| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Nikos
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 1170
Location: Greece
Expire: 2015-01-02
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 8:03 pm Post subject: Zeiss Contax 85mm vs Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II |
 |
|
Nikos wrote:
Trying to solve my infinity focus issue with my Zeiss 1,4/85 I tried a new adapter today (from Fotodiox).
I decided to compare it to something good to see how much I am missing.
Well as far as infinity goes, the brand new Canon zoom was better but you had to be looking for the difference to see it.
The interesting part was an obvious difference. In the corner of the frame, the Zeiss wind hands-down, I think.
I attach 100% crops from the bottom left corner. These are in-camera JPG files with the same settings.
Of course you have to see these pictures at full size.
Zeiss 1,4/85 @ f/4
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II @ f/3.5
_________________
Νίκος • www.diafragma.gr
Cameras: Canon EOS 5D Mark II, Sony α7R, Sony NEX-5N
MF lenses:
SLR:
Canon TS-E 17mm f/4, Zeiss 2.8/21 ZE, Zeiss 2/28 Contax, Zeiss 2/35 ZE, Zeiss 1.4/50 Contax, Zeiss 1.4/85 Contax, Zeiss Makro 2/100 ZE,
Zeiss 2/135 Contax, Zeiss 2.8/135 Contax, Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 35-70 Contax, Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 100-300 Contax, Zeiss F-Distagon Rollei, Canon FD 24mm f2, Minolta MD Rokkor 35mm f2.8
Rangefinder:
Zeiss 4.5/21 C Biogon ZM, Zeiss 2/35 Biogon ZM, Voigtländer 15mm f/4.5 Heliar L39, Leica Tele-Elmarit 2.8/90mm, Zeiss 2/45 Contax G, Zeiss 2.8/90 Contax G, Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM
AF lenses: Canon 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye, Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L, Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, Canon 70-200 f/4 L, Canon 300 f/4 L IS, Canon 100 f/2.8 macro
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 10576
Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
based on photozone reviews, the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II is better than the 85:1.8 at f4, so it is already a dream lens
I don't think they should be lot of difference in sharpness at F4 with the Zeiss
on your samples the Zeiss look indeed better for colors, contrast and clarity
_________________
T* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 29658
Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
I don't know if I imagine it, but to my eye, if you look to the front wirespole, in the Contax picture you can feel the space between the wires and the following house, in the Canon picture, I can't.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nikos
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 1170
Location: Greece
Expire: 2015-01-02
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nikos wrote:
| Orio wrote: |
| I don't know if I imagine it, but to my eye, ... |
You seem to have doubts however 
I am not sure about "space". But contrast and definition are obviously superior in the Zeiss photo.
This was a surprise for me. I do not know If I should be glad about it or not. On the one hand, I have the Zeiss.
On the other, I paid €2450 for the Canon (OK, subtract 19% VAT). Worst, I have one more reason to carry both of them...
Of course, only the Canon does 1/20 sec handheld at 200mm ...
_________________
Νίκος • www.diafragma.gr
Cameras: Canon EOS 5D Mark II, Sony α7R, Sony NEX-5N
MF lenses:
SLR:
Canon TS-E 17mm f/4, Zeiss 2.8/21 ZE, Zeiss 2/28 Contax, Zeiss 2/35 ZE, Zeiss 1.4/50 Contax, Zeiss 1.4/85 Contax, Zeiss Makro 2/100 ZE,
Zeiss 2/135 Contax, Zeiss 2.8/135 Contax, Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 35-70 Contax, Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 100-300 Contax, Zeiss F-Distagon Rollei, Canon FD 24mm f2, Minolta MD Rokkor 35mm f2.8
Rangefinder:
Zeiss 4.5/21 C Biogon ZM, Zeiss 2/35 Biogon ZM, Voigtländer 15mm f/4.5 Heliar L39, Leica Tele-Elmarit 2.8/90mm, Zeiss 2/45 Contax G, Zeiss 2.8/90 Contax G, Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM
AF lenses: Canon 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye, Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L, Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, Canon 70-200 f/4 L, Canon 300 f/4 L IS, Canon 100 f/2.8 macro
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
no-X
Joined: 19 Jul 2008
Posts: 2499
Location: Budejky, Czech Republic
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
no-X wrote:
The Canon lens is known for its CA and this pictures prove it. There is visible CA near edges, but there's none on the Zeiss shot.
It's possible to remove this lateral CA by software, but it would remove not only CA, but crispness, too.
For me Zeiss wins
_________________
(almost) complete list of Helios lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nikos
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 1170
Location: Greece
Expire: 2015-01-02
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nikos wrote:
| no-X wrote: |
The Canon lens is known for its CA and this pictures prove it. There is visible CA near edges, but there's none on the Zeiss shot.
For me Zeiss wins |
???
Known for its CA? No one of the 26 reviewers at fredmiranda.com mentions CA and I cannot see any. Perhaps you are mistaking it for some other lens.
I do have a type of color-blindness (deuteranopia), but I can easily see purple fringing.
My Zeiss lenses (2/35 ZE and 1,4/85 C/Y) have a lot more purple fringing than any of my L-series Canons.
This is my only issue with my Zeiss lenses, especially the 35mm. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
no-X
Joined: 19 Jul 2008
Posts: 2499
Location: Budejky, Czech Republic
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
no-X wrote:
I speak about lateral CA, not purple fringin (form of axial CA). It's best visible in slideshow compared to the Zeiss shot.
Esp. on the left: fencing, window and the shiny barrels are surrounded by slight reddish/greenish lines. There's not a single sign of it on Zeiss shot.
I'm not an Canon expert, but if I remeber correctly, 70-200/4 L version performs much better in terms of lateral CA. I saw a comparision, but I can't remember, where 
_________________
(almost) complete list of Helios lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nikos
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 1170
Location: Greece
Expire: 2015-01-02
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nikos wrote:
| no-X wrote: |
I speak about lateral CA, not purple fringin (form of axial CA). It's best visible in slideshow compared to the Zeiss shot.
Esp. on the left: fencing, window and the shiny barrels are surrounded by slight reddish/greenish lines. There's not a single sign of it on Zeiss shot.
|
Red/Green are the two colors I have the most trouble with...
Regarding lateral CA, we probably see two radically different images.
However, my EIZO monitor can simulate deuteranopia, so here is how I see it. Is it different guys?
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
metallaro1980
Joined: 10 Sep 2009
Posts: 385
Location: West Emilia - Fidenza (PR) 43036 - Italy
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
metallaro1980 wrote:
the canon shot shows ca in the down-left corner near the metal fence..
no purple fringing... CA (red and green)
in some areas i have found that the zeiss is better...specially the wall of the prominence (in the middle-left side of frame)
the upper-right corner is more sharp in the canon shot
_________________
Olympus OM: 28 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.8 Made in Japan
Contax: 50 1.4, 85 1.4
Zeiss: 135 2.0 Apo-Sonnar ZE
Leica-R: 180 3.4 Apo-Telyt-R (Leitax)
Rollei QBM: 135 2.8 Rolleinar (Leitax), 50 1.4 HFT
Canon: 50 1.8, 40 2.8
M42: Helios 50 2.0, Jupiter-37A, Jupiter-21 200 4.0
Binocular: Hensoldt & Wetzlar DF 8x30
http://andreaverdi.altervista.org/ Vivaldi lives in my lenses.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
