tzic wrote:
25mm suits me better. And 67mm filter thread is a plus. But rendering quality, micro contrast etc how do they compare to the magic 21 zf?
I prefer the angle of view of the ZF 25/2.8 (actually, it is closer to 26mm than 25mm). This fits me best for general wide angle photos. Wider than that, I prefer TSE lenses from Canon in 17 and 24, and wider still, the Samyang 14.
There is a trade off in the tolerable aberrations between the 21 (I owned the ZE version and got rid of it) and the 25.
The greatest irritation to me with the 21 is the terrible and intense vignetting and resulting central hot spot, even stopped down to shooting apertures. This was exceptionally hard to deal with for many landscapes, and particularly architecture. This lens has higher contrast than the 25, but I find the 25 to have more pleasing contrast for outdoor work.
The ZF 25/2.8 (never used the newer, better 25/2 ZF.2) has some CA to deal with, but this is not intense, reduces with smaller apertures, and is easy to clean up in PP. It is also smaller, lighter and using smaller 58mm filters.
Given the choice, my #1 pick is the older ZF version, next would be the newer heavier f/2 ZF.2 version, and lastly, I'd burden myself with the 21/2.8 model. Since you seem to be considering the 25/2 ZF.2 with its 67mm filter, I'd say go with your gut on this.
All are great lenses. Just pick your weight and price preferences! (For $500, a used ZF 25/2.8 is hard to beat! )
Gunzorro wrote:
I prefer the angle of view of the ZF 25/2.8 (actually, it is closer to 26mm than 25mm). This fits me best for general wide angle photos. Wider than that, I prefer TSE lenses from Canon in 17 and 24, and wider still, the Samyang 14.
There is a trade off in the tolerable aberrations between the 21 (I owned the ZE version and got rid of it) and the 25.
The greatest irritation to me with the 21 is the terrible and intense vignetting and resulting central hot spot, even stopped down to shooting apertures. This was exceptionally hard to deal with for many landscapes, and particularly architecture. This lens has higher contrast than the 25, but I find the 25 to have more pleasing contrast for outdoor work.
The ZF 25/2.8 (never used the newer, better 25/2 ZF.2) has some CA to deal with, but this is not intense, reduces with smaller apertures, and is easy to clean up in PP. It is also smaller, lighter and using smaller 58mm filters.
Given the choice, my #1 pick is the older ZF version, next would be the newer heavier f/2 ZF.2 version, and lastly, I'd burden myself with the 21/2.8 model. Since you seem to be considering the 25/2 ZF.2 with its 67mm filter, I'd say go with your gut on this.
All are great lenses. Just pick your weight and price preferences! (For $500, a used ZF 25/2.8 is hard to beat! ) ...Show more →
I'm not all that great at teasing out all of the detailed plusses and minuses of particular lenses, but I develop a feel for a lens and a confidence level with it (or not) pretty quickly. And the Zeiss 25 f2.8 and 21 f2.8 are my two favorite and most used lenses by quite a lot.
I can't say I have a preference for one over the other. I know the 21 tests a lot better and the testers usually have some pretty negative things to say about the 25 f2.8, but I love the 25 too. To me, the 25 is more of an every day type of lens - it's kind of a sweet spot focal length for me and I can comfortably shoot almost anything I shoot with that lens, other than portraits and other longer lens type of stuff. That it's actually almost a 26 also eliminates the need to choose between a 24 and 28 for a day of shooting, being roughly in the middle. The 21 is a bit more of a specialty focal length, but I love that lens so much I end up using it nearly as much as the 25. They both have that classic Zeiss rendering with tons of micro-contrast and incredible colors. I guess they behave somewhat differently in terms of stuff like vignetting and field curvature, but I think I subconsciously adapt to those kinds of things pretty quickly and either come to really love a lens or not. These two lenses I love and use constantly.
I'll sometimes bring a Voigtlander 40 or a Nikon 50 along in case I want a middle focal length, but I very rarely end up using them. That used to be the case with the Zeiss 35, so I recently sold it because If figured I didn't need to keep a lens with that much cost in it and carry that much bulk and weight for a lens I was using so little. I very often go out for a days shooting with the Zeiss 21/25 combo and the old Nikon 75-150 and I'm covered for almost anything I'm inclined to shoot.
) 
)
