This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010C/Y Zeiss Image Post
p.12 #1C/Y Zeiss Image Post
akul wrote:
http://www.zeissimages.com/gallery/1070/U1070I1280701100.SEQ.0.jpg
C/Y Distagon 28mm f 2.8 on D700 ( Leitax conversion )
Nice, but I think you used the marker tag by accident -- just paste the plain URL of the image to embed it in the post.
What aperture was that taken at? 2.8 or 5.6?
http://www.zeissimages.com/gallery/1070/U1070I1280701100.SEQ.0.jpg
C/Y Distagon 28mm f 2.8 on D700 ( Leitax conversion )
Nice, but I think you used the marker tag by accident -- just paste the plain URL of the image to embed it in the post.
What aperture was that taken at? 2.8 or 5.6?
Aug 02, 2010 at 12:05 AM
p.12 #2C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Hi
Thanks for the comment. I was not sure how to make image link as I did not see the icon and 'upload' function is grayed out as I do not have the status.
Regarding aperture, I am guessing it was probably F4 or 5.6. EXIF is not accurate as I could not make the dandelion chip to work with the lens, so I removed the chip. ( conflicted with lens barrel movement.) D700 seems to put the 'non-cpu lens' info as if it was the aperture used.
>>>just paste the plain URL of the image to embed it in the post.<<<<
That sounds simple enough, I give it a try. Here is a test run. C/Y Distagon 28 f2.8 at f8 on D700.
http://www.zeissimages.com/gallery/1070/U1070I1280700546.SEQ.2.jpg
Thanks for the comment. I was not sure how to make image link as I did not see the icon and 'upload' function is grayed out as I do not have the status.
Regarding aperture, I am guessing it was probably F4 or 5.6. EXIF is not accurate as I could not make the dandelion chip to work with the lens, so I removed the chip. ( conflicted with lens barrel movement.) D700 seems to put the 'non-cpu lens' info as if it was the aperture used.
>>>just paste the plain URL of the image to embed it in the post.<<<<
That sounds simple enough, I give it a try. Here is a test run. C/Y Distagon 28 f2.8 at f8 on D700.
http://www.zeissimages.com/gallery/1070/U1070I1280700546.SEQ.2.jpg
Aug 02, 2010 at 04:41 AM
p.12 #3C/Y Zeiss Image Post
C/Y Planar 1.7/50 + 5DmkII.
 |
||
| http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/7766/img3405g.jpg | ||
|
Aug 02, 2010 at 06:51 AM
p.12 #4C/Y Zeiss Image Post
everytime i think about selling the 28/2.8 (due to being kinda close to the 35/1.4 and i also have the 25/2.8), taking pics with it just blows me away and makes me want to keep it 
Aug 02, 2010 at 07:32 AM
p.12 #5C/Y Zeiss Image Post
I just got the 28 and it does blow me away at f/8-11, but f/2.8-5.6 is totally useless for longer focus distances. Totally blurred corners (very sharp centre though). 
I'm surprised by the performance of Akul's copy in his first shot. The 2nd shot with the bridge is very nice, btw.
How do the the 25/2.8 and the 28 compare in your experience, teh_rebel?
I'm surprised by the performance of Akul's copy in his first shot. The 2nd shot with the bridge is very nice, btw.How do the the 25/2.8 and the 28 compare in your experience, teh_rebel?
Aug 02, 2010 at 09:34 AM
p.12 #6C/Y Zeiss Image Post
AhamB wrote:
I just got the 28 and it does blow me away at f/8-11, but f/2.8-5.6 is totally useless for longer focus distances. Totally blurred corners (very sharp centre though). I'm surprised by the performance of Akul's copy in his first shot. The 2nd shot with the bridge is very nice, btw.
How do the the 25/2.8 and the 28 compare in your experience, teh_rebel?
yea when i shoot at f2.8 or close it, i tend to shoot things that are at closer distances which for being a 'wide' lens results in some nice separation at 2.8. I havent really compared the two as the only times ive shot the 25/2.8 is for ppl pics wide open which I must say is sharp as well. i havent really shot landscapes with it yet. I might bring it with me when I go camping and hunting for lobsters this weekend
with 25/2.8 wide open
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4048/4677665190_8c0911b39d_o.jpg
I just got the 28 and it does blow me away at f/8-11, but f/2.8-5.6 is totally useless for longer focus distances. Totally blurred corners (very sharp centre though).
I'm surprised by the performance of Akul's copy in his first shot. The 2nd shot with the bridge is very nice, btw.How do the the 25/2.8 and the 28 compare in your experience, teh_rebel?
yea when i shoot at f2.8 or close it, i tend to shoot things that are at closer distances which for being a 'wide' lens results in some nice separation at 2.8. I havent really compared the two as the only times ive shot the 25/2.8 is for ppl pics wide open which I must say is sharp as well. i havent really shot landscapes with it yet. I might bring it with me when I go camping and hunting for lobsters this weekend
with 25/2.8 wide open
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4048/4677665190_8c0911b39d_o.jpg
Aug 02, 2010 at 10:19 AM
p.12 #7C/Y Zeiss Image Post
akul wrote:
Hi
Thanks for the comment. I was not sure how to make image link as I did not see the icon and 'upload' function is grayed out as I do not have the status.
Regarding aperture, I am guessing it was probably F4 or 5.6. EXIF is not accurate as I could not make the dandelion chip to work with the lens, so I removed the chip. ( conflicted with lens barrel movement.) D700 seems to put the 'non-cpu lens' info as if it was the aperture used.
>>>just paste the plain URL of the image to embed it in the post.<<<<
That...Show more →
Yea, all the exif data for that one is here http://zeissimages.com/showphoto.php?photoid=3717
The best thing to embed a photo in this forum or any other thread is to click on the link that says BB Photo Link under your picture. Just copy and paste that into the post.
Hi
Thanks for the comment. I was not sure how to make image link as I did not see the icon and 'upload' function is grayed out as I do not have the status.
Regarding aperture, I am guessing it was probably F4 or 5.6. EXIF is not accurate as I could not make the dandelion chip to work with the lens, so I removed the chip. ( conflicted with lens barrel movement.) D700 seems to put the 'non-cpu lens' info as if it was the aperture used.
>>>just paste the plain URL of the image to embed it in the post.<<<<
That...Show more →
Yea, all the exif data for that one is here http://zeissimages.com/showphoto.php?photoid=3717
The best thing to embed a photo in this forum or any other thread is to click on the link that says BB Photo Link under your picture. Just copy and paste that into the post.
Aug 02, 2010 at 01:18 PM
p.12 #8C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Aham B
I did not use this lens for a long time ( I bought it for Contax Aria years ago ) so I have no memory of how it behaved in the past. So, now I feel like I am learning this lens completely new again. So far, it has been hit or miss. Some come out great, some just don't at all. Few things I noticed so far.
1. It has strong curvature of field. Flat view, i.e. brick wall, really shows this tendency. 3 dimensional ( slight diagonal ) or volumetric subject seem to work pretty ok, but may be not as good with straight-on kind of shots.
2. I seem to have similar experience with teh_rebel, that closer shots seem to work better.
Jorge, thanks for the 'BB link' info. I never even looked at that until you pointed out. Good to know those details.
Regardless, I need to shoot more before I can say much of anything besides I enjoy its light weight and size.
Thanks
I did not use this lens for a long time ( I bought it for Contax Aria years ago ) so I have no memory of how it behaved in the past. So, now I feel like I am learning this lens completely new again. So far, it has been hit or miss. Some come out great, some just don't at all. Few things I noticed so far.
1. It has strong curvature of field. Flat view, i.e. brick wall, really shows this tendency. 3 dimensional ( slight diagonal ) or volumetric subject seem to work pretty ok, but may be not as good with straight-on kind of shots.
2. I seem to have similar experience with teh_rebel, that closer shots seem to work better.
Jorge, thanks for the 'BB link' info. I never even looked at that until you pointed out. Good to know those details.
Regardless, I need to shoot more before I can say much of anything besides I enjoy its light weight and size.
Thanks
Aug 02, 2010 at 02:14 PM
p.12 #9C/Y Zeiss Image Post
C/Y 1.4/85. Mostly at or near WO.
Jim
http://community.mpix.com/forumstorage/14/1120000/1120816/merry_go_round.jpg
http://community.mpix.com/forumstorage/14/1120000/1120817/cowardly_lion.jpg
Jim
http://community.mpix.com/forumstorage/14/1120000/1120816/merry_go_round.jpg
http://community.mpix.com/forumstorage/14/1120000/1120817/cowardly_lion.jpg
Aug 03, 2010 at 10:42 AM
p.12 #10C/Y Zeiss Image Post
C/Y 1,7/50 @ f1,7
|
||
| http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/4868015708_33bb2c37c4_b.jpg | ||
|
Aug 07, 2010 at 01:10 AM
p.12 #11C/Y Zeiss Image Post
tonik23 wrote:
C/Y 1,7/50 @ f1,7
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/4868015708_33bb2c37c4_b.jpg
Williamstown?
JJ
C/Y 1,7/50 @ f1,7
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/4868015708_33bb2c37c4_b.jpg
Williamstown?
JJ
Aug 07, 2010 at 01:42 AM
p.12 #12C/Y Zeiss Image Post
JohnJ wrote:
JJ
That's right
tonik23 wrote
Williamstown?JJ
That's right
Aug 07, 2010 at 04:58 AM
p.12 #13C/Y Zeiss Image Post
D21 snapshot.
http://toothwalker.org/temp/fm/vw05266.jpg
http://toothwalker.org/temp/fm/vw05266.jpg
Aug 07, 2010 at 10:53 AM
p.12 #14C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Here's some funky bokeh for you, Contax 50/1.4 at 1.4.
http://www.johnjovic.com/images/Gallery/l_318_1000.jpg
JJ
http://www.johnjovic.com/images/Gallery/l_318_1000.jpg
JJ
Aug 09, 2010 at 05:56 PM
p.12 #15C/Y Zeiss Image Post
C/Y 50/1.7 w/ Rebel XT
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4142/4874943178_19430415dd_b.jpg
*18 Image stitch
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4074/4874907816_ac2fbe7e23_b.jpg
*Wide open
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4142/4874943178_19430415dd_b.jpg
*18 Image stitch
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4074/4874907816_ac2fbe7e23_b.jpg
*Wide open
Aug 09, 2010 at 07:54 PM
p.12 #16C/Y Zeiss Image Post
cant recall which lens i used for the following but it was either 25/2.8, 35-70/3.4, or 50/1.7
recent camping trip to the keys
campsite
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4134/4878162350_4b2755f15c_b.jpg
wide open landscape (most likely with 25/2.8)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4097/4878161410_7cc0849969_b.jpg
nice morning sky
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4135/4877550877_d5cb7724e4_b.jpg
25/2.8
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/4878159390_09a4661f93_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4121/4878160164_4ba3c65792_b.jpg
recent camping trip to the keys
campsite
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4134/4878162350_4b2755f15c_b.jpg
wide open landscape (most likely with 25/2.8)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4097/4878161410_7cc0849969_b.jpg
nice morning sky
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4135/4877550877_d5cb7724e4_b.jpg
25/2.8
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/4878159390_09a4661f93_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4121/4878160164_4ba3c65792_b.jpg
Aug 10, 2010 at 08:30 AM
p.12 #18C/Y Zeiss Image Post
HT77,
You're making me hungry. Love the color.
teh_rebel,
Have you used Contax 28mm 2.8 before? How is that compare to the Contax 25mm 2.8?
You're making me hungry. Love the color.
teh_rebel,
Have you used Contax 28mm 2.8 before? How is that compare to the Contax 25mm 2.8?
Aug 11, 2010 at 02:45 PM
p.12 #19C/Y Zeiss Image Post
leehua wrote:
HT77,
You're making me hungry. Love the color.
teh_rebel,
Have you used Contax 28mm 2.8 before? How is that compare to the Contax 25mm 2.8?
i have both actually. i havent really tested them against each other but both lens are kinda similar in a way except the 25 being slightly wider. both are sharp wide open and stopped down. both lens can focus pretty close and at 2.8, provide nice subject separation.
HT77,
You're making me hungry. Love the color.
teh_rebel,
Have you used Contax 28mm 2.8 before? How is that compare to the Contax 25mm 2.8?
i have both actually. i havent really tested them against each other but both lens are kinda similar in a way except the 25 being slightly wider. both are sharp wide open and stopped down. both lens can focus pretty close and at 2.8, provide nice subject separation.
Aug 11, 2010 at 03:26 PM
p.12 #20C/Y Zeiss Image Post
I have them both as well.28 is sharper in the corners,which is particularly visible on FF camera like 5D2.25 is never able to match 28 corner sharpness at the same f stop.Also in harsh light 25 tends to produce more CA.In the center they are more or less the same with 28 having slightly better contrast in poor lighting conditions.All in all 28 is a better lens.
Aug 12, 2010 at 04:00 AM