plasticmotif, beautiful color and transition to out of focus on the first flower photo.
perost, I like the second photo best. great contrast and separation.
Vaughn, excellent shot of that train. Thanks for detailing the acquisition. It's easy to visit this thread and get the impression that every photo members take are killer images right out of the box, first try.
xbarcelo, nice composition and colors. I'd love to see it bigger.
ebookman, excellent scapes, I like #2 and #4 the best. My family is heading out to Scottsdale in a couple weeks, can't wait to escape this nasty Michigan weather.
Highfive, gorgeous colors. I really like #2, the placement of the reflective patch makes the photo.
sebboh, the first one is awesome. The out of focus elements complement the subject well, and are a perfect mix of smooth and "interesting".
joevain, nicely captured in #1. The cool-warm contrast is great.
Jim, I've lurked here for awhile, and I love your signature look. #3 is my favorite.
Jim, love all three but #2 is just brilliant, really nice image.
sebboh, the perspective in your last image is spectacular, big fan of your style.
uscmatt99, I think the ZM35/2.8 will be my next purchase, how are you finding it?
plasticmotif, creamy oof well done.
We celebrated St. Patrick's Day with my wife's family at a sort-of-Irish pub. I had my NEX-7 in my coat pocket, and tried to capture some of the character(s) at the event.
joevain wrote:
Jim, love all three but #2 is just brilliant, really nice image.
sebboh, the perspective in your last image is spectacular, big fan of your style.
uscmatt99, I think the ZM35/2.8 will be my next purchase, how are you finding it?
plasticmotif, creamy oof well done.
I like the C-Biogon, and have the CV 35/1.2 II that I also use with the NEX and Ricoh GXR. The ZM gets a little bit smeared at the edges and corners even stopped down at infinity, and I think that overall the CV is a better performer on the NEX-6 at the periphery stopped down. On the GXR the ZM is great out to the corners, so it seems to be at least in part a sensor issue. In the center the ZM is slightly technically better resolving throughout the range at the same apertures. The ZM retains more global contrast, and is much less susceptible to CA. The CV has a lot of bokeh green/magenta fringing that needs correction in Lightroom.
Ergonomically it's a pretty nice lens, very compact. I actually put 43-->46 and 46-->52 step up rings on it so I could use my CP filter and a Nikon pinch cap, and the rings function as a tiny rotective hood for the front element. Focus on my current copy is well damped. I had an issue develop after just over a year with the first copy of the lens, and Zeiss kindly replaced it with a new copy.
Ron Scheffler did a great comparison of 35mm lenses on an M9 to the Sony RX-1, you should check it out.
uscmatt99 wrote:
I like the C-Biogon, and have the CV 35/1.2 II that I also use with the NEX and Ricoh GXR. The ZM gets a little bit smeared at the edges and corners even stopped down at infinity, and I think that overall the CV is a better performer on the NEX-6 at the periphery stopped down. On the GXR the ZM is great out to the corners, so it seems to be at least in part a sensor issue. In the center the ZM is slightly technically better resolving throughout the range at the same apertures. The ZM retains more global contrast, and is much less susceptible to CA. The CV has a lot of bokeh green/magenta fringing that needs correction in Lightroom.
Ergonomically it's a pretty nice lens, very compact. I actually put 43-->46 and 46-->52 step up rings on it so I could use my CP filter and a Nikon pinch cap, and the rings function as a tiny rotective hood for the front element. Focus on my current copy is well damped. I had an issue develop after just over a year with the first copy of the lens, and Zeiss kindly replaced it with a new copy.
Ron Scheffler did a great comparison of 35mm lenses on an M9 to the Sony RX-1, you should check it out....Show more →
Cheers for that mate, i'll take a look. I was looking at the CV35 1.2 but it looks long and heavy. I'm going to be backpacking later this year so I think the CV15 and the ZM35/2.8 might be the perfect combo?
+1 for the ZM 35. A very good lens indeed for its size, and not overly expensive by Zeiss standards. Very detailed, clean, and with nice colours, but you may have to boost contrast just a bit in post, which is easy and gives a first class result.
philber wrote:
+1 for the ZM 35. A very good lens indeed for its size, and not overly expensive by Zeiss standards. Very detailed, clean, and with nice colours, but you may have to boost contrast just a bit in post, which is easy and gives a first class result.
cheers Phil
The Biogon T* 35mm f/2 ZM seems to be in the same price range as the 2.8
Some decent looking reviews for it here, interesting choice the 2 or the 2.8
Joe, to the best of my knowledge, the f:2.0 is about 35% more expensive than the f:2.8, as based ont he Zeiss webshop. I've had both. The f:2.0 is larger and heavier, it is not as easygoing as the f:2.8. OTOH, it is faster, and, when used properly, can yield higher IQ.
