View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Chiti
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 Posts: 78 Location: La Coruña,Spain
|
Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:55 pm Post subject: A big problem: Zeiss 35/1.4 or 28/2??? |
|
|
Chiti wrote:
Hello everyone.
Thats it, i have this big problem arround my head...
I want to complete my contax zeiss collection along this summer, and I'm searching a Distagon
Actually, I have the 40D, but I hope change it for a 5DII the next year... and this is one point more in my touble.
Distagon 28/2
A superb lens... nobody dudes about the lens quality, and the 28mm it's a perfect focal for medium landscapes. The problem...hit's the 5DII mirror focusing to infinity...
Arround the 800$ in perfect conditions
Distagon 35/1.4
Faster than the Hollywood, but a bit longer focal too... Posibly, the best lens ever in 35mm...and this sounds very good
Not perfect for medium landscpaes, but I can use it.
No problem with the 5DII mirror.
"Same" price than the Hollywood
The wide angle will not a big problem, cause when I going to buy the 5DII, I will buy a wide wide angle lens(Nikkor 15mm??) and I have the AF Canon 17-40L at this time... (soma cash for the nikkor )
Please, show me the light in the end of this tunnel!!
Thank you and regards! _________________ D-SLR: Canon 5D II | Panasonic GH1 | Canon 24-105L | Panasonic 14-140
SLR: Contax RX, Ricoh KR-10X, Canon AE1, Praktica MTL-3.... and more
Lenses:
Carl Zeiss (Contax): Distagon 28/2.8 | Planar 50/1.7 y 85/1.4 | Sonnar 135/2.8 | Tele-Tessar 200/3.5
Tamron: 28-70 (44A) | 70-210 (46A) | 60-300 (23A)
Pentacon: 135/2.8 preset | 300/4 | 50/1.8
Rikenon: P Macro 105/2.8 (Kiron) | 50/2
Asahi Takumar: STak 55/1.8
Samyang: 14/2.8
Helios: 44-3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
If the main use of your Contax Distagons will be the 5DMkII, I would advice against the 2/28 unless you have the guts to shave the mirror of your brand new camera.
Fact is you can use the lens with the 5DMkII but not at infinity. Or better said, you can use it at infinity but with Live View only.
It is up to you if you want to live with this limitation.
There is people who buys the Hollywood mainly for the short DOF in the closeups.
IF this is the case then it's OK but you will have to have another 28mm that you can use at infinity (such as the Distagon 2.8/2
If instead you plan to use the Hollywood at infinity for landscapes and such, it can be a frustration to always have to turn lens focus/turn liveview on/focus to infinity/shoot/turn lens focus again/turn liveview off.
I mean you can do it a couple of times, but if you are out for half a day it can become frustrating.
An (expensive) alternative could be the ZF Distagon 2/28 - newer model (but we don't know how it compares with the Contax lens because the optical design is different) and no mirror problem since it's build for Nikon register distance.
The panorama would be different if you plan to shoot film also, with Contax cameras.
In that case, my advice is to collect and use both and find a workaround lens for the 5DMkII at 28mm
In case you wonder, yes, I am using my Contax lenses with film a lot lately, and supremely enjoying it! I can afford it now that Contax cameras have affordable prices compared to when they were new and I was younger... _________________ 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 |
|
|
Chiti
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 Posts: 78 Location: La Coruña,Spain
|
Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 11:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chiti wrote:
Thanks for your answer Orio, always very accurate
I read the problem with the Hollywood some weeks ago, and for this reason the 35/1.4 is walking around my head...
At the moment, the use it's for the DSLR only, but in the future I want buy a Contax body (RTS, I guess) and shot in B&W film...and reveal it in my own house.
Thinkin' in the mirror problem, it's possible that the better option would be buy the 35/1.4 and another lens to the 15-35mm range, like a nikkor 24 or 28mm...or the Distagon 25 ( yes, I discard the 21mm and their 1500€ )
However, I know myself...and finally I will buy the Hollwood, but in this summer the better option would be the 35mm... i think
Any advice with the 35mm??
Thanks! _________________ D-SLR: Canon 5D II | Panasonic GH1 | Canon 24-105L | Panasonic 14-140
SLR: Contax RX, Ricoh KR-10X, Canon AE1, Praktica MTL-3.... and more
Lenses:
Carl Zeiss (Contax): Distagon 28/2.8 | Planar 50/1.7 y 85/1.4 | Sonnar 135/2.8 | Tele-Tessar 200/3.5
Tamron: 28-70 (44A) | 70-210 (46A) | 60-300 (23A)
Pentacon: 135/2.8 preset | 300/4 | 50/1.8
Rikenon: P Macro 105/2.8 (Kiron) | 50/2
Asahi Takumar: STak 55/1.8
Samyang: 14/2.8
Helios: 44-3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Chiti wrote: |
Thanks for your answer Orio, always very accurate
I read the problem with the Hollywood some weeks ago, and for this reason the 35/1.4 is walking around my head...
At the moment, the use it's for the DSLR only, but in the future I want buy a Contax body (RTS, I guess) and shot in B&W film...and reveal it in my own house.
Thinkin' in the mirror problem, it's possible that the better option would be buy the 35/1.4 and another lens to the 15-35mm range, like a nikkor 24 or 28mm...or the Distagon 25 ( yes, I discard the 21mm and their 1500€ )
However, I know myself...and finally I will buy the Hollwood, but in this summer the better option would be the 35mm... i think
Any advice with the 35mm??
Thanks! |
The 1.4/35 is a lens that you will never regret to buy.
In case you should not like it, you can always resell it and get all your money back - and actually, for what is the current trend, you will probably get back MORE money than what you will spend on it, as this lens, which was quite common until a couple of years ago, is now becoming more and more difficult to find.
As for 28mm, there are several options that you can try. Olympus and Nikkor both made excellent 28mm lenses. The aforementioned Distagon 2.8/28 is excellent quality and more affordable than the Hollywood. The best quality-performance ratio is probably with the Yashica ML 2.8/28, which performs almost like the Distagon of the same speed, costing much less. Besides, I am selling one, if you are interested.
The Distagon 25 is another lens that I recommend, although there are different opinions about it.
For both the Distagon 2.8/28 and 2.8/25 the MM version is recommended
(and in general, if you plan to use the lenses with a Contax camera too, all MM versions are preferable)
As for what to choose ultimately it depends much on your shooting preferences. Personally the 35mm focal lenght is my favourite, so I never hesitate when there is a 35mm lens that I like and can afford.
But only you can decide if you really prefer a 35mm lens or a 28mm one or a 25mm one. _________________ 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 |
|
|
Chiti
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 Posts: 78 Location: La Coruña,Spain
|
Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chiti wrote:
Thank you again for the answer.
Definetly, I will buy the 35/1.4
For the moment, i will keep the 40D and the Canon 17-40L, that has a very good performance, it's a great lens...but AF
When I bougth the 5DII (the 2010 summer...maybe the 5DIII?? ) I will keep the 17-40L a few months, to do some cash to buy the Nikkor 15mm and one intermediate focal lens...like the Distagon 28/2.8, 25/2.8 (MM... like you said, I reed that the MM have little better performance) or the Yashica 28mm, but at the moment i need some money to buy the 35...and one Canon 100-400L (the auto focus dark side hehehe)
Best Regards _________________ D-SLR: Canon 5D II | Panasonic GH1 | Canon 24-105L | Panasonic 14-140
SLR: Contax RX, Ricoh KR-10X, Canon AE1, Praktica MTL-3.... and more
Lenses:
Carl Zeiss (Contax): Distagon 28/2.8 | Planar 50/1.7 y 85/1.4 | Sonnar 135/2.8 | Tele-Tessar 200/3.5
Tamron: 28-70 (44A) | 70-210 (46A) | 60-300 (23A)
Pentacon: 135/2.8 preset | 300/4 | 50/1.8
Rikenon: P Macro 105/2.8 (Kiron) | 50/2
Asahi Takumar: STak 55/1.8
Samyang: 14/2.8
Helios: 44-3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 8:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Chiti wrote: |
(MM... like you said, I reed that the MM have little better performance) |
Let me specify: not all MM lenses have better performance. Some give the same performance as the AE.
The AE have the advantage that they usually come cheaper than the MM.
The MM have the advantage that they can be shot in full automation mode with the Contax cameras that support it.
The lenses that are known (officially confirmed by Zeiss) to give improved optical quality in MM version are:
Distagon 2.8/25
Distagon 2.8/28
Sonnar 2.8/135
The lenses that are rumoured to offer improved optical performance as MM but are NOT confirmed, are:
Distagon 1.4/35
Planar 1.4/85 _________________ 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 |
|
|
Chiti
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 Posts: 78 Location: La Coruña,Spain
|
Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chiti wrote:
Heheh, thanks, but I have reading this information yet, the better performance for the lenses that you said....I think that I read it in this same forum
Regards _________________ D-SLR: Canon 5D II | Panasonic GH1 | Canon 24-105L | Panasonic 14-140
SLR: Contax RX, Ricoh KR-10X, Canon AE1, Praktica MTL-3.... and more
Lenses:
Carl Zeiss (Contax): Distagon 28/2.8 | Planar 50/1.7 y 85/1.4 | Sonnar 135/2.8 | Tele-Tessar 200/3.5
Tamron: 28-70 (44A) | 70-210 (46A) | 60-300 (23A)
Pentacon: 135/2.8 preset | 300/4 | 50/1.8
Rikenon: P Macro 105/2.8 (Kiron) | 50/2
Asahi Takumar: STak 55/1.8
Samyang: 14/2.8
Helios: 44-3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
F16SUNSHINE
Joined: 20 Aug 2007 Posts: 5486 Location: Left Coast
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
F16SUNSHINE wrote:
It's also most important to consider which FL you get on best with in full frame.
Now that I have the 2/28 I find it is not wide enough for me.
I use a 35 as my normal lens rather than a 50.
For a dramatic difference when desired a 24 is my choice.
I'm not saying it should be your way also but, keep it in mind.
For me I would trade my Hollywood for a 1.4/35 in a heartbeat.
Leica used to promote the concept of lenses carried in a kit 1.4 increments.
For me I never found this spacing wide enough. Each must choose his own I suppose.
Cheers
Andy _________________ Moderator |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chiti
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 Posts: 78 Location: La Coruña,Spain
|
Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chiti wrote:
Thank you Andy
I see that the 35mm will be in my house in a few months
Thank you and regards to the Contax Zeiss masters _________________ D-SLR: Canon 5D II | Panasonic GH1 | Canon 24-105L | Panasonic 14-140
SLR: Contax RX, Ricoh KR-10X, Canon AE1, Praktica MTL-3.... and more
Lenses:
Carl Zeiss (Contax): Distagon 28/2.8 | Planar 50/1.7 y 85/1.4 | Sonnar 135/2.8 | Tele-Tessar 200/3.5
Tamron: 28-70 (44A) | 70-210 (46A) | 60-300 (23A)
Pentacon: 135/2.8 preset | 300/4 | 50/1.8
Rikenon: P Macro 105/2.8 (Kiron) | 50/2
Asahi Takumar: STak 55/1.8
Samyang: 14/2.8
Helios: 44-3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
F16SUNSHINE wrote: |
Leica used to promote the concept of lenses carried in a kit 1.4 increments.
For me I never found this spacing wide enough. Each must choose his own I suppose.
Cheers
Andy |
The concept of spacing has some reason. For instance if you have a 50mm lens with you, a 28mm lens is more useful than a 35mm
If instead you have a 35mm lens, a 24mm lens is more useful than a 28mm
However, in my practical uses I have found that all focal lenghts are needed if you don't use zooms. The choice really depends on the location. An example: in the streets where I go shooting the Carnevale, the perfect wide angle for ensemble shots is the 35mm. A 28mm is too wide for the size of the streets and makes you lose the focus on the action.
In the streets where I did shoot the Palio recently, even a 35mm was often too wide. Except for the largest street (the one where I took most of the night shots), the other streets really called for a 50mm focal lenght for the ensemble shots.
And of course there are places where you need a 28mm to make a good ensemble shot, theaters where you need a 24mm to make an ensemble shot, and so on. _________________ 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 |
|
|
A G Photography
Joined: 11 May 2008 Posts: 1480 Location: Bologna - Italy
|
Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
A G Photography wrote:
Orio wrote: |
F16SUNSHINE wrote: |
Leica used to promote the concept of lenses carried in a kit 1.4 increments.
For me I never found this spacing wide enough. Each must choose his own I suppose.
Cheers
Andy |
The concept of spacing has some reason. For instance if you have a 50mm lens with you, a 28mm lens is more useful than a 35mm
If instead you have a 35mm lens, a 24mm lens is more useful than a 28mm
However, in my practical uses I have found that all focal lenghts are needed if you don't use zooms. The choice really depends on the location. An example: in the streets where I go shooting the Carnevale, the perfect wide angle for ensemble shots is the 35mm. A 28mm is too wide for the size of the streets and makes you lose the focus on the action.
In the streets where I did shoot the Palio recently, even a 35mm was often too wide. Except for the largest street (the one where I took most of the night shots), the other streets really called for a 50mm focal lenght for the ensemble shots.
And of course there are places where you need a 28mm to make a good ensemble shot, theaters where you need a 24mm to make an ensemble shot, and so on. |
Or use a TLR or a folder with a fixed normal focal and use it at its better
Jokes apart Orio is very right.
But not so a joke.... I found out that having a normal focal is not limiting me but actually learning me to move my ass in a more meaningful way. I remember a great photographer (forgot his name), when asked by a student which wide angle lens he preferred, answered: "two steps back". _________________ Alessandro
My Photography Website
My Blog about Photography and Italian Cuisine
My Photostream on Flickr
--------------------------------------------------------
DSLR: Nikon d80, Olympus e410
SLR: Chinon CX, Fujica ST605n, Nikon f601, Pentacon FM, Pentax Spotmatic SPII, Praktica FX, Praktica FX2, Voigtlander VST1, Yashica FX-3, Zeiss Contaflex
RF: Altissa Altix, Zorki Ie, Kiev 4b
Medium Format: Pentacon Six TL, Zeiss Ikonta 520/2, Mockba 4, Voigtlander Bessa I, Agfa Isolette II, Agfa Isola
Large Format: Cambo SC 4x5, Rodenstock Sinaron 150/5.6, Rodenstock Rodagon 150/5.6, Schneider Kreuznach Symmar 180/5.6
Lenses
Nikkors: 28/3.5 AIS, 35/2, 50/1.8, 50/2 H, Micro 55/3.5, Micro 60/2.8, 85/1.8, 135/3.5 AI, 200/4 NAI, 18-55/3.5-5.6, 28-80/3.5-5.6, 55-200/4-5.6
CY: Distagon 28/2.8, Planar 50/1.4, Yashika 50/1.7, Sonnar 135/2.8
CZJ m42-Exakta: Flektogon 20/4, Flektogon 35/2.8, Tessar 40/4.5, Tessar 50/2.8, Pancolar 50/1.8, Pancolar 50/2, Biotar 58/2, Biotar 75/1.5, Tessar 80/2.8, Sonnar 135/3.5, Sonnar 135/4, Triotar 135/4
CZJ P6: Flektogon 50/4, Flektogon 65/2.8, Biometar 80/2.8, Biometar 120/2.8, Sonnar 180/2.8
Meyer-Pentacon: Orestegon 29/2.8, Pentacon 29/2.8, Lydith 30/3.5, Primagon 35/4.5, Helioplan 40/4.5, Domiplan 50/2.8, Primotar 50/3.5, Oreston 50/1.8, Primoplan 58/1.9, Orestor 100/2.8, Trioplan 100/2.8, Helioplan 135/4.5, Orestor 135/2.8, Pentacon 135/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5, Primotar 180/3.5, Telemegor 180/5.5, Orestegor 200/4, Pentacon 200/4, Orestegor 300/4, Telemegor 300/4.5, Telemegor 400/5.5
Schneider-Kreuznach: Curtagon 28/4, Curtagon 35/2.8, Xenon 50/1.9, Xenar 50/2.8, Tele Xenar 135/3.5, Tele Xenar 200/4
Russians: Arsat Zodiak 30/3.5, Mir-I 37/2.8, Volna-9 50/2.8, Industar-50 50/3.5, Industar-61 50/2.8, Helios 44 58/2, Helios 44-2 58/2, Helios 44-M-4 58/2, Volna-3 80/2.8, Helios 40 85/1.5, Jupiter 9 85/2, Jupiter 11 135/4
Others: Chinon-Tomioka 55/1.4, Helios 28/2.8, Isco Iscotar 50/2.8, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Ludwig Meritar 50/2.9, Schacht Travegon 35/3.5, Schacht Travenon 135/4.5, Sekor 55/1.8, Sigma MF 28/2.8, S-Takumar, 28/3.5, S-Takumar 50/1.4, S-Takumar 55/1.8, S-Takumar 55/2, Steinheil Quinar 135/2.8, Steinheil Culminar 135/4.5, Vivitar 135/2.8, Voigtlander Ultron 50/1.8, Yashica Yashinon DX 50/1.4, Zuiko MC Auto-W 28/2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
A G Photography wrote: |
I remember a great photographer (forgot his name), when asked by a student which wide angle lens he preferred, answered: "two steps back". |
Ernst Haas said "The best zoom lens is your legs." _________________ 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 |
|
|
poncho_morales
Joined: 25 Oct 2008 Posts: 162 Location: Helsinki, Finland
Expire: 2013-02-21
|
Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
poncho_morales wrote:
I've used the 2/28 with x0D bodies and recently i managed to get my hands on an 1.4/35, both of the lenses are really heavy. The quality of both is exceptional but i must say that i like more the 35mm fov in crop cameras. I think the 35mm has a bit more 3D effect than the one i could see from the hollywood, but near minimal focus distance @f2 i think the hollywood had a better character, somehow smoother bokeh and extremely sharp. I would recommend you to try both focal lengths (maybe some cheap zuikos?) to identify which fl suits better for you, since the zeiss 2.8/28 seems to be also highly regarded (and way cheaper). The 1.4/35 is just amazing, but under certain conditions you don't need that fast aperture lenses...
Greetings! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chiti
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 Posts: 78 Location: La Coruña,Spain
|
Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chiti wrote:
Thank you Poncho
The 1.4 can be important for me, because this extra stop will help me in concerts, shooting in a very dark places like a Jazz club.
When I change to FF, i will need something wider than the 35mm... after reading a lot, the SUPER expensive (but perfect!! quality) Distagon 21mm do jingles in my mind...
Regards _________________ D-SLR: Canon 5D II | Panasonic GH1 | Canon 24-105L | Panasonic 14-140
SLR: Contax RX, Ricoh KR-10X, Canon AE1, Praktica MTL-3.... and more
Lenses:
Carl Zeiss (Contax): Distagon 28/2.8 | Planar 50/1.7 y 85/1.4 | Sonnar 135/2.8 | Tele-Tessar 200/3.5
Tamron: 28-70 (44A) | 70-210 (46A) | 60-300 (23A)
Pentacon: 135/2.8 preset | 300/4 | 50/1.8
Rikenon: P Macro 105/2.8 (Kiron) | 50/2
Asahi Takumar: STak 55/1.8
Samyang: 14/2.8
Helios: 44-3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|