This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
p.2 #1ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
Boris, my apologies for mis-representing your WA lens collection. And my congratulations on yet more lovely shots.
Feb 16, 2010 at 03:58 PM
p.2 #2ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
It annoys me to no end that Zeiss has that special something, "plasticity". I saw it even in the 16mm fisheye. If only Canon or Nikon could learn the secret sauce.
Feb 16, 2010 at 04:27 PM
p.2 #3ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
I like the zeiss much more especially those rocks and ocean - just pops and has so much more character. As usually the canon approach is clinical.
Feb 16, 2010 at 09:47 PM
p.2 #4ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
Fascinating comparisons. I know I will get one of the new TS-E lenses for architectural work, but the ZE gets more compelling each day...
Feb 16, 2010 at 11:27 PM
p.2 #5ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
pookipichu wrote:
It annoys me to no end that Zeiss has that special something, "plasticity".
Could you please point out an area or two where you find pronounced plasticity in the Zeiss image?
It annoys me to no end that Zeiss has that special something, "plasticity".
Could you please point out an area or two where you find pronounced plasticity in the Zeiss image?
Feb 17, 2010 at 12:31 AM
p.2 #6ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
Z250SA,
When you look at the pics, sort of let your eyes and brain go fuzzy. Try to not see any recognizable things, just colors and shapes. Then, notice if any areas look clearly in front of others. Also, try to A-B pics shot at f/8 - f/11, so DOF & bokeh don't skew your judgement.
Once you get the hang of it, the differences between lenses becomes very obvious. Zeiss almost always stands out in this regard, even against Leica. Sadly, some of the new ZE's don't have quite the plasticity of the older CY versions, though they are close. (and sharper) This includes the (still excellent) ZE21.
-And no, it's not just always the sharpest lens that "wins." Look at pics from the Nikon 105/2.5 Ai-s, or the new Samyang 85/1.4 Neither can be considered "really sharp" yet both have incredible plasticity.
Very few Canon lenses have it. I have no idea why not, but it's true.
Edited on Feb 17, 2010 at 07:26 AM · View previous versions
When you look at the pics, sort of let your eyes and brain go fuzzy. Try to not see any recognizable things, just colors and shapes. Then, notice if any areas look clearly in front of others. Also, try to A-B pics shot at f/8 - f/11, so DOF & bokeh don't skew your judgement.
Once you get the hang of it, the differences between lenses becomes very obvious. Zeiss almost always stands out in this regard, even against Leica. Sadly, some of the new ZE's don't have quite the plasticity of the older CY versions, though they are close. (and sharper) This includes the (still excellent) ZE21.
-And no, it's not just always the sharpest lens that "wins." Look at pics from the Nikon 105/2.5 Ai-s, or the new Samyang 85/1.4 Neither can be considered "really sharp" yet both have incredible plasticity.
Very few Canon lenses have it. I have no idea why not, but it's true.
Edited on Feb 17, 2010 at 07:26 AM · View previous versions
Feb 17, 2010 at 12:55 AM
p.2 #7ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
Thank you all for your input. The examples posted (thanks!) are very comparable to me actually. I shoot a fair amount of architecture and that is where the distortion really shows. TS-E adds a lot of versatility.
Both are expensive. Either will be my most expensive lens. I have been shooting a lot of landscapes since I got the Oly 18. If I get the 24 TS-E II I would have the most versatile kit but the 3D of the Zeiss really attracts me.
What shall I get for my birthday :-)
Both are expensive. Either will be my most expensive lens. I have been shooting a lot of landscapes since I got the Oly 18. If I get the 24 TS-E II I would have the most versatile kit but the 3D of the Zeiss really attracts me.
What shall I get for my birthday :-)
Feb 17, 2010 at 03:28 AM
p.2 #8ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
Anden, for what it is worth, the distortion of the Zeiss 21 is overblown. I have taken upwards of 1000 shots with it, and only 1 was really unuseable, and maybe 5% incorporated any visible distortion. It is easily cured with PTLens (25$) or PS. Just look at the many pictures posted with that lens, and this demonstrates that this flaw (obviously I would prefer that it weren't there) is very minor IMHO. In another thread, I have decribed it not as my most flawless lens, because of that distortion, but as the one that generates my most fabulous shots. Hope this helps...
Feb 17, 2010 at 07:16 AM
p.2 #9ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
philber wrote:
Anden, for what it is worth, the distortion of the Zeiss 21 is overblown. I have taken upwards of 1000 shots with it, and only 1 was really unuseable, and maybe 5% incorporated any visible distortion. It is easily cured with PTLens (25$) or PS. Just look at the many pictures posted with that lens, and this demonstrates that this flaw (obviously I would prefer that it weren't there) is very minor IMHO. In another thread, I have decribed it not as my most flawless lens, because of that distortion, but as the one that generates my most fabulous shots....Show more →
You are probably right. But the ts-e feature is really useful at times...
A
Anden, for what it is worth, the distortion of the Zeiss 21 is overblown. I have taken upwards of 1000 shots with it, and only 1 was really unuseable, and maybe 5% incorporated any visible distortion. It is easily cured with PTLens (25$) or PS. Just look at the many pictures posted with that lens, and this demonstrates that this flaw (obviously I would prefer that it weren't there) is very minor IMHO. In another thread, I have decribed it not as my most flawless lens, because of that distortion, but as the one that generates my most fabulous shots....Show more →
You are probably right. But the ts-e feature is really useful at times...
A
Feb 17, 2010 at 07:37 AM
p.2 #10ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
Mike K wrote:
A few months ago, I had posted another comparison of the Zeiss 21 ZE Vs the Canon 24 TSE II Vs Canon 24-70
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/838393
the zoom was the only other 24mm lens I had about at the time since I sold my 17-40, which was markedly worse than all 3 of these lenses along the edges.
I found the TSE to be sharper than I had expected, and quite close to the legendary Zeiss. The contrast for the TSE (tested with no shift/tilt) was a bit less as was extreme corner sharpness especially at widest apertures. Of course the TSE...Show more →
Very interesting read!
Thanks!
A
A few months ago, I had posted another comparison of the Zeiss 21 ZE Vs the Canon 24 TSE II Vs Canon 24-70
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/838393
the zoom was the only other 24mm lens I had about at the time since I sold my 17-40, which was markedly worse than all 3 of these lenses along the edges.
I found the TSE to be sharper than I had expected, and quite close to the legendary Zeiss. The contrast for the TSE (tested with no shift/tilt) was a bit less as was extreme corner sharpness especially at widest apertures. Of course the TSE...Show more →
Very interesting read!
Thanks!
A
Feb 17, 2010 at 08:31 AM
p.2 #11ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
The 21 has that "je ne sais quoi" quality about it. Non photographers will often pick out the images from that lens, without knowing even how to spell Zeiss practically, from a mixed series and say they are extra special. They can't say why exactly, but they know these particular photos are exceptional in their rendering. The Canon's are very sharp, but they lack that je ne sais quoi quality, which is of course partly the basis for this forum.
That said, if you need tilt shift, you need it.
BTW, I recently picked up the CZ 35mm PC at less than half the price of the 24 TSE mkII. It doesn't tilt, and it isn't as wide as the Canon, but it should have the Zeissness about it. Tilt is nice, but shift is what you need for architecture and panos. You could almost pick up a used 21 plus this 35 for the cost of the Canon. Not quite, but close. The 35 is reputed to be best in class at that focal length. Hard to find the 35 at a reasonable price, though, because they are few and far between.
That said, if you need tilt shift, you need it.
BTW, I recently picked up the CZ 35mm PC at less than half the price of the 24 TSE mkII. It doesn't tilt, and it isn't as wide as the Canon, but it should have the Zeissness about it. Tilt is nice, but shift is what you need for architecture and panos. You could almost pick up a used 21 plus this 35 for the cost of the Canon. Not quite, but close. The 35 is reputed to be best in class at that focal length. Hard to find the 35 at a reasonable price, though, because they are few and far between.
Feb 17, 2010 at 10:52 AM
p.2 #12ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
I have a ZE 35 on its way and I am anxious to compare it to the CZ 35mm PC I already have... not sure if I will keep both. Also, just go the ZE 21 and TS 17 (been selling a lot of glass, so putting the money to good use
. I too have been debating about the ZE21 versus TS 24, and may have to pick up a TS 24-II and see, but don't think it is in the budget right now. With a shift 35 and a T/S 17, I may not need the T/S24, but sure is hard to decide with all the pro's and cons of each lens. Even if $$ were no issue, the weight is not inconsequential if one is hiking and doing landscapes and the like--these T/S and Zeiss lenses are not light!
. I too have been debating about the ZE21 versus TS 24, and may have to pick up a TS 24-II and see, but don't think it is in the budget right now. With a shift 35 and a T/S 17, I may not need the T/S24, but sure is hard to decide with all the pro's and cons of each lens. Even if $$ were no issue, the weight is not inconsequential if one is hiking and doing landscapes and the like--these T/S and Zeiss lenses are not light!Feb 17, 2010 at 11:32 AM
p.2 #13ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
Anden wrote:
You are probably right. But the ts-e feature is really useful at times...
A
I don't think it's as useful as you think. Unless you shoot architecture for living,
the use of TS-E lenses is very limited. And taking advantage of its features slows down
the manual process even more. And please don't buy it for the "miniature look",
I'm so tired of this new HDR thingy...
But you will be using and enjoying Zeiss 21 ZE every day.
You are probably right. But the ts-e feature is really useful at times...
A
I don't think it's as useful as you think. Unless you shoot architecture for living,
the use of TS-E lenses is very limited. And taking advantage of its features slows down
the manual process even more. And please don't buy it for the "miniature look",
I'm so tired of this new HDR thingy...
But you will be using and enjoying Zeiss 21 ZE every day.
Feb 17, 2010 at 11:40 AM
Andi Dietrich
Offline
[X]
Details
p.2 #14ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
Myths beside the TS is the one Canon lens which makes you feel to have a lens in your hand that is perfect. Together with the 24L MKII and the Zeiss you have an incredible choice of high q lenses by now. I would just look at the specs and choose the focal and decide if you need a fast a TS or a MF Zeiss lens
Feb 17, 2010 at 11:52 AM
p.2 #15ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
Luvwine wrote:
I have a ZE 35 on its way and I am anxious to compare it to the CZ 35mm PC I already have... not sure if I will keep both. Also, just go the ZE 21 and TS 17 (been selling a lot of glass, so putting the money to good use. I too have been debating about the ZE21 versus TS 24, and may have to pick up a TS 24-II and see, but don't think it is in the budget right now. With a shift 35 and a T/S 17, I may not need the T/S24, but sure...Show more →
One nice thing I forgot to mention about the 35 PC is that it is small relative to these other shift and tilt lenses. It is a bit smaller in length, girth and weight than the CZ 35-70 that Anden just bought. It's definitely hikeable (if there is such word). I was surprised just how small it is. As you say, at some point, it doesn't matter how cheap, great, etc. it is if it is too big to lug around just in case you might want it. I'd be very interested in your comparison between the lenses if you can post your results eventually.
I have a ZE 35 on its way and I am anxious to compare it to the CZ 35mm PC I already have... not sure if I will keep both. Also, just go the ZE 21 and TS 17 (been selling a lot of glass, so putting the money to good use
. I too have been debating about the ZE21 versus TS 24, and may have to pick up a TS 24-II and see, but don't think it is in the budget right now. With a shift 35 and a T/S 17, I may not need the T/S24, but sure...Show more →One nice thing I forgot to mention about the 35 PC is that it is small relative to these other shift and tilt lenses. It is a bit smaller in length, girth and weight than the CZ 35-70 that Anden just bought. It's definitely hikeable (if there is such word). I was surprised just how small it is. As you say, at some point, it doesn't matter how cheap, great, etc. it is if it is too big to lug around just in case you might want it. I'd be very interested in your comparison between the lenses if you can post your results eventually.
Feb 17, 2010 at 12:39 PM
p.2 #16ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
snowboarder wrote:
AI don't think it's as useful as you think. Unless you shoot architecture for living,
the use of TS-E lenses is very limited. And taking advantage of its features slows down
the manual process even more. And please don't buy it for the "miniature look",
I'm so tired of this new HDR thingy...
But you will be using and enjoying Zeiss 21 ZE every day.
-1
Apart from the shifting which allows perspective control, the tilting function is useful too. Often in landscape photography you need everything in focus from nearby to infinity. This can be done by stopping down but comes at a cost of diffraction / slower shutter speed (on a windy dark day the foliage movement can be undesirable). Tilting enables one to have the large DOF without stopping down as much.
Anden wrote
You are probably right. But the ts-e feature is really useful at times...A
the use of TS-E lenses is very limited. And taking advantage of its features slows down
the manual process even more. And please don't buy it for the "miniature look",
I'm so tired of this new HDR thingy...
But you will be using and enjoying Zeiss 21 ZE every day.
-1
Apart from the shifting which allows perspective control, the tilting function is useful too. Often in landscape photography you need everything in focus from nearby to infinity. This can be done by stopping down but comes at a cost of diffraction / slower shutter speed (on a windy dark day the foliage movement can be undesirable). Tilting enables one to have the large DOF without stopping down as much.
Feb 18, 2010 at 12:08 AM
p.2 #17ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
I have tried the 24 ts-e II and will probably go test a ZF21 this weekend.
What can be done in software to get rid of the distortion?
A
What can be done in software to get rid of the distortion?
A
Feb 18, 2010 at 06:09 AM
p.2 #18ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
To get rid of distortion, you can use photoshop, as explained by Brainiac, who uses the C/Y 21 that has the same issue, or PTLens, a 25$ piece of software.
Feb 18, 2010 at 06:25 AM
p.2 #19ZE/ZF 21/2.8 vs 24 TS-EII?
colorfoto test result (on 450D)
TS-E 90 point
ZE21 88 point (Zeiss win wide open)
TS-E 90 point
ZE21 88 point (Zeiss win wide open)
Feb 18, 2010 at 08:12 AM