One is on the first page of this thread.
I too have looked for the best Zeiss portrait lenses. I would include the following lenses in that group of best Zeiss portrait lenses: ZA 135/1.8, ZA 85/1.4,Z* 100/2, C/Y 100/2, and Z* 85, Contax N 85. If you are shooting Sony then the two ZA lenses listed above make an incredible portrait tandem. If you are shooting Canon then you are limited to the two 100's and the Z* 85 and the N 85. Because the Z* 85 has the reputation here of not being as sharp at MFD/close distances and the focus shift, I went for the C/Y 100/2 Planar which is a nice portrait lens. The 100's are very sharp, can generate 3-d often, and have less smooth bokeh which I think works better for shots of men but not for beauty shots of women where I prefer the softer smooth type of bokeh. The 85L mk2 which I have, has of course that soft bokeh. The contax N 85 is sharp and has the soft smooth bokeh and I think the closest to the 85L in terms of bokeh. I also converted the ZA 135/1.8, which is sharp and has the soft smooth bokeh, to work on my 1ds3. The ZA 135 and contax N 85 make a very good Zeiss soft bokeh beauty style portrait lens combo. Just my $.02 and IMHO all the Zeiss lenses are very good portrait lenses above.
