Contax Carl Zeiss Distagon 28mm or 35mm 2.8f

[asterinex]

Hello all,

I have the opportunity to by either a Contax Carl Zeiss Distagon 28mm f2.8 or Contax Carl Zeiss Distagon 35mm f2.8.
Asking price for the 28mm = 300 euro, asking price for the 35mm = 280 euro.
I can only can afford one lens.
Which is the one to get ?

[fermy]

The one that you need more.

[iangreenhalgh1]

What camera do you intend to use them on? 35mm isn't wide at all on an APS sensor so that is a big factor.

[asterinex]

I have an E-p1 at the moment and considering to buy a NEX 5-n body.
I don't have a favorite focal length. I shoot with the lens I have with me an be creatif.
I care about top notch IQ , character and nice bokeh.

[iangreenhalgh1]

I would prefer the 28mm on M4/3, but that is just my taste, I am sure either lens will please you very much in IQ terms.

[hifisapi]

on aps or m43 I think the 28mm would be more useful

[kansalliskala]

Wait until member Orio gets online, you'll get the most comprehensive answer.

[propellor]

Both are great lenses. But the price I think is pretty high. You can find them on Ebay from good sellers for less. Or go to keh.com.

Good luck.

[asterinex]

Thx for your usefull replies.

[Misha_M]

I would go for the 28mm if I were you.

[Oreste]

They are different focal lengths. I am curious why you would ask this, as it is entirely a personal decision.

[fermy]

[kansalliskala]

Hmm .. since Orio didn't respond.

So they are 2 different kinds of desings.

28/2.8 has 7 elements
http://lenses.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/downloadcenter/contax_yashica/distagon2-8_28mm_e.pdf

35/2.8 has 6 elements
http://lenses.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/downloadcenter/contax_yashica/distagon2-8_35mm_e.pdf

don't know what this is in practice but has to have some difference. right?

edit: the charts are also totally different, someone please explain them!

[Orio]

Both lenses are designs from the 70s (neither of them existed in the Contarex line)
The 35 is however a bit older and was introduced in the Rollei SL line before entering the Contax/Yashica line.
The 28 is a design by Walter Woeltche, a very talented mathematician who came to Zeiss from Schneider Kreuznach and who
became the head lens engineer at Zeiss after the retirement of Erhard Glatzel.
Woeltche had a more "modern" concept of the lenses and his designs were a way in-between the traditional Zeiss concepts
and the contemporary Japanese lenses whose sales were going very strong at the time.
Both the 35 and the 28 share a common Contax/Yashica philosophy that is to have the optimal correction in the center while
"letting go" a bit the edges. This is visible in the MTFs of both, but it's a little worse in the 28mm lens, which was in fact
optically improved with the introduction of the MM version. So if you choose the 28, and if you use a full frame camera, it is
important that the lens is MM version. If you use a crop camera, it is irrelevant if AE or MM, as you would not see the edges.
The rendering of the lenses are different which is explained by the different designer and slight temporal gap.
The 28 is more contrasted and a bit more saturated. The 35 renders more natural colours and contrast.
Stopped down, 28 is a bit sharper in the centre, but the 35 has better definition near the edges.
The 35 has always offered me a bit more dimensional rendering ("3D") than the 28, which is however more "spectacular" for landscapes.
This is another way of saying that the 35 is abit more "German" and the 28 a bit more "Japanese".
Both handle flares very well thanks to T*
Both are great lenses, neither are perfect. Both offer an excellent price/quality ratio.
What would I choose if I had to pick only one of them? I would pick the 35. However, as someone already said, you should get
the one that you need the most. Both are good buys.