Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

C/Y Zeiss, 35/1.4 or 28/2 which one to get??
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:16 pm    Post subject: C/Y Zeiss, 35/1.4 or 28/2 which one to get?? Reply with quote
Both of these are within my price range and I don't know which to choose. I have a 35-70/3.4 and 28/2.8 that I use stopped down at infinity. I want the 28/2 or 35/1.4 for their close focusing abilities and of course the bokeh. Any opinions on which you like more or if there's differences between AE/MM versions of these lenses? Or perhaps I should save up for the ZE line?


PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
take both Smile instead of saving for ZE


PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think the 35/1.4 is a whole lot more spectacular, but you should have seen this at FM already. The 28/2 is not as popular.

The ZE 35/2 is also spectacular in a different way; still fast but with not as much separation from the background, but the impression of sharpness and 3D effect is very strong. I would go for either the 35/1.4 or the ZE 35/2. I have not been so impressed with the ZE 28/2; it's rendering is a bit less interesting than the ZE 35/2.
And then there's the rumour that Zeiss is coming with a Z* 35/1.4... Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Contax 28/2 has problem with 5d mirror, so you really need to consider the ZE if you are shooting EOS FF 5D-I or II. The 35/1.4 seems to be good on any EOS for the most part.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bruce wrote:
The Contax 28/2 has problem with 5d mirror, so you really need to consider the ZE if you are shooting EOS FF 5D-I or II. The 35/1.4 seems to be good on any EOS for the most part.


The 28/2 has problems with the 5D mirror yes.
MM version does not clear it at all, but AE version just has a problem at infinity and almost infinity...

With AE you can just step down a few clicks and focus a little shorter than infinity and it get's sharp anyway... IF the situation allowes it ofcourse.

I happens to have both actually... I bought the AE version almost a year ago and the MM version quite recently and I'm hoping to change one of the for the 35/1.4. Smile


PostPosted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Seeing as how I have both 5D and 5DII I'll skip the CY 28/2. I've seen some ZF 28/2 for $100USD more than the CY, but it seems the 35/2 is preferred in the Z* line. Maybe I'll wait for the Z* 35/1.4 or the Samyang/Rokinon 35/1.4. If I happen upon a good price for the CY 35/1.4 I'll snatch it up but the current prices have all been over $1000USD.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
AhamB wrote:
I think the 35/1.4 is a whole lot more spectacular, but you should have seen this at FM already. The 28/2 is not as popular.


How come the 28/2 is not as popular?

Do you think it's because it doesn't clear the 5D mirror perhaps?


PostPosted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Swappo wrote:
AhamB wrote:
I think the 35/1.4 is a whole lot more spectacular, but you should have seen this at FM already. The 28/2 is not as popular.


How come the 28/2 is not as popular?

Do you think it's because it doesn't clear the 5D mirror perhaps?


It could be... I have seen very few pictures from this lens adapted to Canon. But there is a ZE 28/2 now but that one also doesn't give such a dramatic rendering as the ZE 35/2.


PostPosted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think the ZE 28/2 maybe more difficult to use because of an extreme field curvature inherit with this formula, but I’ve seen stunning wide angle landscape type shots with it. I think the wide angle aficionado will fall in love with this lens.


PostPosted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 8:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think wideangle afficionados will be all over the ZE21. Wink
I agree that the field curvature makes the 28/2 more difficult to use; when you want to make use of the short DoF at medium focus distance, the background will be nicely blurred in the center but will be sharp at the borders. Not so nice and there is no way around it.


PostPosted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 9:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
AhamB wrote:
I think wideangle afficionados will be all over the ZE21. Wink
I agree that the field curvature makes the 28/2 more difficult to use; when you want to make use of the short DoF at medium focus distance, the background will be nicely blurred in the center but will be sharp at the borders. Not so nice and there is no way around it.


Yes and no!
I really like shooting with wideangle and would looove to have the Zeiss 21mm. 28mm is wide, but there is a big difference between 21mm and 28mm. 28mm is sort of wide-normal - things doesn't look wierd and distorted, just like 35mm but just a bit wider.

I don't know if there is any direct border, but I think there is quite a big difference between shooting with 28mm and shooting with 24mm.

And ofcource, with the 28/2 you have the short DoF wich can be nice to have.


PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Swappo wrote:
28mm is wide, but there is a big difference between 21mm and 28mm. 28mm is sort of wide-normal - things doesn't look wierd and distorted, just like 35mm but just a bit wider.


http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/860134/112#8731809
What do you mean weird and distorted? Wink

(That was a rhetorical question; it depends on how you use the lens of course.)


PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
AhamB wrote:
Swappo wrote:
28mm is wide, but there is a big difference between 21mm and 28mm. 28mm is sort of wide-normal - things doesn't look wierd and distorted, just like 35mm but just a bit wider.


http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/860134/112#8731809
What do you mean weird and distorted? Wink

(That was a rhetorical question; it depends on how you use the lens of course.)


Well... Smile
I love the look of ultrawides (below 24mm) and would love to have the 21/2.8.

They can, rightly used, make an more dramatic effect to a scene...

Those pics linked to wasn't "wierd and distorted" in my opinion... But as you said, it depends on how you use the lens.


PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
AhamB wrote:
I think wideangle afficionados will be all over the ZE21. Wink
I agree that the field curvature makes the 28/2 more difficult to use; when you want to make use of the short DoF at medium focus distance, the background will be nicely blurred in the center but will be sharp at the borders. Not so nice and there is no way around it.


It wont happen easily, at least I have no experience with Distagon 2/28 ZF since I bought it.
The same for Distagon 25mm ZF, and these Distagons have less field curvature at medium distance.

Yes, this lens is somehow not popular. But I like it among ZFs which I have. Distagon 21mm ZF is
remarkably sharp despite its wide angle, Distagon 35mm ZF is optically superb as many say.

For OP, if you have enough fund get the both. They are different animals. ZF and ZE lenses do
not have mirror problem with EOS 5D I think. I cannot comment about C/Y Distagons since my 5D's
mirror has been shaved.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
take both Smile instead of saving for ZE


+1 Very Happy




My Hollywood got himself a big brother yesterday...


First impressions are that lenses are quite similar.
Differences are focal lenght and longer one beeing a bit faster.
This affects DoF.

Both are great regarding image quality as well as bokeh.
Just get the one wich focal lenght you prefer, you won't be disapointed.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
@Swappo: No mirror clearance problem with the 28/2? On what camera are you using it?


PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 12:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
AhamB wrote:
@Swappo: No mirror clearance problem with the 28/2? On what camera are you using it?


Well... I'm using it on Canon EOS 5D and the AE version has mirror problems at infinity. Solution: Focus a bit short of infinity and step down a few steps (works well... when situation allows to do so).

Edit:
Forget what I said about the adapter.
It was because a AF-confirm chipt that was loose. Razz

Last edited by Swappo on Fri Aug 13, 2010 7:46 am; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Had the 35/1.4, on 5dII C/A < 2.8 was to much for me, specialy out of focus foreground C/A. found my self not using it bellow 2.8. But... the the lens is great Smile


PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
darmodej wrote:
Had the 35/1.4, on 5dII C/A < 2.8 was to much for me, specialy out of focus foreground C/A. found my self not using it bellow 2.8. But... the the lens is great Smile

can you show a sample
I only use it 1.4 and never see any CA
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1