p.7 #1 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
wayne seltzer wrote:
These shots are much better than his earlier in super dark bokeh shots that he did with the prototype lens.
Interesting. I much prefer the prototype images. I haven't seen an image yet from the new lens he's in the process of testing that makes me want one badly, but there's still more to come for evaluation. To the contrary, I'm back to considering getting one of the Rollei or Contax ones on ebay again. As a brief aside, does anyone know if my 5D2 will have mirror clearance issues with either of the two old 35mm 1.4 lenses, and will the camera have accurate aperture and shutter compensation for proper exposure?
p.7 #3 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
jffielde wrote:
Interesting. I much prefer the prototype images. I haven't seen an image yet from the new lens he's in the process of testing that makes me want one badly, but there's still more to come for evaluation. To the contrary, I'm back to considering getting one of the Rollei or Contax ones on again. As a brief aside, does anyone know if my 5D2 will have mirror clearance issues with either of the two old 35mm 1.4 lenses, and will the camera have accurate aperture and shutter compensation for proper exposure?
I didn't like a lot of the old prototype images because they were misfocussed and handheld in dark light with slow shutter speeds and developed on the dark side. The picture of his daughter holding the tennis racket is misfocused and nothing is sharp.
If you get the old lens you will have the max aperture of the lens in the exif along with shutter speed used. Both versions can have mirror clearance issues on the the 5d2.
May need to adjust infinity focusing adjustment screws.
p.7 #4 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
trusty wrote:
I don't read LC talking about he reached the oo stop on infinity. It seems he He dutifully use liveview to adjust. By the way, he was sometime forced to close f/2 for focus to see something . In the focus charts test or even in forest at closest distance, it could not be compelled neither by the focus stop.
Two things : this lens is a dud or this lens is like this.
I think this lens is like this.
Personnaly and for now, I've reported my expectations on the Samyang 35/1,4.
What I was trying to say is that a good lens review does comparison shots at different distances, near infinity and at least at normal portrait distances.Maybe the lens is better at closer distances.Without having side by side comparison shots at closer distances, its hard to say but the recent sample shots don't look to have the same amount od SA but then again he is sharpening differently.
Samyang looks to be sharp wide open and no SA but it's bokeh is a little funky in the highlights, LoCA? Plus it is a large lens too. At least it's much cheaper.
p.7 #7 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
If you disregard size, weight and price I think it might be a step forward. From the samples it looks like there's a good chance that it has a similar signature to the old one but with vastly improved performance stopped down. I would like to see more samples though before I state anything categorically.
p.7 #9 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Except SA at 1.4 looks worse than the old one.
I am wondering if anything got changed in the optical formula between this production one and the prototype?If not, why wasn't Lloyd bringing this SA problem up then?
Seemed like he was more glowing about the proto back then.
p.7 #10 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly is SA? If it's veiling haze, that would be a real pity. I had the same experience with my first and only ZE, the 50/1.4. It had much more haze than my Contax that I compared to, plus some other issues. Zeiss sent me another copy but it was similar. That was the reason that pushed me to switch to Sony and ZA glass. Curiously, none of the ZA has any veiling haze of any significance, so I don't think it's an issue with the selection of glass used.
p.7 #11 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
wayne seltzer wrote:
Except SA at 1.4 looks worse than the old one.
I am wondering if anything got changed in the optical formula between this production one and the prototype?If not, why wasn't Lloyd bringing this SA problem up then?
Seemed like he was more glowing about the proto back then.
It is not unusual to keep quiet about problems in a prototype, hoping that they will be fixed in the production version.
The church with this new lens at f/1.4 does look quite a bit better than the Planar 50/1.4, just to keep that one in mind, even if it is a much smaller and cheaper lens.
p.7 #15 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
@Edward
SA is spherical aberration.
@Alundeb
Only have the Contax N version of the 50/1.4 which I think has some SA at 1.4 but not that bad.
Hard to say for sure as I don't take many distant 1.4 shots.
Usually focused closer at 1.4.
Lloyd seems to not be the type to hold back on revealing problems on proto systems.
p.7 #17 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
Thanks Wayne. That would be indeed very disappointing if the new lens has more SA than the old Contax. As mentioned in my above post, the 50 is also such a case, and also the 85 as far as I know. I would have thought a lens of this size and price would have been better corrected. Strange...
p.7 #18 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
edwardkaraa wrote:
Thanks Wayne. That would be indeed very disappointing if the new lens has more SA than the old Contax. As mentioned in my above post, the 50 is also such a case, and also the 85 as far as I know. I would have thought a lens of this size and price would have been better corrected. Strange...
interesting, i've had two copies of the contax ae/mm 50 and the ze 50 1.4..and the SA seemed pretty close...just dependent on the light it was shot at.. granted i've had them all at different times.
p.7 #19 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
crazeazn wrote:
interesting, i've had two copies of the contax ae/mm 50 and the ze 50 1.4..and the SA seemed pretty close...just dependent on the light it was shot at.. granted i've had them all at different times.
I did direct comparisons between them, some of which were posted on FM. The Contax had clearly less veiling haze, and was sharper below 2.8. From 2.8 to 4, the ZE was sharper, and from 5.6 upwards they were quite similar.
p.7 #20 · Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 35mm f/1.4 (according to Roger Cicala/lens rentals.com)
edwardkaraa wrote:
I did direct comparisons between them, some of which were posted on FM. The Contax had clearly less veiling haze, and was sharper below 2.8. From 2.8 to 4, the ZE was sharper, and from 5.6 upwards they were quite similar.
thats stinky! especially if thats the case with the famed 85 as well..i wonder how much of the T* formula has changed in the last 30 years.
