Great images Charles! #3 is my favorite - love the colors.
Alright, today I had my first real chance to to properly shoot with the Zeiss 21. Remarkable piece of glass. For the first time with a lens I had to turn saturation down in PP. I also unfortunately discovered that sRGB is no fun at all - it ruins some colors.
#1 They say that imitation is the sincerest from of flattery, so the first image is Andrew (snowboarder) style as his California spring gallery got me into this whole Zeiss racket. Unfortunately the yellows look like crap (washed out) in sRGB..
Excellent shots Samuli!
Good shots Luka. The 21 is an amazing lens.
You are right Samuli, the third shot, was hand held and very dark, so nailing it was very difficult. But sometimes it is just better to capture the moment and feelings
Going to Boracay in two weeks. What lenses should I bring.
I've the 35ze, 50mpze, 85ze, 100mpze..
I was thinking 35 and 100 and calling it a day. Though would I be missing out
I'm looking for someone to convince me to pickup a 21ze, and I'm also looking for people to convince me that two lenses is enough. Though I currently think bringing all 4 is a good idea. I'll BTW be spending a few days in Manila as well.
Think I will take all lenses, thoughts?
BTW this isn't business, it's pleasure, so vacation shots!
I'm new here, first post.
I registered to be part of this thread.
Let's tell a little story:
I'm totally hooked on Zeiss in the last few months. I only have the 50ZE makro-planar right now, but... I want more
I agree that (most) canon lenses look rather boring in comparison.
So now I'm seriously rethinking my lens lineup.
Because I do wedding work, I'll have to keep some canon lenses (AF).
The lens that leaves me in doubt the most is the TS-E24II, which I got back in december.
It blows away every canon prime lens I've ever had (24L, 35L, 50L, 85L,100L,135L,...) imho, because of the insane sharpness, lack of CA, color rendition, contrast. It renders images more 'zeissy', some reviews even mentioned that. With the right pp, images often have a 3D feeling too.
Tilt and shift is also great for being creative.
BUT: It's not a zeiss. I still like the pure look of the zeiss 21 better, because I grew to love the way zeiss lenses render images.
The funny part is:
Back in december I ordered the zeiss 21mm and went to pick it up at the store. A mistake was made, they had already sold the zeiss.
So I got to take the TS-E24II home to try that one for a few weeks untill they had a new 21ZE in stock.
After those few weeks (and hours of doubt) I decided to pay extra and keep the TS-E because of the tilt and shift.
Don't know what to do. I can't have both because I'm not going to take 2 lenses with me that are so close in focal length. We'll see
I think the next lens I'm going to order is the 35ZE, because the canon 35L (my workhorse wedding lens) was always my favorite lens. I love that focal length.
Some photos made with the 50MP (most of them are at f2):
And just one that illustrates my love for zeiss
I'm selling my 85L, just don't think it's that special anymore!
Jochenb - For the first image, is that a crop or a full capture (must be a crop right)? FF, 1.3x, 1.6x? If it's a crop, how much of the image do you reckon you cropped?
Jochen, if you like the 50 MP, the 35Z* is going to delight you. But you already know that, having read this thread. And your 35L is going to look so boring....
Adam: I use FF cameras (5D & 5D mark II)
I just checked and the first shot is indeed cropped (about 30%).
philber: I love the IQ of the 50MP (not really sure about the focal length yet) and I'm looking at zeiss photos for many months now. Love the rendering.
Most of my canon glas indeed looks boring now, that's why I'm selling the 85L. Can't sell the 35L because it's my most used wedding lens.
Maybe I'll sell the 50MP and replace it with the 100MP (wasn't available yet when I bought the 50), because 35 and 50 are a littlebit close.
Back than I didn't want to buy the 35ZE because I already had a 35L. I don't care anymore
Jochenb, I figured due to the magnification of the bug vs the picture...
Also, the 50 MP ZE is a great lens, I was just reviewing some portraits I took with it, and it's pretty spectacular if you use it wide open (as it's to sharp stopped down [never thought I'd say that about a lens]).
Where the 100 MP ZE fits in, well it's exactly like the 50 MP ZE, but is 100mm FL and has more of a 3D effect to the shots, though I see the 3D in my portraits with the 50mp nobody seems to mention it however.
The 35 is a neat lens, and if you find yourself shooting weddings with the 35L and you're shooting outdoor weddings the 35ZE might be the choice for you, if you're shooting indoors don't bother, the AF of the 35L is almost a must for weddings, and indoors the 35ZE won't shine as much as it could IMHO. I've used it for events indoors and out, and I find that if used indoors it's better to use with natural light (which can be difficult).
The 85 which you've not asked about is also a good lens, but you'll find yourself using it at f/2 and above due to the fact that it isn't as sharp as the 85L
Those are the only ZE lenses I have, so cannot comment on anymore.
I wouldn't use any MF lenses for wedding work personally as I don't have the MF skill yet, though if you had the skill, then I think you'd be happy with either of the lenses I listed above, as they're all a mark improvement over the Canon lenses.
Let's see some more ze 50 1.4 images and opinions. I'm addicted to this lens.
I had the two ze 50mm lenses at the same time, I returned the 50/2 MP because in my opinion although it was sharp close up, wide open which the 50 1.4 isn’t, in every other aspect I am immensely happier with the results I achieve with the 1.4. The differences are very hard to see on downsized jpg web images but here’s my take on it. The images from the 1.4 are so natural, not a strong aggressive- “look at me” image. There is a subtle beauty to the 1.4 that when I look at my favorite images I just feel a sense of calm satisfaction. I have had many L lenses and the happiness I get from this lens is beyond any lens I have ever used. In addition, I can get pretty close to flowers (about 7-8 inches at about 2.8 and I like these much better then the “macro” images I took with the 50 MP. To summarize for me at this time of my creative expression the more natural, delicate, perhaps more subtle and understated image is what I want, and that is what the 50 1.4 is giving me, and when used correctly extremely sharp.
It's all about personal taste ofcourse. I agree that the 50 and 85 1.4 are slightly less aggressive looking.
Nothing wrong with prefering those over the makro-planars. Whatever suits your needs best.
Sharpness is overrated anyway.
philber wrote:
My thoughts exactly, camershy. Though this opinion has thrust me on the receiving end of quite a bit of grief on this forum...
I know you you agree philber, and have read many of your posts about this subject, however it was not until I had both lenses to compare at the same time that I totally understood what you were saying. You have tried so hard to explain with words like painterly that I thought I would add a few like subtle and understated to convey what we are seeing. And it is not that I don't enjoy other peoples 50/2 images.
I couldn't have put it any better. The 50 1.4 definitely has a smoother, more subltle look than some of the "sharper" lenses out there - up til now I thought no one appreciated this lens with the exception of me and Philber. Thank you for your perception. This is one of the first shots I ever took with my ZE 50 1.4 - no - it is not particularly sharp - but it sure works for me!
Well it can't be just us three-Let's hear from some others that "get" the 50 1.4 . Lovely image by the way
