I think it is far too general to speak of any \"Zeiss look\". I have used lots of them, and to me there are at least three distinct Zeiss \"looks\" which correspond to the major design types; Planar, Sonnar, and Distagon (Tessar is less distinct, to me).
Of these types, I have only ever really liked Distagon in its ultimate form (the 21) and the Sonnar 135/2.8 and 100/3.5.
The \"Planar look\" has never been one I liked much. The 85/1.4 in particular. The 100/2 certainly can produce some nice photos, but maybe that\'s all anyone ever shows us. Something tells me it is capable of some pretty edgy \"electrified\" bokeh.
So, no, I can\'t agree that there is a single \"Zeiss look\". In fact, there is much more of a \"Minolta look\" or \"Leica look\" than there is a \"Zeiss look\", IMO. Those two companies made a serious effort to make their lens lines draw very similarly and it is quite obvious to me that Zeiss did not. I guess the Zeiss lenses all had two primary goals; resolution and contrast. This may account for what so many people call the \"Zeiss look\", but I think there ought to be much more to a lens line\'s \"look\" than these two attributes.
I think it is far to general to speak of any \"Zeiss look\". I have used lots of them, and to me there are at least three distinct Zeiss \"looks\" which correspond to the major design types; Planar, Sonnar, and Distagon (Tessar is less distinct, to me).
Of these types, I have only ever really liked Distagon in its ultimate form (the 21) and the Sonnar 135/2.8 and 100/3.5.
The \"Planar look\" has never been one I liked much. The 85/1.4 in particular. The 100/2 certainly can produce some nice photos, but maybe that\'s all anyone ever shows us. Something tells me it is capable of some pretty edgy \"electrified\" bokeh.
So, no, I can\'t agree that there is a single \"Zeiss look\". In fact, there is much more of a \"Minolta look\" or \"Leica look\" than there is a \"Zeiss look\", IMO. Those two companies made a serious effort to make their lens lines draw very similarly and it is quite obvious to me that Zeiss did not. I guess the Zeiss lenses all had two primary goals; resolution and contrast. This may account for what so many people call the \"Zeiss look\", but I think there ought to be much more to a lens line\'s \"look\" than these two attributes.
Oct 13, 2009 at 07:34 PM
Previous versions of cogitech's message #7637143 « Zeiss look? »
