Smridevan- gorgeous color on the flower shot
R.Young- Nice shot with 35
Lars - I quite like the bokeh. I has character
Makten - that is a gorgeous shot. Shadows on red makes this shot really stand out. Beautiful
Jim - the tree shot is very nice
Wheaty - I like the window shot
frezeiss - First one is surreal. I like it a lot.
Sep 26, 2011 at 05:26 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Thanks Jim,
I have both the ZE 35 lenses. Yes it's worth the upgrade. And I belive you like to blur the background and play a bit with the DOF. The 35/1,4 is really great for that
Lars, did you consider the cy version? I know I've asked here a few times but I just can't stretch to the ZE and I've read that the cy has it's own benefits, like more 3d but less sharp. Would that be an improvement over my 35f2ze or should I just save for the 1.4?
Sep 26, 2011 at 04:48 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Ok thanks, I'm still holding out for the CY but the prices on eBay are painful right now, and there seems to be nowhere else to look in the UK. Lots around Europe though...
Jim Schemel wrote:
Lars #2 is very nice.Great color and bokeh.Care to share your opinion on the 35ZE f1.4.Maybe if its worth upgrading from the 35f2ZE?
I sold my 35/2 ZE for the 1.4 ZE
Not a single regret! I like the general look and bokeh of the 1.4 better.
Does the 1.4 still give you a 3D look? I have read that in 'improving' the bokeh, that is made it smoother you sacrifice some of the 3D look that Zeiss is famous for.any thoughts?
-Jim
I think that either of these lenses can produce the 3D effect provided the conditions are right. Personally, I much prefer the bokeh, sharpness, and macro capability of the 50MP. As with anything, it all comes down to personal needs/preferences...
It is quite a bit easier to get a 3D look with the 50/1.4, but the 50MP can also do it, with more work. The 50MP is of course sharper, and the DoF is quite large for a given aperture value, similar to the 21 Distagon. If I did not have the 100MP, I might prefer the 50MP over the Planar, but with the 100MP always in my bag, some of the advantages of the 50MP are less important.
carstenw wrote:
Is this a question about the 35s or 50s?
If 50s:
It is quite a bit easier to get a 3D look with the 50/1.4, but the 50MP can also do it, with more work. The 50MP is of course sharper, and the DoF is quite large for a given aperture value, similar to the 21 Distagon. If I did not have the 100MP, I might prefer the 50MP over the Planar, but with the 100MP always in my bag, some of the advantages of the 50MP are less important.
My question was in reference to the 35f1.4 ZE and the 35f1.4 C/Y Does the newer ZE version still produce similar 3D effect despite the smoother bokeh?
-Jim
I normally don't talk about '3D', because it seems that many people have a different view on it. Some just call very sharp shots 3D, others say a shot is 3D when a subject is isolated from the background (thin DOF),...
cfr: the many threads about it
Just look at the shots taken with the 1.4 ZE
To my eye they have more microcontrast than the many photos I made with the 35/2.
