p.21 #1 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Somehow, I don't think this new one can do that at f/1.4....
randyp01 wrote:
Still no proper request for certain tests? I'll continue bouncing my tennis ball then
Cheers.
Here's a proper request....if you have the time, can you post shots representative of what you believe the lens is capable of?
LC's shots are suffused with noise at ISO 200 but the subjects are limited to a single planar target, a busy forest scene and a few portrait shots. And he's had issues with nailing focus at f/1.4-2 (most troubling). Eager to hear whether you experienced the same issues.
p.21 #2 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
cyra wrote:
I can see some double contours in the oof areas in lloyds pictures, especially number 2 (sleaves/hands) or number 4 (boot on ball) - where do you guys think does that come from? Is this astigmatism or is it also due to spherical abberations?
I wish someone would post some pics in good light for a change...
@Cyra: Double contours in the OOF areas in foreground of LC's shots are inherent to undercorrected SA lens designs like the new Z* 35/1.4. This is explained in the excellent CLN35 article that Luka linked above.
@Luka: Thanks for that link. I hadn't seen/read that one before. It explains a lot of things that I have noted with all my lenses.
My Nikon 24G/1.4 is an undercorrected SA design as its foreground bokeh is much worse than its background bokeh. I assume the Nikon 35/1.4G is the same. But both those lenses don't have the SA haze that the new Z* 35/1.4 has. I have seen a comparison of the 24G against the Canon 24/1.4 mk2 and one thing they noticed is that the Canon is the opposite where its foreground bokeh is better than its background bokeh. So this would seem like the Canon 24/1.4 mk2 is an over-corrected design.
My Rokkor 58/1.4 would seem to be a undercorrected SA design with its sometimes nervous foreground bokeh but gorgeous background bokeh. It doesn't have the haze like the new Z* 35/1.4.
I am wondering if their(Zeiss) statement about always having to undercorrect so much the SA and get a veiling haze wide open in order to get great smooth bokeh.
My Contax N 85/1.4 has beautiful smooth bokeh, probably the best of my Zeiss lenses along with the ZA 135/1.8 but it doesn't have the veiling haze either. My old Contax 35/1.4 doesn't have the haze but may have more nervous bokeh closer to the focus point when wide open.
I think the Z* 85/1.4 and the old C/Y 35/1.4 also have less contrasty lens designs in which the background bokeh is less contrasty which helps the bokeh look less harsh.
They also use the fast focus falloff trick to help get more separation and better bokeh too. I could not find anything in the CLN35 document which talked about this behavior and what in the design is connected with this.
@Alundeb: The fast focus falloff trick which helps with getting the 3-d look and the lack of veiling haze and good performance and contrast wide open are the biggest pluses for the old C/Y 35/1.4. Its nice subtle pallette drawing style is another difference maker which I like in some landscapes and cityscapes.
One thing which someone needs to mention to LC and others who are having the trouble focusing the new 35/1.4 which has a lot of focus shift, is the trick of putting the 5d2 into movie mode(not sure the precise name since I don't have one) which has the lens stopped down to the aperture selected all the time while you are focusing. The other problem affecting proper focus is due to the different color focus points due to the undercorrected SA. To overcome this I guess you will need to notice the color of the subject and focus adjust mentally for it.
p.21 #3 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
j.liam wrote:
Somehow, I don't think this new one can do that at f/1.4....
Here's a proper request....if you have the time, can you post shots representative of what you believe the lens is capable of?
LC's shots are suffused with noise at ISO 200 but the subjects are limited to a single planar target, a busy forest scene and a few portrait shots. And he's had issues with nailing focus at f/1.4-2 (most troubling). Eager to hear whether you experienced the same issues.
Thanks in advance.
Hi,
That comment was directed at rodluvan in jest .
In regards as to what I feel the lens is capable of, in event cinematography, I choose the lens based on FL and characteristics. With that said, I'm not too sure on what this lens is really "good" for, other than low light shooting where my 50 would be too tight, so I couldn't give a qualified answer on that part.
I will however shoot some varied still subjects at a park down the street to see how it does with those types of subjects. Again, this lens is pretty hefty, so I would see why LC would have problems focusing at 1.4 in low light. I haven't seen his review at all so I can only assume what situations he was shooting in.
I'll be shooting in highlight tone priority mode which maxes at ISO 200 to stretch dynamic range a bit and standard picture profile just so that's taken into account.
p.21 #4 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Randy,
Can you put some clothing with black and white stripes or better yet a checkerboard pattern in front of and then behind the focus point of the subject you are taking a shot of?
How about a shot with some out of focus lights?
Pls. don't take any shots where the subject to background distance is large relative to the f stop, any lens bokeh will look good then. That is the problem with f1.4 bokeh shots. I would try also stopping down some and having contrasty objects near but just outside of the plane of focus to test bokeh rendering.
p.21 #5 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Just saw the flower shots that photoe posted in the Zeiss 35 thread with the new ZE 35/1.4 and I can see this lens like a Leica R 80/1.4 with slow/smooth focus transition and veil wide open but with Zeiss color and contrast. The slow/smooth transition is unlike any Zeiss lens I know.
I guess Richard's (Brainiac) poster child shot for the old CZ 35/1.4 with the tight close up of the guy's face with 3-d must have gotten Zeiss to go in this direction instead with the new ZE version.
p.21 #6 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
While remaining cautiously optimistic, I think it is still a little early to tell. Those shots do not have much variety, and so it is hard to judge. I guess more will come. I wish someone had both the old and new, and a good idea of how to provoke 3D and so on.
p.21 #8 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Ok...took this lens for a little walk around test drive at the mall and I was a bit surprised. Photos to come in a bit. About a dozen different shots all wide open.
p.21 #9 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
So I lied. It wasn't a dozen...more like 32 .
Technical Settings :
5Dmk2
Highlight Tone Priority
1.4 aperture for all the photos
ISO from 200 - 320 (I believe that was the highest, not 100% sure)
Standard Picture Profile
Manual WB for all the indoor stuff, Cloudy preset for outside
Relied on the AF confirm points for focus confirmation
40% resize on all the photos, zero post processing done / SOOC
Impression - At first, I really wasn't expecting much. With the testing I did just messing around the house and what not, I really wasn't impressed over the stuff I used to get with my 35 f/2. However, after taking a few shots in "proper" light and with more proper perspective in my photos, I was kind of digging the 35 1.4 ZE. I've found that I don't like how it does "landscapes" and infinity shots and I liked the look I was getting from subject medium to closer mfd. These were all shot wide open as it was primarily just going to be a few shots. However, went kind of overboard as my friend and I were just cruising around the mall and a few photos turned into a whole bunch.
CA/Purple fringing - It's present in some of the photos around the blown out areas but again, disappears when stopped down. I believe the 50 1.4 ZF/ZE has the same issue wide open so maybe this is just a by-product of Zeiss' design for their 1.4 lenses? Does the 85 1.4 ZE/ZF do the same? I don't get any of this with the contax 50 1.4N so far.
Focus - I was having a hard time nailing focus at a vent about 6 feet away wide open, but I suspect the white color of the vent along with it being against a dark background might have confused the focus point...but eh...not too sure. The focus wasn't always spot on so I'm thinking I need to micro adjust, although I'm not sure if the MA feature affects how the AF points light up and determine whats in focus or not. If someone could clarify on that, I'd appreciate it. I've found it was front focusing most of the time when relying on the AF light up points as a guide.
Weight - The weight wasn't TOO bad when just pulling it out of my retrospective 20 and shooting now and then but don't get me wrong, it is a heavy lens.
Hope these pictures help you guys draw your own conclusions on the abilities of this lens. Again, I don't consider photography to be my strongest thing as I'm primarily using these lenses for cinematography.
p.21 #10 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Thanks for the shots Randy!
Very slow/smooth focus transitions and smooth bokeh but I can't seemed to get past the haze which ruins the "like being there" feeling of normal Zeiss. Maybe its's just me. Its really tailored to a soft portrait style look.
p.21 #11 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Cool Thanks Randy.
I like it but definitely different from the old 35/1.4 methinks. The new one seems to have better bokeh at medium distances but also higher spherical aberrations. The sharpness to blur gradient seems different as well.
p.21 #12 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Thanks for sharing! My first impressions from the f1.4 pictures:
- very good color and contrast (how much of it can be attributed to the cloudy-preset? I'm not familiar with the presets)
- sharpness not so impressive (but difficult to judge in the downsized examples)
- bokeh is good, but I expected it to be a bit smoother and hoped it has less contrast; I'm looking forward for direct comparisions with ZE 35/2 etc.; for all of you C/Y 35 1.4 owners: how would you describe differences in the rendering?
p.21 #13 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
No prob fellas
Would love to know more about your assessments on how this lens draws as I'm definitely a zeiss fan (I shoot all zeiss for cinema) but when it comes to the refined explanations, I'm not too versed in the linguistics. Anything beyond microcontrast and I'm going cross-eyed :S. heh
wayne - which shots do you see the haze in? it could be my focusing also making it look more hazy as I'm not sure if I'm 100% tack sharp (whoops).
Ulff - I will note that I haven't gotten a 100% tack sharp shot at 1.4 with this lens yet so maybe it just isn't super sharp wide open.
First time doing manual focus shooting on an extended basis. It wasn't that bad and actually kind of fun . Moving subjects would be another story though.....
p.21 #14 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Randy, I must have missed something (even though I just went through the entire thread), but what lens is it that you have and if it's the new 1.4/35 ZE or ZF how did you come about getting it. Are any of those on the market yet?
p.21 #16 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
rodluvan - I have the new 35 1.4 ZE as watermarked on all the photos. I received it a few weeks ago to test the production sample out and provide some insight for cinematography as I shoot all zeiss and to also share photos. They should be available to purchase this month in the US market, not too sure about int'l.
p.21 #17 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
So far the nikon 35 1.4 af-s has my number for a fast 35. Cant wait till LC does a shoot out between the two. But these samples also seem a bit softer WO and the boke actually looks a bit more busy than the nikon.
p.21 #18 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Randy, these look to be focused fine so don't worry.
If you read the CLN 35 article on Zeiss website that Luka provided the link to a little earlier in this thread, you will understand that Zeiss on purpose undercorrected the spherical aberration (SA) in order to get smoother transitioning bokeh in which OOF objects retain their shape longer/better as you go away from the focus point. The downside is that you get this veiling haze which makes the focus point look softer/less sharp than a lens with normal SA correction.
The old 35/1.4 has a quick focus to OOF transition which gives that more abrupt change where the lens goes from ultra sharp at the focus point to quickly blurring a very short distance away. For portraits, some people might not like that abrupt focus transition. This abrupt change is like the Z* 100/2 when used for portrait.
This new lens will have a lot harder time generating 3-d like the old lens does due to this.
To me the look of the new lens wide open is like putting a Softar sp? softening lens on the front of a normal zeiss lens.
randyp01 wrote:
No prob fellas
Would love to know more about your assessments on how this lens draws as I'm definitely a zeiss fan (I shoot all zeiss for cinema) but when it comes to the refined explanations, I'm not too versed in the linguistics. Anything beyond microcontrast and I'm going cross-eyed :S. heh
wayne - which shots do you see the haze in? it could be my focusing also making it look more hazy as I'm not sure if I'm 100% tack sharp (whoops).
Ulff - I will note that I haven't gotten a 100% tack sharp shot at 1.4 with this lens yet so maybe it just isn't super sharp wide open.
First time doing manual focus shooting on an extended basis. It wasn't that bad and actually kind of fun . Moving subjects would be another story though.....
.
