Thanks for the comments.
Smridevan, akul. The 35/1/4 ZE is such a nice lens, I'm sure I'll miss mine one day.
Bob, I like how you didn't overcook the HDR's.
Hah, I knew it! I was there a few years back, and the landscape was so familiar I bought a 37 Euro bottle of Brunello, the most expensive I had bought up until that time, and it eventually rose to a value of 250 Euro or so, and got a 99/100 from Wine Spectator, but I drank it with the wrong person. Oh well.
Jochenb wrote:
Bob, I like how you didn't overcook the HDR's.
Thanks. I've been working on using HDR to maintain a natural look without over cooking. I think I'm close to a starting formula using Nik HDR Efex Pro.
Carsten, that's nice. It's a shame, but I didn't try any wine during my Tuscany trip. Didn't touch any alcohol because I was driving around all the time.
Luka, I replaced the 35/1.4 with the Sony RX1. I want to travel lighter (RX1 + Fuji X-E1). Also sold the 85P. The 21 and 50P are the only Zeiss lenses I have left now and I'm even thinking about selling those too. Wouldn't make much sense to keep them if I won't take my 5DII with me anymore.
Still thinking it over. Not easy because the Zeiss 21 has always served me so well. It might be my all-time favorite lens. We'll see.
Jochenb wrote:
Carsten, that's nice. It's a shame, but I didn't try any wine during my Tuscany trip. Didn't touch any alcohol because I was driving around all the time.
Im just going to open up to anyone who wants to take a chance of talking me out of this.
I am in all likeliehood selling my M2 and ZM planar. I like the camera (like, I LOVE the camera but no budget for Lux ASPH means I will just buy another one later) but I'm not sold on the lens. For what I can get from that I will probably get an F3HP and the 50/2 Makro-Planar [well, sometime later].
here is what I think I get out of the MP:
1. better performance before f4; important to me since I have a phenomenal 50/3.5 macro which I can get copies of for 100 dollars a piece. so I need a lens for when that is not fast enough.
2. more IN YOUR FACE look. the ZM50P is subtle and gentle and I want a lens with crunch.
3. I can adapt it to my Canon for when I want to shoot digital. granted this is rarely but I have a relative with a FF Nikon too.
can anyone give me a legitimate reason I shouldn't do this? I realize the Nikon will suck compared to an M2 (yes Ive had Nikon film cameras before) but I feel like I have an awful lot tied up in a lens I just dont get along with. Some people like Starry Night. I like First Days of Spring at the Strait of Hormusz, and I want a lens that reflects my counter-normal views of what good lenses are.
oh and here is an image from a Zeiss for your troubles:
I bought a 37 Euro bottle of Brunello, the most expensive I had bought up until that time, and it eventually rose to a value of 250 Euro or so, and got a 99/100 from Wine Spectator, but I drank it with the wrong person. Oh well.
..jpg "2026 © mike reid"){kind=small}
