Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

  

  Previous versions of j.liam's message #9064986 « Zeiss 28/2 and 35/2 comparison »

  

j.liam
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Zeiss 28/2 and 35/2 comparison


carlitos wrote:
I\'d have to disagree with the \"dull landscape\" description. I have some stuff taken with Velvia that are \"lush\". I like the way trees about 200 yards away seem to pop off the transparency. And I\'ve not encountered the purple fringing yet. I don\'t normally shoot at f2 or f2.8 though, and rarely at f4.


For shooting at f/5.6-11, far cheaper options abound & are likely just as good at small apertures. To me, the whole point of an expensive, fast, sharp lens is to tap into its high-resolution shooting wide-open.



Nov 23, 2010 at 11:26 AM
j.liam
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Zeiss 28/2 and 35/2 comparison


carlitos wrote:
I\'d have to disagree with the \"dull landscape\" description. I have some stuff taken with Velvia that are \"lush\". I like the way trees about 200 yards away seem to pop off the transparency. And I\'ve not encountered the purple fringing yet. I don\'t normally shoot at f2 or f2.8 though, and rarely at f4.


For shooting at f/5.6-11, far cheaper options abound & are likely just as good at small apertures. To me, the whole point of an expensive, fast, sharp lens is to tap into its high-resolution wide-open.



Nov 23, 2010 at 10:59 AM





  Previous versions of j.liam's message #9064986 « Zeiss 28/2 and 35/2 comparison »

 




This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.