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.50 #1C/Y Zeiss Image Post
rico wrote:
Awesome stuff, Jim! GGB (#1) is right up P100 alley with its complete lack of linear distortion. Okay, I don't feel so lonely now.
Wayne, the SP100 is blisteringly sharp: even at f/11, the 1Ds was color aliasing like crazy on that laptop's glittering surface. Yes, the lens is very scarce right now - nothing on eBay for the last year. Contax bellows (T/S capability) are going cheaply on KEH, so you might scoop one up in preparation for the eventual SP100 arrival.
Here is one for bellows, but without bellows. And here is one with bellows.
Concerning the P100, I still have it. It was my favorite lens in the Contax times, but now I have the MP100 and the main reason to use the P100 is a sentimental one. The new lens is simply better where it matters most, i.e. the plane of focus, and virtually identical elsewhere. I am still fond of the P100 and will not sell it. I suppose the shaved fin puts pressure on the price anyway.
Awesome stuff, Jim! GGB (#1) is right up P100 alley with its complete lack of linear distortion. Okay, I don't feel so lonely now.
Wayne, the SP100 is blisteringly sharp: even at f/11, the 1Ds was color aliasing like crazy on that laptop's glittering surface. Yes, the lens is very scarce right now - nothing on eBay for the last year. Contax bellows (T/S capability) are going cheaply on KEH, so you might scoop one up in preparation for the eventual SP100 arrival. Here is one for bellows, but without bellows. And here is one with bellows.
Concerning the P100, I still have it. It was my favorite lens in the Contax times, but now I have the MP100 and the main reason to use the P100 is a sentimental one. The new lens is simply better where it matters most, i.e. the plane of focus, and virtually identical elsewhere. I am still fond of the P100 and will not sell it. I suppose the shaved fin puts pressure on the price anyway.
Jul 12, 2012 at 04:54 PM
p.50 #2C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Toothwalker wrote:
... is one for bellows, but without bellows. And ... is one with bellows.
Thanks for the links, but note those Continental prices. I can see similar, implausible asking prices from the US eBay site: $2000, $3000, and (my favorite) $6000! Mine was under $700, and $1000 is a realistic ceiling IMO. Beyond that, just get the CZ S-Planar 135/5.6 in Hassy mount which is a medium-format clone. SP100 and SP135 have remarkably similar MTF and low linear distortion at their respective optimized distances (1:4 and 1:5). As a bellows lens, the SP135 will adapt to anything and has lots of coverage for movements on 135 format. A copy on KEH (Ex) is going for less than $300, which is ridiculously cheap. Should buy it for myself.
Edited on Jul 12, 2012 at 10:06 PM · View previous versions
... is one for bellows, but without bellows. And ... is one with bellows.
Thanks for the links, but note those Continental prices.
I can see similar, implausible asking prices from the US eBay site: $2000, $3000, and (my favorite) $6000! Mine was under $700, and $1000 is a realistic ceiling IMO. Beyond that, just get the CZ S-Planar 135/5.6 in Hassy mount which is a medium-format clone. SP100 and SP135 have remarkably similar MTF and low linear distortion at their respective optimized distances (1:4 and 1:5). As a bellows lens, the SP135 will adapt to anything and has lots of coverage for movements on 135 format. A copy on KEH (Ex) is going for less than $300, which is ridiculously cheap. Should buy it for myself. Edited on Jul 12, 2012 at 10:06 PM · View previous versions
Jul 12, 2012 at 10:04 PM
p.50 #3C/Y Zeiss Image Post
I have a question for anyone who uses a Zeiss 50mm 1.7 planar. At what aperture do you achieve the sharpest photos?
Jul 12, 2012 at 10:04 PM
p.50 #5C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Thanks, Rico and Wfrank!
Cadaver, I used to have a 1.7/50, and it was gloriously sharp wide open in focal plane and with proper focus. I shot mostly at f/2 as the wild background was less so there. f/4 was so sharp that I had to be careful what I shot with it (ie, people's faces looked like bumpy roads with the detail it rendered.)
Here is an example at f/2. Note the eyelashes.
Jim
Contax_50_sample by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr
This one is f/1.7...see the difference in overall sharpness of focal plane in that small change from 1.7->2? For whatever reason, background is less wild when wide open and focusing at least 10 or so feet away.
End of Summer by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr
Cadaver, I used to have a 1.7/50, and it was gloriously sharp wide open in focal plane and with proper focus. I shot mostly at f/2 as the wild background was less so there. f/4 was so sharp that I had to be careful what I shot with it (ie, people's faces looked like bumpy roads with the detail it rendered.)
Here is an example at f/2. Note the eyelashes.
Jim
Contax_50_sample by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr
This one is f/1.7...see the difference in overall sharpness of focal plane in that small change from 1.7->2? For whatever reason, background is less wild when wide open and focusing at least 10 or so feet away.
End of Summer by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr
Jul 13, 2012 at 09:03 PM
p.50 #6C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Jim, Thanks for the reply. Sounds like there's some serious sharpness at f4. Just got this lens and the manual focusing brings back memories of my film days. It will be fun getting aquainted with this Zeiss. Hey, there's some excellent detail in those photos you posted with the 100mm f/2!
Jul 14, 2012 at 08:43 PM
p.50 #7C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Thanks.
Resolving power of the 2/100 is incredible. Should I tell you that none of the mountain shots were shot smaller than f/5.6, and that most were at f/4?
Lesser lenses can not produce that detail or sharpness at f/11 or f/16.
Jim
Resolving power of the 2/100 is incredible. Should I tell you that none of the mountain shots were shot smaller than f/5.6, and that most were at f/4?
Lesser lenses can not produce that detail or sharpness at f/11 or f/16.
Jim
Jul 15, 2012 at 10:03 PM
p.50 #8C/Y Zeiss Image Post
GGB in shadow. 2/100
Jim
First Impressions by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr
Jim
First Impressions by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr
Jul 21, 2012 at 01:17 PM
p.50 #9C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Zeiss 85mm
Zeiss 85mm Lotus Waterlily 301 by Anh Tri, on Flickr
Zeiss 85mm Lotus Waterlily 300 by Anh Tri, on Flickr
Zeiss 85mm Lotus Waterlily 298 by Anh Tri, on Flickr
Zeiss 85mm Lotus Waterlily 301 by Anh Tri, on Flickr
Zeiss 85mm Lotus Waterlily 300 by Anh Tri, on Flickr
Zeiss 85mm Lotus Waterlily 298 by Anh Tri, on Flickr
Jul 27, 2012 at 10:57 PM
p.50 #10C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Stitch with 1.4/50, f/5.6 I think.
Jim
Muir Point by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr
Jim
Muir Point by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr
Jul 31, 2012 at 06:01 AM
p.50 #11C/Y Zeiss Image Post
^Nice, but I think you should have straightened the horizon. I feel like I'm falling over when looking at it. 
Jul 31, 2012 at 07:10 AM
p.50 #12C/Y Zeiss Image Post
A few shots with the Contax 100-300mm......all at @ 275mm, wide open.
http://lanaihale.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v56/p502628970-5.jpg
http://lanaihale.zenfolio.com/img/s2/v61/p852168199-5.jpg
http://lanaihale.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v48/p578913680-5.jpg
R
http://lanaihale.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v56/p502628970-5.jpg
http://lanaihale.zenfolio.com/img/s2/v61/p852168199-5.jpg
http://lanaihale.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v48/p578913680-5.jpg
R
Jul 31, 2012 at 01:21 PM
p.50 #13C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Nice shots with the 100-300, but I think you've been a bit too enthusiastic with highlight recovery in the last shot (highlights turned grey where they should be white).
Jul 31, 2012 at 01:51 PM
p.50 #14C/Y Zeiss Image Post
300mm 4.0 Tele Tessar C/Y on 5D Mark II open, stitches:
- L.
 |
||
| http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7112/7687125056_ae468102a6_h.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8292/7687125474_01f2b39a53_h.jpg | ||
|
- L.
Jul 31, 2012 at 04:14 PM
p.50 #15C/Y Zeiss Image Post
AhamB wrote:
Nice shots with the 100-300, but I think you've been a bit too enthusiastic with highlight recovery in the last shot (highlights turned grey where they should be white).
I guess I might agree with you if I saw that shot too.......but there was no highlight recovery involved in the PP.
It was just a very grey and overcast day with the sun occasionally popping out.
Cheers.....R
Nice shots with the 100-300, but I think you've been a bit too enthusiastic with highlight recovery in the last shot (highlights turned grey where they should be white).
I guess I might agree with you if I saw that shot too.......but there was no highlight recovery involved in the PP.
It was just a very grey and overcast day with the sun occasionally popping out.
Cheers.....R
Jul 31, 2012 at 07:28 PM
p.50 #16C/Y Zeiss Image Post
AhamB wrote:
^Nice, but I think you should have straightened the horizon. I feel like I'm falling over when looking at it.
Thank you. Yeah, it could use a levelIng, and I wish I had taken a lower row of frames to catch the full curve of the cost/hillside lower left.
Jim
^Nice, but I think you should have straightened the horizon. I feel like I'm falling over when looking at it.
Thank you. Yeah, it could use a levelIng, and I wish I had taken a lower row of frames to catch the full curve of the cost/hillside lower left.
Jim
Aug 02, 2012 at 09:12 AM
Guest
Offline
Guest
Details
p.50 #18C/Y Zeiss Image Post
here is my latest with my fav lens, the 28mm 2.8 at f11. taken just before the big squall hit, and i was going to get wet, very wet!!!!
http://sussexlandscapephotography.co.uk/VU2R8576.jpg
and seconds before i did get very wet and the sun set. two shot pano with eposure blend
http://sussexlandscapephotography.co.uk/bvest[Group%201]-1_2-2%20images.jpg
simon
http://sussexlandscapephotography.co.uk/VU2R8576.jpg
and seconds before i did get very wet and the sun set. two shot pano with eposure blend
http://sussexlandscapephotography.co.uk/bvest[Group%201]-1_2-2%20images.jpg
simon
Aug 03, 2012 at 09:06 AM
p.50 #20C/Y Zeiss Image Post
Some fantastic pictures here guys well done and it has been a pleasure looking through them all.
Aug 03, 2012 at 08:21 PM